David Hingtgen

Last pic unless someone requests something specific: Side view comparison. No comments on the positioning! (It's the only way it worked). Hase on top (in a non-innuendo way).

Underside comparison. Fuji on top, with no #2 engine or intake.

It's VERY hard to photograph surface scribing. Top 2 pics are Hase, bottom 2 Fuji.

Same area, Fuji kit. Not gapless, no F-14 kit is, but much easier to fill--don't need to re-carve the area aft of the canopy. Also note integral gunvents, and excellent fit of nosecone.

"The big gap" Source of 99% of all complaints about the Hase kit. The forward fuselage isn't as tall as the mid fuselage. That alone would be a problem. However, the angles also don't match. If you close the gap between the forward and mid fuse. on top, the plane's belly will be kinked, and the phoenix pallets won't fit. Thus you've got to make the belly flat, thus leaving a gap up top. (Much easier to fill a gap than un-kink the belly) PS--overall, the Hase fit together much better than I had been lead to believe. Still well below the Fuji though, IMHO. But the intakes (a very important part) did fit quite nicely, maybe even better than the Fuji's.

Big main comparison pic. Fuji is up top, with the green xacto knife supporting the underside. (Since as you just saw, a large portion of the underside is still on the sprue)

Tried some different backgrounds, but the main thing was "distance from the camera". 1 inch makes a lot of difference when you're this close to 1/72 bits. Before I start the main comparisons, quick shot here: This one of the Fuji's sprues, showing the main way it differs from all other F-14 kits. This is the entire starboard side of the lower half. Two large intake/engine halves, and a wing-glove (with integral upper intake and ramps).

Well it's got the bat-turn, which is just as "last-ditch energy-sucking" as a Cobra, and can surprise the hell out of somebody to fire off a missile. But close-in low-speed is not its forte. Really, a Tomcat wants to go fast (and high). It can outmanuever a lot of planes if its transonic (.8/.9 to 1.2/1.3) or higher. When the wings are swept back, the wing-gloves REALLY start working in conjunction with the outer wings, the lifting fuselage is "working" and even the intakes are making a difference, and basically it's all blending together to the point that you practically have a flying wing, and the effective wing area surpasses 1,000 sq ft. Lower wing loading than even a lightly-loaded F-15 or even the YF-23. That means you can MOVE. However, you will bleed energy like a delta-wing when doing so. (That means more than an F-15/16/18 would) Also, at high altitudes, the otherwise sucky engines of the F-14A really are in their element, and will produce more thrust than just about anything but an F-15. (Super Tomcats actually have a much lower top speed than an F-14A, due to this). (and that's why F-4's are still pretty darn fast as fighters go, despite having low power and lots of drag--the engines were designed for high-alt high-speed operation, so they really shine there) The F-14 is still one of the all-time most aerodynamically efficient aircraft. Swing-wings are amazing.

Comaparison pics! Well, I almost always photograph at night, so that means either bad incandescent lighting, or the "only has 1 setting--HIGH" flash. The vast majority of fuselage dryfit pics didn't come out well, will re-shoot tonight. (my next digicam had darn well better have a "good pics in low light" mode---it takes wonderful pics outdoors, but indoor shots suck) Anyways, here's some bits and parts that turned out well enough. 1. Fuji seat sides. 2. Hase PE panels. 3. SR-71 wheels. (They were there, begging to be photographed) 4. Hase seat back 5. Hase seat sides 6. Fuji seat back 7. Fuji rubber tires (they are matte, not glossy like most) 8. Hase PE overall

Honesetly I have no idea, never read about Flanker-specific tactics. I will say that Flankers have insane acceleration, and it's very hard to "get away" from them, no matter how much lead-time you may start off with. Don't turn your tail on it, it WILL catch up quickly. Also, they can carry many missiles, especially short-range ones. Unlike US planes which usually have only "medium-range radar" and "short-range IR" for missile options, Russia basically uses the same designs, scaled up or down, with various seekers. Thus a short-range IR, short-range radar, and the medium-short, medium, and medium-long range versions as well, both IR and radar. It's not uncommon to see a Mig-29 or Flanker carrying 10 missiles, each one different! They will usually have the "perfect" missile for any given moment---just not very many of that type. There were originally going to be basically 2 Flankers--long-range interceptor, and close dogfighter. Well, all you really need to do to get a "dogfight" Flanker is to not load it up too heavily. Flankers are huge, with massive fuel and missile capacity. Ever notice you never see drop tanks on a Flanker? Doesn't ever need them. Can fly plenty far enough on internal fuel, even while carrying many large long-range missiles. That's a LOT of weight. So if you just load a half-dozen small missiles, and like 1/3 fuel, you've still got the range/payload of a small fighter, but the raw engine power of the Flanker--thus a super-powered dogfighter. US nightmare scenario: Soviet bombers escorted by Flankers. When the Flankers get to the US (they are a LONG ranged plane when fueled up, and refueled off the Russian coast), they've used up a lot of their fuel and long-range missiles "busting in", and are now light with short-range missiles, and can likely beat any local F-16 or F-15 stationed at the bases the bombers are attacking.

