CH/HH-46D Sea Knight from Academy Question

bondoman wrote:

Thanks for all of the valuable info, JH. I will leave the rotor assemblies as-is. I plan to order the Cobra kit this afternoon, all the resin looks very nice. Juries out on the Eduard stuff though, it looks like a fair amount of overlap with the resin. Thanks again. I'm planning a start this Fall. Bill

Actually, the Eduard stuff is pretty good and will go a long way in enhancing the kit, especially by replacing, among other things, the engine air inlet screens (fine mesh instead of a blob of plastic) engine armor and cabin  interior seat belts.

bondoman wrote:

Thanks for all of the valuable info, JH. I will leave the rotor assemblies as-is. I plan to order the Cobra kit this afternoon, all the resin looks very nice. Juries out on the Eduard stuff though, it looks like a fair amount of overlap with the resin. Thanks again. I'm planning a start this Fall. Bill

Actually, the Eduard stuff is pretty good and will go a long way in enhancing the kit, especially the engine air intakes and the engine armor.

Thanks for all of the valuable info, JH. I will leave the rotor assemblies as-is. I plan to order the Cobra kit this afternoon, all the resin looks very nice. Juries out on the Eduard stuff though, it looks like a fair amount of overlap with the resin.

Thanks again. I'm planning a start this Fall.

Bill

bondoman wrote:

J.H. Primm wrote: There are some inaccuracies, but nothing that most people would notice. For example, the rotor systems on the A,D, and E versions are all the same, that is, they reflect the FRB set up that first appeared on CH-46Es in the late '70s, (The As, Ds, and Fs, all had metal rotor blades and associated rotor heads) So what's the visual difference? Are there fixes either AM or sand and file?

 As I mentioned, the visual diffences are not readily noticable unless one knows exactly what to look for. And trying to fix the rotor sytem would probably be more work than it's worth, better to just let it go and live with it.

All the kits have rotor heads and rotor blades that are representative of the Fiberglass Rotor Blades rather than the older metal/honeycombed, pocketed blades. FRBs were introduced when the CH-46E was fielded, circa 1977 with HMM-162, at MCAS(H) New River.

The FRBs have a different blade root and are secured by a set of pins  where the blade meets the hub. The older metal blades used a single large retaining nut that secured the entire blade root to the rotor hub. The difference between the two is that the blade root and rotor hubs on FRBs is rectangular whereas on the older metal blades the root was round.

While I never saw FRBs installed on CH-46Ds or CH-46Fs, I am not certain that the rotor system wasn't retrofitted to them before they were converted to CH-46Es or if any of the UH-46Ds used by the Navy, or HH-46s were retrofitted with them.

As for the armament system in the kit, I would advise trashing it, The .50 cals are lame and what are supposed to be the llink, and brass catch bags are horrible. I would highly recommend the Cobra Company interior upgrade ( http://www.cobracompany.com/48035.htm )

 There were at least three different types of intakes used. The first was the original intakes (we used to refer to them at the witches tits) which were conical in shape. Second, was the long, cylindrical, intakes covered with two stages of mesh material, Third were the intakes that utilised a centrifugal partical seperator (EAPS) which were identified by intake screens that resemebel large waste paper baskets. I crewed Ds and Fs with all three types of intake screens, so trying to indentify the model by intake type was an exercise in futility.

Aside from the rotor blades, the one prominent feature that distinguished the E from the earlier As, Ds, and Fs was the shape of the engine exhausts. The exhaust on the GE-T-58-16s is squared where as the exahusts on GE-T-58-10s (Ds and Fs) and -8s (As) is slilghtly oval.

Additionally, an external hoist at the crew door on the right side of the aircraft was standard on Es and was installed as a kit on ealrier models, usually on aircraft dedicated for the SAR misson (commonly refered to as PEDRO). To confuse things a little more...The A model (the least numerous of the series) could be identified by the 'step' along the trailing edge of the aft pylon, just above the APU exhaust.

 With all that being said, most people won't know and more importantly won't care.

J.H. Primm wrote:

There are some inaccuracies, but nothing that most people would notice. For example, the rotor systems on the A,D, and E versions are all the same, that is, they reflect the FRB set up that first appeared on CH-46Es in the late '70s, (The As, Ds, and Fs, all had metal rotor blades and associated rotor heads)

I built the Marine version just a few months ago. The fit was excellent, assembly was a breeze. Eduard makes a PE set for it that is quite nice. Pay attention to the instructions.. I screwed up a little on the engine intakes because I got ahead of myself. 

I thought it was a tad pricey, but otherwise a great kit. 

wingform84 wrote:

^ This kit ^ Pretty much what I want to know is it any good?  I've never built an academy kit before, and I saw it at the hobby store today (steal at 30% off) and it really caught my eye.  I didn't wanna put down that much money though (it's still $45.78 incl tax) without knowing somthing about it.  Thanks!

If you aren't overly concerned with accuracy, they are  a pretty good investment. And I would recommend buying one. The CH/HH-46D kit is based on the first release which was a CH-46E, there was another version as was used by Japan, and the latest version was the CH-46A/D as used by the Marine Corps in Vietnam.

There are some inaccuracies, but nothing that most people would notice. For example, the rotor systems on the A,D, and E versions are all the same, that is, they reflect the FRB set up that first appeared on CH-46Es in the late '70s, (The As, Ds, and Fs, all had metal rotor blades and associated rotor heads) and while the interior is passable, the after market sets by Cobra Co will help alot. Also, the Eduard sets are a good investment for those who want to go to town on it. (Like myslef)

Don't get me wrong, I like these kits, but having spent time on the real ones, I am inclined to be a bit of a rivet counter when it comes to CH-46s.

I built Academy's CH-46A kit earlier this year.  I'm sure the CH-46D kit is based on the CH-46A kit.  I thought the kit went together great and really enjoyed building it.  The only problem was getting the hull halves together and getting the interior to fit all at one time.  You need three hands or a good friend to do it.  Other than that the kit was great.

/forums/1098927/ShowPost.aspx