Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /membri/massimotessitori/sovietwarplanes/board/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Hobby Boss 1/72 Yak-3 and P-40B/C
Sovietwarplanes
March 28, 2024, 03:24:28 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This forum replaces the old sovietwarplanes.com whose domain has expired in January 2017. It has been updated with the posts of the year 2016.
The new location of the site 'Sovietwarplanes pages' is at http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Hobby Boss 1/72 Yak-3 and P-40B/C  (Read 7127 times)
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1696



« on: October 25, 2006, 10:22:40 PM »

Here?s a look at the Hobby Boss Yak-3 and P-40B/C kits. The P-40 is easier, so here it is first; the VVS used a few of these in the GPW, and there are decals available, although not included with this kit.

The P-40 is very good. Compared to the drawings in the MBI P-40 monograph, complaints are:

-Wing machine guns are too far out from the fuselage by about 2 mm. This would be easy to correct, except that there are some related panel lines which also would have to be relocated. Probably better just to leave it alone.
-Rib detail on all control surfaces is much too deep, but could be improved with a few coats of liquid filler, such as Mister Surfacer.
-Two canopies are provided ? one open, one closed. Both have the same odd error ? the windscreen is a rounded shape with no framing visible. The windscreen should consist of three separate flat panels with frames.

Otherwise, I like this kit. The panel lines look quite good, and all the outline shapes generally agree with the MBI drawings.

The Yak-3, unfortunately, is a whole different matter. Here I used the drawings from Skrzydla 15, by Zbigniew Luranc, published in 1997, as a basis for judging accuracy:

Fuselage:
-Accurate in side view outline, except leading edge of fin is too vertical.
-In plan view, the fuselage shape behind the cockpit is much too narrow.
-The rib detail on the rudder shows the ribs angled upwards, as if intended to parallel the ground line on a parked aircraft, not parallel to the thrust line, as they should be. Very odd.
-The cowling lower panel is a separate part. While its outline shape matches the drawings, the joint line to the fuselage is not even close to where the panel line would be on the real aircraft.
-The cannon bulges on the upper cowling are very wrongly shaped.
-The cannon troughs on the upper cowling are too short, too narrow, and too shallow.
-The rear underside of the fuselage (molded as part of the wings) is much too sharply squared off ? while the fuselage underside was indeed flat, the corners had a noticeable radius to them on the real aircraft.
-The radiator housing bottom surface is too flat in profile view.

Prop:
-Blades too narrow, too pointed.
-Spinner is slightly too pointed, but better than existing kits.

Wings:
-Tips are too pointed.
-Aileron chord width too wide on top ? same width as underside. Should be narrower on top.
-Panel lines should all be eliminated, top and bottom, except for large panels immediately behind wheel wells on underside.
-Air intake faces on leading edge of wing roots are flat, not tapered or rounded, and lack a slight ?sweepback angle? shown in the drawings.
-The pitot tube is on the wrong wing, and is very large, like some kind of a spear. Perhaps for ?taran? attacks?
-The wheel wells are satisfactorily deep, but lack any detail.

Landing Gear:
-The main gear legs look acceptable, but the retraction mechanisms (molded in one piece with each leg) are much too big, and are flat in cross-section shape, not tubular like a real Yak.
-Main gear doors ? the internal structure detail looks too deep, but better too deep than too shallow, I guess.
-Outer doors ? too small, remind me of fingernail clippings.

Horizontal Tailplanes:
-Good!

Canopy:
-Good shape, but only one option (closed) ? no open canopy option like P-40 and MiG-3.

So, there you have it. Is it better than existing 1/72 Yak-3 kits? Overall, no. A few parts (the spinner, the canopy, and maybe the prop ? at least it?s no worse than existing ones) could be used to improve the VES Yak-3, which seems to be the best of the previously-existing kits by a small margin. But the Hobby Boss Yak-3 is NOT the ultimate 1/72 Yak-3 which we have been waiting for.

I hope I can be forgiven for cross-posting this to Matt and Erik?s forum as well ? my apologies in advance if anyone is offended!

John Thompson
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6528


« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2006, 09:54:02 PM »

Hi John, Smiley
thank you very much for your reviews. No problem if they are not exclusive, of course.
What a strange thing about the P-40 windscreeen! It looks difficult to be corrected.
About Yak-3: pity that it's not too good. Did you make a detailed comparison to Hasegawa kit? Is it much different in shape?
Have you the possibility to upload some images of those kits, please?
Massimo
Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1696



« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2006, 07:16:54 PM »

Hi Massimo! I guess the best solution to the P-40 windscreen is to use a vacuformed replacement canopy, if one is available, or the canopy from another kit. This would be expensive, though!

I haven't had time to compare the Hobby Boss Yak-3 with other Yak-3 kits, but maybe I will be able to look at this over the weekend.

I'm sorry; right now I don't have any way of providing images - my PC at home is dead, my camera is not ready for use, and I'm forced to steal time at work to check the forum!  Undecided

John
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!