What I could find: http://www.vodnik.republika.pl/pages/mig29/mig29_review.htm http://216.110.156.31/mig29kit.htm Also, note that probably the most distinctive thing about MiG-29's are their "double" exhaust nozzles. Look here: http://s96920072.onlinehome.us/ISL/Cutting...48030/48030.htm PS---*tons* of Russian aircraft info--both real and models: http://216.110.156.31/russian.htm

I put the Hase and Fuji "tail to tail" and the Hase's fuselage between the engines is a good 2 or 3mm wider than the Fuji--if the Fuji's fat, then the Hase's "fatter". I haven't tried "overall" width across the rear fuselage yet, but it'd take massively wide fairings to make the Fuji wider than the Hase overall. I'll check tonight, when I take pics of the dry-fits. However, I do know the back end of the Fuji is often considered "off" by people. BTW, my Hase PE set has canopy mirrors, and it's an "A" PE set---there's no PE parts for the B/D's, you just get the A set and use what you can. Which is most of it. As for paint colors: I can't find a Tamiya equivalent. Which blows my mind, for that is the most common color in the entire US Navy from 1950 to 1985 or so, for all aircraft. From what I can find, XF-20 is the closest. But every single other company makes FS16440. (or 36440, depending on how clean the plane is). Anyways--from the pic of the kit box, I can't quite tell if it's white-belly or not. Either way, don't mottle it. However, the presence of white undersides will affect how the intake interiors are painted. If the belly is white, every bit of intake interior is white. If the entire plane is grey, then front end of the interior is grey. Note position of ramps--first 2 are grey, but the 3rd is white, and that's where the white intake paint starts. Separation line is vertical. If you do a low-vis scheme though, it's completely different, with different ramps and intake colors. (And all of the above is "usually"--it'll vary plane-by-plane--but those are general rules for how the intakes are painted with the main 3 F-14 schemes) PS--if it comes with a Block-70 boat-tail, I could sure use one! You won't need it for ANY Jolly Rogers plane, but I bet a high-vis F-14A kit like that would come with one. Overall 16440 scheme typical intake interior paint pattern: (and of course, this is actually a low-vis F-14, which for some reason has intakes painted like a high-vis gloss grey F-14)

capt america--you're John Moscato? I've seen just about everything you've ever posted at ARC. I wish I could weather at all---to the point that I have yet to do a low-vis F-14, only nice and clean high-vis CAG. And you say the 1/48 fit isn't as bad as they say... (I think the 1/72 fits better than the 1/48). I've GOT to get a decent airbrush someday, rather than plod along with my Testors... (hey, I live in Iowa, hard enough to get Tamiya products, much less good airbrush supplies) I also notice the 1/48 has *far* better nozzles than the 1/72. Hase really seems to "drop the ball" on 1/72 GE nozzles--their F-16's aren't any better. newca--thanks very much for the pics. From what I've seen/bought, all Fuji F-14A+/B/D kits include that "new" plastic sprue, but use it ONLY for the "display engines"---all the nozzles, etc are included in the new sprue J, which I think they now include with all their F-14 kits, regardless of type. (But I'm not sure) That PE set has about half the parts that the Hase has, but overall looks quite similar to the Hase set. Only differences I see is the Hase doesn't have the Sidewinder or ejection seat sides, but does include many console/panels for the instruments. wm_cheng: A Hase D is actually their B kit (instructions and all! Says "VF-101 F-14B" right on the pages) with a new sprue R, and one addendum sheet explaining (mostly) how to make a D with the new parts. I presume their B is simply an A with 3 new sprues, and missing the A engine sprues. (And no old-style boattail, which I could really use) 90% of the parts are identical for all versions, it's really only the cockpit, engines, and gunvents which vary. (And they've really got the cockpits down for the A and B, there's variants even I don't recognize--RIO panels that vary by only ONE DIAL for example) ::edit:: Could you clarify your question? There are no Jolly Rogers D's---there's B's though. But AFAIK, Hase has only ever made B/D's to the latest newest tooling---there are no "old-mold" B's and D's.

