HKM 1/32 Boston test prints.

[rtfoe]

I agree to a certain extent if they are going that route they wouldn't be in model making but in the aircraft industry. I guess the designers employed are basically skilled in software with some art background and rely on reference pictures and feedback from anyone in the team that has access to real subjects. Even if they find such a subject in China or Hong Kong they would be relics and wrecks. Hardly anything to follow except in museums abroad and blue prints. But I do agree that a bit of physics and engineering thought be put into the characteristics of the subjects life in the field at that specific time. I hear ka-ching and smell burnt wallets as the research and resources increase.

Anyway not getting paid for this, just thought of sharing and let you guys have a look at the first test prints with permission from my friend and Neil before anybody else. :tongue-out3:

Cheers,
Wabble

[rtfoe]

Hi, here's more info on my friends take on this kit...


Doing in depth look into the design and fit. So far so good. All lines align, no distortion despite this being test print. The slide moulding tech is a bit wanting on some sides but I think it's the test print. Quite sure final parts will be crisp.

See the top where the halves join? By right, there are rivets on both sides of the join line because the panel ends here in the middle. Some modellers are going to putty here and get it wrong. Top of the nose this test print only showing rivets on one side.

Same with details at the bottom. The slide mould indentations look too soft. Likely test print setting.
Neil is actually not happy with the consistency. I tend to agree

They missed a good opportunity to separate the top panels into a different part rather than maintain the halves. Tamiya Phantom did that. No fuselage halves to putty and sand.
Going to write a bit about how modellers take certain innovation for granted like these part tabs.

Whenever there are halves to be put together and tabs are there, the design is different compared to early kits.

These tabs are located above the halves so it's easier to cut and sand without damaging the halves. If you look at Hasegawa kits you will understand. I hate puttying those parts when there is damage. This kit has quite well thought out tabs but cannot escape from ejector pin tabs. Hate them. If only they followed what some Eastern Europe manufacturers do. Create extra tabs to avoid ejector pin tabs.

That's all for now.

Cheers,
Wabble

[BarryW]

Hi Barry, on the British version it would be a bit of work. This is what was mentioned...

It appears that for this initial version its the A-20G which is mainly used by the Americans. The British used an earlier version. Frankly, if they need to produce that version, the whole Hull needs to be redone as it is actually slimmer by 6inches ( around 5mm in scale) and there are apparent differences. Nose is partially transparent, tail a bit different.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]n1192368[/ATTACH]
Brits used the version marked Boston. See Boston I/II tail is way different. Shorter fuselage too. Different engine too. Early Boston have short on nacelle also. I think too many parts to change but you never know. Already came so far. Maybe he will do a version for that for the French, Brits and Aussie makes.

Cheers,
Wabble

Thanks Wabbie.

[BarryW]

Thinking through the oil canning issue. My first ‘oil canned kit’ was the 1/24 Airfix Typhoon and, of course, I have the Border Lancaster.

I do agree that this effect is too even and regular. The simple truth is that to vary it extensively over the fuselage will add massively to the design times and costs.

I note the comments from Mini Me and totally accepted that he is right about modern aircraft, but we do have photographic evidence of this effect on WW2 aircraft. Just look at any photo of Lancasters for one thing.

As I see it we have three options:

1/. Accept significantly higher prices for kits with the more realistic oil cannng.

2/. Have this more ‘even’ oil canning.

3/. Drop oil can affects all together.

Personally I think option 1 would be uneconomic. Look at the complaints about the price of the Airfix Buccaneer. The point is that price resistance is increasing and companies understandably will resist adding to costs.

So it’s between 2 and 3. Personally I prefer 2, to have oil canning rather than not. It is easier, for those who are bothered by this, to use sandpaper to adjust/alter the effect than to create it from scratch.

[Guest]

As an aircraft mechanic I wish to put my two cents in the jar,. If you see an aircraft skin that is crumpled or even slightly oilcanned, it is MANDATORY that a FULL structural inspection be performed IMMEDIATELY

I have a feeling this may be more a modern(ish), peacetime/small-scale war attitude than would have prevailed during the Second World War. I suspect that many planes that would be grounded instantly today, would happily be kept in the air in the 1940s.

I think Model manufacturers need to go back to Airframe school and stop trying to make things look better by playing around with their molds.

