Jump to content

HK B-17 Accuracy issues?


Guest Nigelr32

Recommended Posts

<bangs head against wall>

 

I'm off to build something - anyone care to join me?

 

Iain

 

I should have turned up the radiator earlier so I could paint something...

 

 

...ah, I could continue on my Tupolev drawings! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony of this post...................

 

Would you mind explaining? Someone had made the comparison that Wingnuts came out of the gate with great products, and that HK should be at that same level. I was explaining that when a company has a multi-millionaire running the show, they can afford to purchase the best molding machines and spend as much time as they need researching and perfecting their kits.

 

 

Matt 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you.  I know they won't redo everything and there's some things that we as modelers can add for ourselves.  However, the misshapen nose, windscreen, instrument panel are all children of the incorrect circular nose cross section in the bulkhead 3 area.  I would expect that if they're going to fix the nose, they'll have to fix those other issues as well.  B-17 side nose windows came in three sizes according to the IPC, one of each size on either side of the nose (cheek gun installation not present)  I do not know the exact sizes of those windows but I can find out with an email or two. 

 

If they're going to do the B-17F, they'll have to include the retractable 50 caliber gun on the sliding mount in the radio room.  To mount that sliding apparatus, they'll almost have to recreate the upper radio room structure otherwise there would be nowhere to mount the gun, retracted or in the firing position.  There really should be a place for the 1/32 plastic radio operator to sit as well.  There are spare seats in the G kit and if HK tools some seat structure, we can use one of the spares to mount in the radio room.  The strike camera door is another necessity.  That thing is front and center when viewing the radio room from the hatch.  That step needs to be removed.  HK can reference what one modeler did in this thread to eliminate the step.  We as modelers shouldn't have to do that much to a $300 kit.  I'm willing to do some customizing but I draw the line at that.  I will fix it on the G.

 

The convex upper, aft fuselage from bulkhead 6 to 9 definitely needs to be addressed.  The fuselage line should run straight from bulkhead 6 to bulkhead 9. The curve makes the lady look fat.

 

The interior of this kit needs to be revamped to a certain extent.  The huge gaps in the bomb bay roof (at around 10 and 2 o'clock)  where the turtledeck and the lower fuselage meet are supreme eyesores.  If one opens the bomb bay to expose the interior they'll be hit with those two railroad track gaps.  Even with bombs mounted (which by the way are incorrectly installed in the instructions and need to be rotated to fit) the gaps on either side stick out like a sore thumb.

 

They don't need to add the chemical toilet though as it was usually removed. :whistle:

I cut a couple strips of 20 thou plastic and filled the gaps and it looks better, an easy fix.

 

Bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

volunteer to spend several days crawling all over, around, and inside the next perfectly restored B-17G you come across, and provide all that to HK.  He'd love to have it.

 

I have....  Fuddy Duddy used to live 7 miles from my house in NY.  I've banged knuckles on it and smelled its vintage odor in the hangar with doors closed.  I've watched the 100LL being put into the tanks so the aircraft could go on tour.  I've crawled through just about every flying restoration that's ever been to the Elmira-Corning Regional Airport.  I have photographs of the interiors and exteriors of most, if not all of them.  I have almost every wartime technical manual that was printed about the aircraft.  Prior to that, I visited Griffiss AFB regularly during Commander's days and whenever a B-17 was on the display tarmac, I got inside it if that was available.  I offered to help via an email to HK, at least one post here to a distributor and never heard another word.  I've also collaborated with a few B-17 SME's and none of them were asked anything.  To be fair, I'm not sure they were identified to the manufacturer so they probably didn't know to contact them. 

Edited by TimC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

perfection in kits is a rare thing... I grant you WNW are pretty much there but then if they did a B17 it would certainly be accurate but I suspect 3 - 4 times the price of the HK kit and then only please the specialists and deny those that either accept it as is, or like me enjoy taking a kit as a canvas and 'correcting' it myself

 

just sayin..

 

Peter

 

 

There even are problems with WNW kits. Or else HGW wouldn't have a market for detail/correction sets. They have rapidly improved though, especially from their first block of kits. I have a Junkers J.1, a Brandenburg W-29, and a Fokker D.VII. The jump in technology and accuracy is really cool to see. So even a company that comes out of the gate so strong can still make some small mistakes and improve on them in the long run.  If only plastic could produce machine guns just like the metal ones, WNW would be the pinnacle company in the model world.

 

 

Matt 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just moved my B-17 up on my build list. All this discussion has made me want to build this beautiful aircraft. It looks like a B-17G to me. I am not an accuracy individual. I will buy some AM for the cockpit and such to make it look even better. Thanks guys, for all of your hard work and great discussion.

 

Happy Modeling

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I am a rivet counter when it comes to one of my all-time favorite aircraft.  I will say it again, the G kit is not a bad kit, it just suffers from shape errors and some other issues that need to be addressed in my opinion.  For those who don't know or don't care to, it'll be ok.  What percentage of the market is this?  Probably a good portion.  Does that make my "issues" lesser?  Maybe so but if so, I will adopt a wait-and-see attitude before parting with my money and if I miss out, so be it.  I ain't getting any younger and suffering from perfectionitis, I challenge someone to make a better product or make their product better. 