Shin Densetsu---the Flankers have about a 200-400kt range for doing the Cobra, they can set it up and exit it pretty quickly under many conditions. Unlike an F-18 which needs 30 secs of prep to do the "slow pass" at an airshow, a Flanker can do a Cobra immediately before or after just about any other move.

All Hase 1/72 F-18's come with pilots, but the C/D ones also include new, better pilots as well.

BIG sheet of PE? That must be why it costs more. What all is on it? 99% of Fuji F-14's have only the canopy frame and mirrors as PE. Man, I'd love some Fuji-specific PE parts...

Yup, Hase 1/72 Weapons set 6 and 7 are great sources for later F-14 parts. The LAU-138 rail, LANTIRN pylon adaptor for the glove pylon, LANTIRN pods, and bombracks for the Phoenix pallets. (And the bombs to put on them). A lot of those parts also come in the 1994+ Tamiya 1/32 kit. wm_cheng: I'll take photos of the Hase seats and cockpit parts (mostly still on the sprues) so you can see what's there. (The D kit still has all the A parts, except for engines). And the Hase that newca linked to is probably the one you want---1/72 new-mold Hase F-14A, with cartograph High-vis Jolly Rogers decals. And I know it's fairly easy to find, much easier than the equivalent Sundowners kit. I'm sure you'd have a wonderful time weathering all 50,000 panel lines. As an A, the Hase has no competition if you want a single really nice Tomcat to build. Just be prepared to take a long time. I still have the basic fuselages taped together, will photo when I can. (I'll tape on the Hase's forward fuse and nose, too, no reason not too) PS--I think I counted 14 sprues in the Hase, plus the photoetched and clear parts. PPS--I plan on going out of town tomorrow, but should be back by evening. So I might not reply for a while.

Yes, I know it's a B, I was hoping nobody'd notice. There's no physical way to tell in that pic, it's only the paintjob that lets people know. (Darn their way-too-obvious diamond-pattern insignia) PS--you've got the Red/white Fuji F-14 with the different stabs? That is exactly the one I've been talking about. The one I suspect Shin's is modeled off it. (well, add a dual chin-pod). Funky fairings and all. (The new stabs are because the duct area is so short on that variant, the nozzles would get in the way of the stabs) PPS---since you have that variant, what exact sprues does it have? Does it have sprue J? Specifically, does it have a dual chin pod, or the late-style gunvents?

Captain America--by "flat" do you mean the Hase gloves don't have enough dihedral from head on? Because that's the impression I got.

B's have identical back-ends to D's. All the B vs D changes are the cockpit, chin-pod, and the ECM bumps. All in all, the Hase B/D's are pretty darn close, but my feelings are that for the time and effort to build ANY version of a Hase, it's a lot less work to modify a Fujimi, for 99% of the accuracy of the Hase. And a LOT better engines. I could care less that the Hase has a photoetched cockpit and chaff dispensers, if the engine nozzles totally suck. (I like engines, some(most) people like cockpits above all else) (Well, and no intake ducting, but since most jets in 1/72 don't have it, I don't mind much) If you're going to build just 1 or 2 Tomcats, get Hase's and detail the heck out of them. But I have no less than 7 A's, 2 B's, and 3 D's planned. Time/effort (and fragility, I plan to move at least twice in the next few years) is a factor. (If I had all the time and energy in the world, I would build the ENTIRE Iowa class, not just one ship--heck, I'd build every US battleship built from 1930 on) Might as well just edit, than add more replies! wm_cheng--what, you want pics of taped together un-primed dry-fits? I've spent many hours comparing the kits, to decide "how am I going to build my future fleet of Tomcats". It'll be a while before they all actually get bought and built. (Have lots of decals, and a few kits). I still plan to build that Italeri 1/48 I have for practice very soon. (just need to buy some new decals---the kit's are very nice, I just hate the schemes) Might even weather it a little! cambodian tire---Mostof my Fujimi kits are the original kits from a decade ago--the decals haven't seem to deteriorate, and plastic generally doesn't. Build away! And yes the canopy is bubbled too wide (probably why the instrument coaming is wider in the Fuji). Canopy/cockpit area is definitely the area where Hase is better than Fuji, though I still say the nosecone itself is better on the Fujimi (and the cross-section of the forward fuselage). PS--more Fuji/Hase differences. The Hase is noticeably wider between the nacelles at the back end. (I noticed this because the boattail widths are decidedly different between the kits). Hase's Flanker also has this problem. I think Fuji's correct on this issue. So the Fuji's intakes are too far apart up front, the Hase's are too far apart in the back. Fuji gets points for having a cat hold-back on the compressed nose-gear.

