Sovietwarplanes
August 22, 2019, 03:16:42 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 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: new La-5FN 1/72 from KP  (Read 12225 times)
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1490



« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2015, 02:27:07 PM »

I'm always interested - please provide more information, if possible. I hope you won't be offended if I say that I don't agree with some of the errors you have shown in your images. I agree that the step in the canopy could be smaller, and that the oil cooler radiator housing is not correctly shaped when compared with the MBI drawings and the Prop&Jet resin La-5 part.

But I still believe (again, based on drawings) that the reinforcing plates in the wing root area are correct, but only for the La-5FN, not the La-5 and La-5F. The joint between the wing and fuselage will need to be filled in very carefully, though. I also don't see anything wrong with the wheel wells. If there is anything wrong with the upper cowling (part No.3), it seems very minor and easy to correct. The air intake and the openings for the guns in the cowling face (part No.6) can be opened up easily to make them more accurate.

I understand your criticism of the tailplane, canopy sill, and cowling not being in line, and from the drawings it seems that you are right. This would not be so noticeable on a finished model, I think.

Again, I hope you are not offended if I disagree on some points. This is always possible when criticising new model kits - things which are bothersome errors to one person are sometimes not as serious to another person!

Best regards;
John
Logged
Johann
Full Member
***
Posts: 216



WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 04, 2015, 06:44:29 PM »

John, for the sake of all the gods, what could be resentment? But you must admit that even in the Czech edition of MBI drawings almost true and all the more strange that the Czech company KP everything is confused in the model. Regarding pads I did not have I will give that they are not true, but the gap between them and the heat-resistant panels should not be. Just as it was possible to avoid all this igrushochnosti.
And, John, no offense, but the approach that we can fix it, but that's not to be so in the eyes can see each pozitsianorovat as the most correct model and such. )))
« Last Edit: November 04, 2015, 06:46:08 PM by Johann » Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1490



« Reply #17 on: November 04, 2015, 09:04:14 PM »

Hi Johann; yes, of course - with a brand-new kit, we should not have to talk about possible errors, even small ones, but I guess I am more easily satisfied than some others. For example, I love Amodel kits, even the old ones - I like the types of aircraft that are represented, so I don't mind the extra work to make them better.  Wink

Thanks for the drawing of the La-5 glider; maybe I'll build one of those next!  Cheesy

BR;
John
Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1490



« Reply #18 on: November 06, 2015, 07:06:36 PM »

Continuing to clean up - I should have taken more time during the initial assembly!

If you build one of these, pay attention to instruction steps 22 and 23, which deal with installing the oil cooler (part B14) and its housing (B13). This probably works better than the method I used, because I didn't read the instructions!  Sad

John
Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1490



« Reply #19 on: November 19, 2015, 02:28:18 PM »

Continuing to work away at this - I'm now applying paint. Looks reasonable, by my standards!  Wink

Another instruction sheet error - the correct (per photos and drawings) main landing gear covers are A1 and A2 (the ones with the bumps on them), not A3 and A4 (the plain ones) as the instructions would have you do. I'm guessing A3 and A4 are for the future La-7 kit.

Also a beef about the very tiny underwing bomb location fairings, for which there are three totally unnecessary options - without going into a long explanation, the "standard" one of these should just have been molded as part of the wing. Trying to clean up the oversized sprue attachment points on these minute parts and then glue them into place on top of a hole, no less, is ridiculously difficult.

John
Logged
AC26
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 85


« Reply #20 on: December 06, 2015, 01:36:35 PM »

Hi all,

I got mine yesterday and unfortunately I have somehow mixed feelings.

I have compared it to photographs, MBI book drawings and Mr. Voronin's drawings. The kit compares very well with the MBI and differs only a little from Voronin's. Voronin has more onion shaped cowling on the top view and right hand bulge further back. With the gun bulge compared to the photos kit (and MBI) looks better. Someone with the wing built might be able to comment if the wing lower surfaces raises up below the tip or not. Toko/Roden LaGG-3 catches this feature.