Could be this is the airplane moulding equivalent to the Spanish School of armour modelling …

[Neil Merryweather]

Could be this is the airplane moulding equivalent to the Spanish School of armour modelling …

Example please @Jakko

[Tim Marlow]

I have a feeling this may be more a modern(ish), peacetime/small-scale war attitude than would have prevailed during the Second World War. I suspect that many planes that would be grounded instantly today, would happily be kept in the air in the 1940s.


Could be this is the airplane moulding equivalent to the Spanish School of armour modelling …

To be honest, I looked as several wartime shots of these and couldn’t see any examples of this at all. They all looked very smooth skinned. Not many rivets on show either? Could well be an example of Panzer chipping……

[rtfoe]

Example please @Jakko

I think he means the over chipping and weathering of armour, Neil.

Cheers,
Wabble

[rtfoe]

To be honest, I looked as several wartime shots of these and couldn’t see any examples of this at all. They all looked very smooth skinned. Very rivets on show either? Could well be an example of Panzer chipping……

I think the Liberator would have been more appropriate with it's huge box shaped fuselage and the constant high altitude these bombers did rather than the low flying medium bombers. Wrong choice of subject perhaps? There has to be more definitive references.

Cheers,
Richard

[Mini Me]

I have been to numerous Museums herein the States and have not seen this phenomenon that you speak of. I have worked on and inspected aircraft that were designed and built in the late 1940's....when an aircrafts structure is continuously loaded and unloaded, the first thing one notices are the rivets are being worked in the affected areas....one may also see a few sheared heads. Once those have failed, because their are the weakest part of the assembly, the load placed on the affected area....if allowed to continue will then be transfered to the underlying secondary structure and thus increase the load placed on the primary structure as well. If this is allowed to continue, there will at some point, be signs of canning as the skin works against the underlying structure, then cracking will start to appear and as the underlying structure starts to fail the stress will transfer back to the skin and rivets holding it all together and one will see more popped rivet heads and more smoking rivets that are working and elongating the holes they are secured in. All this takes time to show up as well as extreme flight conditions. For this to occur all over the aircraft all at once and all to the same degree would amount to a catastrophic failure in both design and construction.

[Guest]

Example please @Jakko

The “Spanish School” refers to the kind of armour painting popularised about 20 years ago by Spanish modellers like Mig Jimenez and others. Basically, it means to very heavily weather, rust, dust and chip everything regardless of whether it would realistically look like that.

[Neil Merryweather]

The “Spanish School” refers to the kind of armour painting popularised about 20 years ago by Spanish modellers like Mig Jimenez and others. Basically, it means to very heavily weather, rust, dust and chip everything regardless of whether it would realistically look like that.

Understood, cheers

[rtfoe]

Kindly tell me why is the B52 skin like this and its still not grounded

Wikki says its a form of buckling of the skin that happens in flight and poses no harm. There are some images on ground as well.:smiling2:

Cheers,
Wabble

[BarryW]

The “Spanish School” refers to the kind of armour painting popularised about 20 years ago by Spanish modellers like Mig Jimenez and others. Basically, it means to very heavily weather, rust, dust and chip everything regardless of whether it would realistically look like that.

That’s not my understanding of the Spanish School. When I first got back I to the hobby I bought and read a book by JM Villalba (a mate of Mig Jiminez) that promotes this style of modelling.

For one thing it is not all about armour and very much applies to aircraft and neither is it just about heavy weathering.

It is about highlights and shadows. It shuns the more traditional highlighting method of dry brushing in favour of highlighting with a fine brush for instance. Outlining detail, carefully applying paint, not washes, into detail to create shadow, painting a highlight along a pipe or edge, modulating a base colour and so on. Washes are still used, of course as is dry brushing but these are not the almost universal panacea that they are elsewhere.

There is a lot more to it than that, of course and it was a long time ago since I read it.

[rtfoe]

The “Spanish School” refers to the kind of armour painting popularised about 20 years ago by Spanish modellers like Mig Jimenez and others. Basically, it means to very heavily weather, rust, dust and chip everything regardless of whether it would realistically look like that.

Goodness me has it been 20 years already? How time flies. What's the next popular technique nowadays. :smiling2:

Cheers,
Wabble