I will have to take a look at that on the 1/72 Hase and see if it's the same (haven't put that part together yet! ). So the GE nozzle's new parts are carbon fibre? Yeesh, I have almost every F-14 book you can buy and none ever said that. Makes perfect sense though, being all black and smooth. I'm going book-shopping tomorrow, and plan to buy any Tomcat book I find. Anyways--I was actually talking about the Teknics conversion, which is much better than the Cutting Edge one (from pics, I don't own a set). Grey resin is almost always better than yellow, from my experience. They mold the fairings with the carbon-fiber area together. http://greatmodels.com/cgi/display.cgi?item_num=tk32011 http://www.internetmodeler.com/2001/octobe...s/tk_detail.htm I personally hate puttying, and hate sculpting with putty even more, so I will gladly slice the heck out of a kit and add a new resin part, as opposed to modify what's there. But if you can sculpt putty well, probably the way to ge to ensure nice a square fairings. (I don't recall hearing the term alligator plates before, but it makes sense--there's SO many Tomcat back-end terms. Rear deckincg/boattail/beavertail just for starters) IMHO, the burner cans themselves are nigh-identical internally (for I have stuck my head up both types--they may have differnet dimensions, but the proportions and look are awfully similar--many circumferential rings in a row). But the flamer-holders/exhaust bullet etc are of course very very different. (and a point of contention in the Fuji kit, they appear too small, but being a full inch inside the nozzle, it's not obvious unless you do a side-by-side compaison--hase's are definitely better and bigger) Any 1/32 F-16C GE burners out there? PS--that brings up another point. Fujimi burner interior is much nicer than Hase. Hase has very visible pins to hold it together, and the "rings" inside don't line up at all. PPS--I have looked at the local shops' Tamiya F-14 many times. They must have just sold it, gone last time I was there. (I was close to buying it--I came into some cash). I would make it a Sundowners CAG though, my fave F-14 by far. (but NOT Miss Molly, which is the most overdone F-14 after Jolly Rogers high-vis)

Well, asides from the seats, the easiest way to tell a D cockpit is "the little box on top of the RIO's console". Only D's have it. It's in the "they won't say what it is" category. It has lights and buttons, and that's about all anybody knows.

My PC hates me tonight, I've tried to reply 3 times. Short, minimal word version of reply: 1. Thanks so much. 2. Worldlingo seems to translate those pages well. http://www.worldlingo.com/products_service...translator.html 3. Many Flanker moves are un-named, that pic sequence is like a version of a Herbst turn, or even a Hook (I have never seen even a video of a Hook, only often read it as "the horiztonal version of the Cobra". It's too "stall+fall" for a Herbst, which is more of a "swing around with vectoring after a Cobra"---this is more like "turn really hard while coming out of a Kulbit" (Those are about the only named "ultra-high-alpha post-stall manuevering" moves there are) PS-do you have the direct link to that vid? I'd like to see it to analyze better. (Most of the translations are simply "demo" "airshow" "manuevers" etc--and I effectively get about 33Kb connection, since the lines here are so bad)

Tamiya 1/32 F-14: Old release is an early F-14A. Decals for cockpit displays! And the plane is 50/50 raised/recessed panel lines. Weird. 1994+ releases are for late F-14A's (new gunvents, but you can't make an earlier one, they changed the mold) , and include bombs, and more detailed nozzles. You're pretty much stuck with making the Black Knights with this. There is a nice ($30) resin conversion kit to make a B/D, and since it flat-out has you slice off the entire back end, and has new nozzles, ducts, burners, and fairings, it's probably the only way to get a truly accurate F-14B/D in any scale. With raised panel lines and cockpit detail from the 70's. Of course, for another 30 bucks, you can get a nice resin cockpit for any version you want. And you'll need some non-sucky ejection seats, more cash. Decals! (unless you want a low-vis Black Knights one) 1/32 ones cost a lot more than 1/72 or 48. At which point, you've got a $300 F-14 model.

I thought it did explain it--that plane, and the kit of that plane, has an A cockpit. If they just looked for a good, close-up photo of "whatever style cockpit matches our reference plane" they would have noticed that F-14A cockpits looked a heck of a lot closer than D cockpits. Also, every F-14 ever stationed in Japan has been an A, so if any of the designers was using personal pics from an airshow or something, he would have had photos of A cockpits. Unless someone finds a photo of an F-14 with a single ECM bump under the wing, that Fujimi kit is the only "depiction" of an F-14 that matches Shin's (and it does so in so many ways that nothing else does), and it matches it pretty darn closely.