 

Am I an expert?  I don't know, I wouldn't call myself an expert; just someone with much more than average knowledge of this aircraft.  The term "expert" is usually bestowed by others....  Self proclaimed experts usually are not.  Am I learning new things about the B-17 every chance I get?  Sure do, it just makes me that much more of a better resource. 

Edited by TimC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim, is the window shape a standard thing on B-17Gs?  Since this kit represents a certain block of -Gs, does that mean that they are inaccurate for every one of them, or just the ones in this production block/factory?

 

Thanks

 

 

Matt  :frantic:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim, is the window shape a standard thing on B-17Gs?  Since this kit represents a certain block of -Gs, does that mean that they are inaccurate for every one of them, or just the ones in this production block/factory?

 

Thanks

 

 

Matt  :frantic:

 

 

From what I can tell yes, the little side nose windows are pretty much standard on every B-17 from at least the E and subsequent (cheek gun installation notwithstanding).  This is what I am led to believe since the noses of every B-17 in that area are unchanged from the E forward (and quite possibly prior).  Of course the gun ports in these little windows on the earlier E's and F's were only meant to handle a 30 caliber gun so they do have a socket mount in them which I don't believe the G has.   I'll have to do some more checking since the discovery of the differing size windows is relatively new to me and I need to bolster my information. 

Edited by TimC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Nigelr32

As the starter of this thread I would like to make a couple of comments with regard to the posts on the last few pages.

 

Basically, as has already been mentioned, the content of this thread has taken a massive nose dive. Please stop posting low level digs at HK Models, it's too late. The kit has been released, we have paid the money, that's that.

 

I have personally spent hours and hours and a lot of money researching the subject and buying reference material. I have then spent hours and hours correcting errors discovered by studying my reference material. I have viewed drawings, scaled them up and taken measurements, then backed up my findings with photographs, usually of restoration project in the raw.

 

I respect the opinions of Jennings, and have read what he has written about HK putting this kit together, but I must ask, if I can do this work, pretty much alone, in a couple of months, why couldn't HK do it when they designed the kit? Yes, we could ask this of any manufacturer when they get it wrong, but once the moulds are produced, the cost for corrections will be massive.

 

Superfly, I also respect your comments, but please do not include me in your comments regarding "we" are not happy and "we" should expect replacement parts. As has already been said, we all want HK to carry on producing these big bombers, whether we buy them or not is up to us. Personally, if the Lanc looks like a garden gate, I'll buy it and correct it.

 

Kev, please lock this thread, immediately. I started it to get peoples opinions on what they felt was wrong with the kit, the arguments and off posts started straight away, and now they're back. Please just nip it in the bud now. if it's possible, I would really like to see the thread deleted. I would imagine HK would be quite interested to see what has been found wrong with their kit, and how we're correcting it, but they shouldn't have to read some of this ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Nigelr32

Tim, is the window shape a standard thing on B-17Gs?  Since this kit represents a certain block of -Gs, does that mean that they are inaccurate for every one of them, or just the ones in this production block/factory?

 

Thanks

 

 

Matt  :frantic:

 

Matt, it was me that discovered the window issue. I have posted the corrective action further back in this thread and also in my build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I am locking this at the request of the originator Nige.  When I get some free time I'll delete all the negative post here keeping all the constructive findings you have in here Nige. There is a lot of value in what you've posted so far. It would be nice to see you continue this in your build thread.

 

 

Here is a Link to that build

 

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    It is interesting to see how this thread has turned. This was supposed to be how to enhance a kit that most of us, builders since the 60-early 70s NEVER would have dreamed would be available. IT JUST WAS NOT IN THE CARDS. If you are old enough, you remember the Aurora B-25, which was hugely collectable; "someday!" We have a good kit in the B-17, they did the best they could, actually corrected some issues, and moved forward. I am left wondering why people are chirping away at the kit via this thread, when they do not have or are not even building the bloody thing. It can't be left for those that are actually working on it? Does everyone have to voice there opinion as to the negatives, and keeping nitpicking the credentials of the enthusiasts? We have a fair few people I'll freely call experts, because they've studied the airframe, and probably know a lot more than the original crewmen. If and when HK delivers a Lanc, I'm hoping we are so fortunate to have some of the same self-taught experts come out to help those builders that want the help. If/when the time comes, and you dear modeler, don't want to buy a Lanc, then don't; keep it to yourself though, no one else cares. You are an adult, do with your money as you see fit. There really is no need to harp on the subject! I'd like to buy an "F" when they come; how I do it is my business.

 I walked away from this thread awhile ago, thinking it was headed in a great direction, and in the best dare I say Tradition of LSP. I see that we'll need to keep a weather eye on similar threads now.

 If you are going to post, think before you hit "enter", and think again.

 And, with regards to WNW: Peter Jackson is rich, and a very knowledgeable WWI aero enthusiast. Even his kits are not perfect, and some few even have glaring issues. The WWI guys just get to fixing the issues though, and their collective pool of knowledge has grown proportionately. I'd like to see that happen here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...