So in general terms accuracy seems to be quite okay although the canopy has too pronounced step between sliding portion and rear part. Open canopy is featured quite interesting way. As I'm talking about canopy it is unfortunately very clear.

Moulding quality was not so nice surprise. Lot's of flash and in an built report was reported wing upper and lower surfaces to be different pairs! Mine had one landing gear short shot. Luckily quality control had noted it and taped another pair of fully moulded gears to the sprue.

Verdict? Not yet from me. I'll follow with interest others building this. So far it didn't went on the top of my building pile.

Cheers,

AaCee
Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1490



« Reply #21 on: December 06, 2015, 10:53:02 PM »

Someone with the wing built might be able to comment if the wing lower surfaces raises up below the tip or not. Toko/Roden LaGG-3 catches this feature.

Cheers,

AaCee

No, I'm afraid KP missed this feature - I know exactly what you mean. Mine is built, painted and decalled; unfortunately I'm having problems with my PC and can't upload any photos yet.

I didn't notice a lot of flash on mine, although others have complained about this. The wings lined up not badly, too, although there was some misalignment.

I'm looking forward to the La-5 and La-5F; I just hope KP take a very hard look at the detail differences between these and the La-5FN, because there's a lot of these differences, and some of them are subtle!

John
Logged
AC26
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 85


« Reply #22 on: December 12, 2015, 11:18:20 AM »

Someone with the wing built might be able to comment if the wing lower surfaces raises up below the tip or not. Toko/Roden LaGG-3 catches this feature.

No, I'm afraid KP missed this feature - I know exactly what you mean. Mine is built, painted and decalled; unfortunately I'm having problems with my PC and can't upload any photos yet.

I didn't notice a lot of flash on mine, although others have complained about this. The wings lined up not badly, too, although there was some misalignment.

I'm looking forward to the La-5 and La-5F; I just hope KP take a very hard look at the detail differences between these and the La-5FN, because there's a lot of these differences, and some of them are subtle!
Thank you, John!

Wing tip is not very big deal. And it is good to know, that there are better examples than my. Better to check the kit before buying if possible,

I'm also waiting for the older variants. I'm especially interested about the high back.

Greetings,

AaCee
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1484

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #23 on: July 22, 2016, 12:05:27 PM »

Hi,
here is assembled kit (not mine):



More pics at http://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=104549

Regards,
    66misos
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5746


« Reply #24 on: July 25, 2016, 10:11:22 PM »

Hi Misos,
thank you for sharing the image.
The shape of the kit doesn't seem bad. Do you know if the modeller utilized the canopy of the kit?
I think that numbers should have a blue outline. I thought that the decals sheets of the kits include this, but I don't see them on the photo.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1484

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2016, 07:53:49 PM »

Hi Massimo,
The canopy is original from the kit.
There are two marking options - one has boatd numbers with blue outline, the second one without outline:

Regards,
   66misos
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5746


« Reply #26 on: July 29, 2016, 10:03:45 AM »

Hi Misos,
thank you for the answer.
I've my doubts for 07, if the outline was made in factory.
I've doubts on the emblem painted on both sides too. Well, they were right to provide double markings, but my guess is that it was on one side. Any ideas on this?
Regards
Massimo
Logged
learstang
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1750



WWW
« Reply #27 on: July 29, 2016, 09:02:54 PM »

I built one up, and I thought it was a nice kit. There is a bit of flash in a few places, but it wasn't too hard to deal with. There are no locating pins on the fuselage, but I didn't have much problem with the fit. The interior detail is quite nice, and includes some of the fuselage framework. If anyone's interested, my build is featured in the August issue of Scale Aviation Modeller International (http://www.sampublications.com/magazines-subscriptions-renewals/scale-aviation-modeller-international/latest-issue/scale-aviation-modeller/prod_699.html).

Best Regards,

Jason
Logged

"I'll sleep when I'm dead."

- Warren William Zevon

http://www.learstang.com
Pages: 1 [2]
  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!