HobbyBoss 1/72 A-7A Review

[Gene K]

Got my little SLUF from HLJ today, quickly opened the box, and started visually wondering - fuselage too thin, intake cross section too flat, canopy too flat, tanks too long and pointy, MER too skinny, pylons too short, bombs too skinny,....?

So starting with the fuselage:

My first impression was that it was too thin since I'm used to looking at Fujimi and ESCI/Italeri kits -- so I laid the fuselage of the Hobby Boss (in red) over the Fujimi kit....

Opps - something's wrong, so I compared it to a Hasegawa 1/48 kit:

Opps again - even more, so I put it up against some KoKu Fan drawings:

Pretty good match!

So I concluded that the Fujimi kit was too fat, the Hasegawa slightly off, and the Hobby Boss kit just about right on (are the drawings correct???). The only area of the fuselage that may be a little off is the canopy area being too deep - but as a whole, the fuselage looks great! The canopy has a molding seam across the top - easy enough to polish out.

The moldings are beautiful (not overly riveted, and extremely nice detail), the cockpit very, very nice (but decals for the instrument panel and side consoles - perfect for an Eduard colored Zoom set), the seats are junk, the avionics bays and landing gear wells are nicely detailed, and the decal sheet looks great.

Tomorrow I'll look at the other things that "didn't look right" on my first impression.

Gene K

Edited July 31, 2007 by Gene K

[billbuccaneer]

Gene,

Keep it coming! Thanks!

[Gene K]

Just to clear up a point - the Hasegawa fuselage shown is the 1/48 reduced to 1/72.

Gene K

[AndrewS]

Hi Gene,

Thanks for your information on these kits; I haven't followed the progress of the release of these kits for a few months now, and was hoping that the two-seaters would be first-released. All the same, your review is very valuable, and I shall watch your posts closely.

Thanks very much,

Andrew.

[MickeyThickey]

So I concluded that the Fujimi kit was too fat, the Hasegawa slightly off, and the Hobby Boss kit just about right on (are the drawings correct???).

I would be very, *very* careful about making those judgements based on the Koku-Fan drawings. It's a big assumption to say the KF drawings are right. That may be the source HB used (hence, the kit martches those drawings), but that's not to say the drawings match the real plane.

A few quick measurements may help. What do the lengths of the Fujimi, Hasegawa and HobbyBoss kits, and Koku-Fan drawings scale up to? Hasegawa's is much longer, Fujimi's noticeably shorter, so if one of those scales out to the right length... everything else must be wrong.

And on the subject, what are the 'definitive' A-7 scale drawings? *ARE* there any?!?

[Pete]

Does this help? A-7d drawings. This comes from Vought Aircraft themselves, so I guess they are accurate.

There are a lot more drawings from Vought aircraft on their website, maybe useful for future references. I wish all the aircraft manufacturers had this feature on their website.

Edited July 29, 2007 by Pete

[David Hingtgen]

Vought's site is very useful, lots of great info in those drawings. Found that part about 2 years ago.

And I too would not assume Koku-fan is correct. I've seen too many kits based off of Squadron Signal "In Action" drawings, when the drawings have clear errors. (F-8 exhaust length anyone?)

An overlay of the kit fuselage over a photo of the real thing would be much better. With all the ANG A-7 gate guards, surely there's a nice perfect side-view photo of one out there?

PS---there's even errors in many "official" manufacturer's drawings. Go by photos, photos, and photos. Or measuring the real thing.

[Gene K]

I would be very, *very* careful about making those judgements based on the Koku-Fan drawings.

Yes, my judgments are just my opinions based on the best I have at hand (er....again in my judgment). I try to cross reference against the most appropriate pictures and other sources I have. That's why I included a comparison to the Hasegawa 1/48 kit (assuming that Hasegawa USUALLY gets it right).

The subject of "reliance" on drawings came up in another group where it was suggested that I, in effect, chill out by not "fretting" over the Hobby Boss kit. My reply stated, in part:

I give a lot of credence to certain drawings, including the Koku Fan A-7 series. If parts of a kit just don't look right (like the items I mentioned in first post above), a good set of drawings is my first stop, followed by other kits, photographs, and trips to museums or displays (like here at Pensacola NAS).

Some of us enjoy the research as much as the building, and I enjoy determining whether a SCALE MODEL is in fact, scale - especially if it's the first of it's kind from a new manufacturer (in this case, first 1/72 jet from Hobby Boss, with a two seat A-7, F-100 (Trumpeter) and F-105 to follow in the near future). If the first shot is

good, then I can happily anticipate that the others will likely also be. If, on the other hand, the first effort is lacking, then the manufacturer should be made aware with hopes that subsequent releases are to a higher

standard - obviously.

