Viasistina Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Gents..If I buy a 1/72 CH-53W how close am I to having a CH-53E to build? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HeavyArty Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) What is a CH-53W? Thats a new version to me. If you mean this one on eBay... It is a CH-53D model, not an E. The box is wrong. There is no CH-53W model. The E is a very different helicopter w/a 2 meter longer cabin, 7 blade main rotor, additional (3rd) engine in the sail, canted tail and bent stabilator, etc., etc., etc. If you want an E model, you need to get an E model. The Academy 1/48th scale one is it and it is a great model. Here is a comparison between the D and E models. Edited October 6, 2010 by HeavyArty Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Viasistina Posted October 6, 2010 Author Share Posted October 6, 2010 What is a CH-53W? Thats a new version to me.If you mean this one on eBay... It is a CH-53D model, not an E. The box is wrong. There is no CH-53W model. The E is a very different helicopter w/a 2 meter longer cabin, 7 blade main rotor, additional (3rd) engine in the sail, canted tail and bent stabilator, etc., etc., etc. If you want an E model, you need to get an E model. The Academy 1/48th scale one is it and it is a great model. Yeah..thats the one I saw...I could only go by the picture on the box. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HeavyArty Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) I could only go by the picture on the box. Not really. A little research will quickly show that: (1st) there is no CH-53W, and (2nd) they are different. Resrearch is an important part to building realistic models. With the internet, research has become infinitely more easy as well. Edited October 7, 2010 by HeavyArty Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Viasistina Posted October 6, 2010 Author Share Posted October 6, 2010 Yes I meant that one on E-bay and I neglected to include the link or photo. I called that helo a CH-53W since that was what it was identified as. There was no need to research CH-53W's (sic) on gogge since the question really what was in that box. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pminer Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Gents..If I buy a 1/72 CH-53W how close am I to having a CH-53E to build? Checked out the CH-53W on E-bay. Galaxy models?? Who the heck is that?? Never heard of them. Anyhow...it just looks like a reboxing of the CH-53D from Italeri. And a CH-53W...? It was in Navy markings. I'm thinking a -possible- one off? Maybe in service for a very short time and then converted to an Echo or something? It's hard for me to believe that a company would be so ignorant or mis-informed so as to offer (to the world for crying out loud) a product that was poorly researched and just plain -wrong-. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HeavyArty Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 (edited) There was no need to research CH-53W's (sic) on gogge since the question really what was in that box. That is not the question you asked, but whatever. I guess its easier to have someone else tell you the info than to look for it yourself. It's hard for me to believe that a company would be so ignorant or mis-informed so as to offer (to the world for crying out loud) a product that was poorly researched and just plain -wrong-. Incorrect markings and names on models happens all the time. A big part of the problem is in the translation. Some companies just get it wrong. Most are more interested in selling a product than they are in accuracy, espcially in the packaging. For a really good laugh, check out some of the descriptions on the sides of Trumpeter boxes. Definitely some translation issues there. And a CH-53W...? It was in Navy markings. I'm thinking a -possible- one off? Maybe in service for a very short time and then converted to an Echo or something? Nope, there has never been a CH-53W. The US Navy markings are not wrong for a CH-53C, CH-53D, CH-53E, or an MH-53E. The US Navy uses all these versions as well. Again, this is why researching your model before you build and even buy it is essential if you are interested in accuracy. Edited October 7, 2010 by HeavyArty Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rank11 Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Checked out the CH-53W on E-bay. Galaxy models?? Who the heck is that?? Never heard of them. Anyhow...it just looks like a reboxing of the CH-53D from Italeri. And a CH-53W...? It was in Navy markings. I'm thinking a -possible- one off? Maybe in service for a very short time and then converted to an Echo or something? It's hard for me to believe that a company would be so ignorant or mis-informed so as to offer (to the world for crying out loud) a product that was poorly researched and just plain -wrong-. The model and markings are that of a RH-53D, the original minesweeping version of the H-53. The Navy flew those for a long time, until replaced by the MH-53E and sent to the Marine reserves for use as regular transports. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hovering Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Thanks for the posts HeavyArty.. I can appreciate the extra time to add pictures etc. I don't know about the CH-53, but you are spot on about the other stuff. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rotorwash Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Looks like the "CH-53W" may have first been used for a flight sim. Over half the hits on Google refer back to a "CH-53W" model created by Michael Vader and Shlomo Hakim for Flight Simulator 2000. I suspect this may be the origin of the incorrect acronym. You can see the website here. In fact it has the EXACT same markings as the kit! Only question is which came first, the model or the sim? The sim was made in 2001. Ray Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 See, what you guys don't know is that the W model has a secret plasma drive system in it. W stands for Warp. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gmat Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Sorry small correction, but I think you meant that the USN used the CH-53A (ex USMC, VC-1) and RH-53D, but only the USAF used the CH-53C, which wasn't the HH-53C Rescue version. Best wishes, Grant Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hovering Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 (edited) Interesting observation Ray.. it would be a fun way to influence the market ;) Edited October 8, 2010 by hovering Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Viasistina Posted October 8, 2010 Author Share Posted October 8, 2010 (edited) That is not the question you asked, but whatever. I guess its easier to have someone else tell you the info than to look for it yourself.Hey..Heavy..you having trouble with this? If you dont want to answer a question..then DON"T! but stop already with the inane condescending comments. I asked if you could build a E from a W based on what was in that box. Since I dont know what was in that box, I thought someone else might know. You then use your vast knowledge of CH's to tell us there was no W. No kidding? Really? Now you want to argue about my question. Give it a rest. Incorrect markings and names on models happens all the time. A big part of the problem is in the translation. Some companies just get it wrong. Most are more interested in selling a product than they are in accuracy, espcially in the packaging. For a really good laugh, check out some of the descriptions on the sides of Trumpeter boxes. Definitely some translation issues there. Nope, there has never been a CH-53W. The US Navy markings are not wrong for a CH-53C, CH-53D, CH-53E, or an MH-53E. The US Navy uses all these versions as well. Again, this is why researching your model before you build and even buy it is essential if you are interested in accuracy. Edited October 8, 2010 by Via Sistina Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HeavyArty Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 I don't have an issue with providing info. I just would prefer people to do a little research on their own and ask questions in a way that we can tell what they are asking for. If you knew there was no CH-53W, you could have answered your own question. Likewise, a little research and you would have figured out the sprue shots on eBay were of a D model, not an E. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rotorwash Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 I don't have an issue with providing info. I just would prefer people to do a little research on their own and ask questions in a way that we can tell what they are asking for. If you knew there was no CH-53W, you could have answered your own question. Likewise, a little research and you would have figured out the sprue shots on eBay were of a D model, not an E. Sometimes things aren't always so clear cut though. For instance, I always see people say there is no such thing as an "AH-60L" but it should be MH-60L. Well, that is true if you are talking US helos, but the IS a real AH-60L, it is the AH-60L Arpia III operated by the Columbians. Looks essentially just like the "AH-60L DAP" kit to me. I could see some other country calling a CH-53D a W. Why not. Point is, if I got annoyed every time someone asked about Huey variants when there are reams of info out there, I'd pretty much stay mad. But hey, we try to help folks here. Heck, I love this stuff! Ray Quote Link to post Share on other sites
petebuilt Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 The W is a designated version flown by (W)oman pilots. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 The W is a designated version flown by (W)oman pilots. Hmmm... intelligent use of a fire pull handle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winnie Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 hehe, Funnily enough the Throttle is still at 1000 HP... Cheers H Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pminer Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Looks like the "CH-53W" may have first been used for a flight sim. Over half the hits on Google refer back to a "CH-53W" model created by Michael Vader and Shlomo Hakim for Flight Simulator 2000. I suspect this may be the origin of the incorrect acronym. You can see the website here. In fact it has the EXACT same markings as the kit! Only question is which came first, the model or the sim? The sim was made in 2001. Ray Now thats cool!! Everybody look....this is the man that did his research!! Hes go my vote for the explaination of the mystery. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pminer Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 I don't have an issue with providing info. I just would prefer people to do a little research on their own and ask questions in a way that we can tell what they are asking for. If you knew there was no CH-53W, you could have answered your own question. Likewise, a little research and you would have figured out the sprue shots on eBay were of a D model, not an E. Hey...I've had a ball reading about the W. Found out stuff I've never thought of. I've learned a lot and laughed. About research...research is what this Site is all about. But not condecention. I'm not a rivet counter....never will be. But some folks are. Fun, learning and hopefully making new friends is the whole point of Steves website. Maybe we all should try to remember that. Ya know...? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pminer Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 The W is a designated version flown by (W)oman pilots. LOL!!!...now thats hilarious. Love it... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pminer Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 The W is a designated version flown by (W)oman pilots. ...But isn't that a C-130 shes driving?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pminer Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Looks like the "CH-53W" may have first been used for a flight sim. Over half the hits on Google refer back to a "CH-53W" model created by Michael Vader and Shlomo Hakim for Flight Simulator 2000. I suspect this may be the origin of the incorrect acronym. You can see the website here. In fact it has the EXACT same markings as the kit! Only question is which came first, the model or the sim? The sim was made in 2001. Ray But the question still remains....is it an Italeri rebox? And who is the manufacturer bringing this thing out?? Never heard of them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winnie Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 ...But isn't that a C-130 shes driving?? Nope, that is a P-3C I believe. Awsome plane, wish I had MORE time in it, save for my measly 14 hours in various stations. Cheers H. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.