Further, since Hobby Boss is associated with Trumpeter (who didn't do a very good job on certain aspects of their 1/32 SLUF), it's of interest (at least to me) whether the same errors are scaled down to 1/72. Once I identify any errors, I contemplate how to fix them, and good drawings are usually my starting point.

Having said all that, I'll probably spend a very enjoyable Sunday doing more comparisons, including reference to the drawings on the LTV site, Pete. Appreciate that forgotten link.

Then it's back to the Naval Museum tomorrow.

Gene K

[Gene K]

An overlay of the kit fuselage over a photo of the real thing would be much better. With all the ANG A-7 gate guards, surely there's a nice perfect side-view photo of one out there?

David,

I agree, but those kind of overlays have their own set of problems - like parallex. Here's an example of how I generally do that - this was from a SLUF's Ultimate Big Brother (YA-7F) project I was "researching".

I apologize for the display size of the photo - need to re-read how to scale down (I already reduced the photo size with Paint Shop Pro, but need to adjust the width displayed in this forum).

Gene K

[Almansur]

Hi buddy,

You know I do not trust drawing, rather have general dimensions and photos.

As you mentioned, photos have their problems too, but you can get pretty close if you have a photo taken from afar with a long lens and the right aperture... why don't you give it a go with the bird on second plan in this photo:

http://www.dodmedia.osd.mil/Assets/Still/1...T-88-04018.JPEG

Looks pretty good.

[MickeyThickey]

Some of us enjoy the research as much as the building (snip)

Fair enough, and I'm not knocking anyone for trying to determine what inaccuracies a given kit may have - particularly when they're (potentially) as serious as in this case, as two of the three A-7s have some BIG problems.

It's just that...

I give a lot of credence to certain drawings, including the Koku Fan A-7 series. If parts of a kit just don't look right (like the items I mentioned in first post above), a good set of drawings is my first stop, followed by other kits, photographs, and trips to museums or displays (like here at Pensacola NAS).

...I wouldn't make any assumptions based on one set of scale drawings. Reason for further investigation? Absolutely! I'm really curious to see which of the kits is right, now. Like you, I'd always figured Hasegawa's kit must be good, but if it's wrong, it's REALLY wrong. But I don't think we can say what's right, and what's wrong, just based on that one set of drawings. (and FWIW, I wouldn't put any more trust in the LTV drawings. manufacturer drawings have just as poor a track record as those printed in reference books)

[madmike]

But I don't think we can say what's right, and what's wrong, just based on that one set of drawings. (and FWIW, I wouldn't put any more trust in the LTV drawings. manufacturer drawings have just as poor a track record as those printed in reference books)

Just to add to what MickeyThickey posted...

I am a Project designer (Civil, Assoc Engineer) professionally and It must be remembered that photocopied plans have a fair degree of inherent inaccuracies and differences when compared to source. As copies are made of copies, scanned or photocopied, those very discrepancies are multiplied. For example, "stretching" is very common with copies, especially those coming out of dry and wet diazo type printers most common up to 15 years ago.

I would treat any plans not directly copied from source to be much less than accurate.

A golden rule of design, drafting and construction is this; Never, ever scale a plan, rely on the dimensions provided on that same plan.

MikeJ

[Gene K]

Fair enough, and I'm not knocking anyone for trying to determine what inaccuracies a given kit may have -

Sorry - didn't mean to imply that you were. My comments were those directed to another group.

BUT - you have to start somewhere!

Gene K

[madmike]

Gene, apart from possible shape issues, how is the kit?

Is it an easy assemble kit like the smaller 1:72's?

and thanks

MikeJ

[Gene K]

Hi buddy,

.. why don't you give it a go with the bird on second plan in this photo:

http://www.dodmedia.osd.mil/Assets/Still/1...T-88-04018.JPEG

José,

Greetings - long time!!

Great picture - I'll play this afternoon.

Gene K

[Gene K]

For those of us that could care less how it compares to other kits and/or drawings and photos, can you post pictures of the kit and provide some information on how it fits or its features?

There are 14 responses in this thread and we still don't know anything about the kit itself!

Dave

For those of you who could care less, skip this thread, Dave! DUH.

Gene K

[Gene K]

.. why don't you give it a go with the bird on second plan in this photo:

http://www.dodmedia.osd.mil/Assets/Still/1...T-88-04018.JPEG

José,

Here's the best match I could make. I think the kit tail appears small because of the camera angle.

.

As I said before, the fuselage looks great, the only "suspect" area being that the canopy looks too big.

Gene K

[Gene K]

Gene, apart from possible shape issues, how is the kit?

Is it an easy assemble kit like the smaller 1:72's?

MikeJ

Mike,

This is the smaller 1/72 brother by Hobby Boss of the Trumpeter A-7. First issue was supposed to have been a two seater, but this A-7A showed up at HLJ, and I haven't seen the TA-7C for sale yet.

The kit itself is very nicely molded with excellent detail and a good balance between panel lines and rivets. Many small detail parts are included (the sprues have been previously posted here), and the cockpit tub is especially nice - you definitely won't need the excellent 1/72 Aires tub, but you may want a True Detail seat. Wheel well detail is excellent, but no speed brakes provided.

The fit is also excellent, both the internal parts like the tub and intake trunk, and the external parts like wings to fuselage.

The intake is squashed like the 1/32 Trumpeter (see the thread on Zactoman's Correction set . I tried some squeezing and squashing to get a rounder appearance, and that improved the look tremendously.

The big letdown for me is the weapons/tanks sprue: the supposed Mk-82s are too small and thin, more like 250 pound bombs than 500, but there's a nice selection of long and short fuse extenders; and the MERs are too thin. Robbing parts from a Fujimi kit or a Hasegawa Weapons Set will solve that. The FLIR pod, however, looks spot on. - but I'm not up on that pod, so it might be a LANA pod (Low Altitude Night Attack)

The wing tanks are like none I've ever seen - too long and pointy as shown:

. For Dave Roof's benefit, I won't compare them to the 1/48 Hasegawa 's which are scale-wise longer and ....

Decals are beautifully printed, but I haven't tried HB decals, so don't know how they'll adhere.

Overall, I think it's a gorgeous little kit, and I'm really looking forward to the two-seaters.

If anyone would like a scan of the box art, instruction sheet, plastic, etc, drop me an email : this review was intended to have been an in-depth in-progress review, rather than a quick look - or a posting of sprues with a comment to figure it out yourself. However....

Time to build this little gem.

Gene K

Edited July 31, 2007 by Gene K

[JackMan]

was hoping that the two-seaters would be first-released.

This may help:

http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index....780&hl=TA-7

http://www.sonicmodel.com/topicdisplay_saf...&BoardID=23

(The 2nd link is veeerry slow but has good pics of the built up kit. The canopy does look a little 'squashed'. HTH.)

Can't wait for the 2 seaters either. :D Have plans for a Thai, Greek and China Lake bird. Speaking of which, does any one know of a decal source for the China Lake TA-7C:

http://www.chinalakealumni.org/IMAGES/1980...MAY80%20CLK.jpg

Or at least a profile of the tail unit markings so that I can make my own decals?

Gene, some sprue shots of the A-7A would be greatly appreciated :) . Especially the weapons loadout goodies if any.

EDIT: Never mind about the sprue shots. Just saw 'em in above post. Gene, could you post the camo schemes? That 'Corsair College' and the bright yellow markings are intriguing. Thanks in advance :)

Edited July 29, 2007 by JackMan

[Gene K]

Gene, could you post the camo schemes?

Sure - here's the Yellow:

and here's the other:

There's certainly a plethora (thanks Howard Cossell) of interesting markings available, as a search on any of the big shops will show.

Gene

[Gene K]

You know Gene, all I asked was if you could post a little more information about the kits parts fit, details, etc.,

Sorry, I misinterpreted.

Let me know which sprues you'd like to see before I detach any more parts for cleaning and painting.

It's going to be hard to go back to all those Fujimi and ESCI kits that I have stockpiled/started/converted! Now if only the Hobby Boss kit were a little less expensive....

Gene K

[MickeyThickey]

'Nother thought... Since the kit is apparently based on the 1/32 Trumpeter kit, how's the intake shape?

[Gene K]

How did they do the wings and intake? Are the control surfaces separate and does it have a full intake?

Can you post a quick shot of the fuselage components?

Good morning Dave,

The wings are similar in layout to the Fujimi kit, but set right up against the fuselage rather than having a "fillet". Here again - the fit is excellent with a just little pre-fitting/sanding. Control surfaces are not separate, and if you want to fold the wingtips, you'll have to cut the top - easy enough.

The intake is a nice little piece which is similar to the old Revell 1/72 A-7 - fit is excellent. It's not a full intake, but goes back far enough! The intake is perfect for your pour method to make it seamless.

and

and for good measure

Note that displaying the canopy open will require just a tad of modeling.

MickeyThickey - the intake shape has the same problem as the 1/32 Trumpeter - squashed flat. However, I was able to get a better shape by squeezing the sides to deform the intake ring as well as the intake trunk and fuselage sides. There are two intake rings provided, so you can practice on the one you don't need. I don't think Zactoman does 1/72.

The more I play with this kit, the more I like it!

Gene K

[ChernayaAkula]

My! Those instructions are beautiful! Very detailed.

[madmike]

Now that does look a rather nice kit to consider purchasing.

MikeJ