Kitty Hawk models

I've got about 4 in the stash (F-35B, TF-9F, SEPECAT Jaguar (all 1/48th), & the 1/32nd OV-10D Bronco), but haven't built any of them - yet. I have a good friend who has built the Kitty Hawk F-101 Voodoo, and says it is an incredible kit. Goes together without any fuss. Very well-engineered, he says. All of the plastic in the kits that I have look very nice, with no flash at all (probably because they're all new tooling).  I love the instruction booklets in them, too - very well designed and laid out.

Which kit did you order?

Thanks, that's good to know!  I ordered the Saab J-39 Gripen.  Should be here today.

There have been several Kitty Hawk kits built and reviewed in FSM. If you're a subscriber, you should be able to find the reviews through the FSM homepage.

They seem very nice but out of my modling budget  :-(

Theuns

In my opinion, they've gotten better.  One of their earliest aircraft kits, the T-6, has some issues with detail errors, and the molding is a bit soft.  However, I'm currently working on their 1/32 F-86D and it's a wonderful kit - great fit and top notch molding.  Good luck with the SAAB!

Hmm, everything I've read and seen about them ..(build logs, Flory models video's, youtube), points to them being very tough kits. Poor fit, horrible sink marks and short shot parts, soft detail,soft/flimsy plastic. The KittyHawk Voodoo seems to be horribly engineered to try and accommodate the other variants. And all removable panels such as speed brakes/ re-fueling probe doors/ flaps, fit very horribly in the closed position. They do look nice when built though...

Thanks to all for your comments.  The Saab Gripen kit has arrived, and upon brief inspection looks to very nicely molded.  The copyright on the box is 2014, so it must be a brand new kit.  Lots of parts and not for beginners.  I am hoping for great results!

I'm very happy to have them producing kits of interesting subjects.  My only issue is a personal preference - I like clean builds all closed up.  My dry fitting of some of their kits supports what Nathan T said - poor fit on openable panels, etc.  The Jaguar will be a challenging kit to build.

Cadet Chuck

Thanks, that's good to know!  I ordered the Saab J-39 Gripen.  Should be here today.

OOOOHHHHH!! My salivary glands are at peak production right now!

I have their 48 scale F-9F8 Cougar and 32nd scale F-86D in my stash. Both look to be amazingly detailed. I am a bit concerned about the nose of the Cougar, which you slide over the guns. There does not seem to be any way to pose it with gun access panels open other than plastic surgery or simply leaving the entire nose cone off.

I don't believe the Cougar had "access panels" in the nose for the guns; I believe the nose slid forward on rails. But there is no way to mount the kit nose in the slid open position. On my FSM review model, I had hoped to be able to make the nose removable, but there was no way to remount the nose and get the four guns to fit into the four little holes. The instructions want you to mount the entire gun assembly into the nose (not to the fuselage), and then attach the nose to the fuselage. This makes it a case of providing a lot of detail and then burying it inside and unseen. If you want to keep the nose off forever, then you can show the gun detail. I suspect the same goes for all that camera gear they give you for the photo Cougar version.

The Cougar did have a slide off nose to service the guns.  There is a story, I think it was in Flight Journal, telling about when they first built the plane they had several accidents where gun gas would build up and potentially explode which would blow the nose cone pretty much off.  One of the test pilots was writing about how Grumman eventually discovered the fix, and how the original test program was flawed, but no one realized it.  

Seems kinda silly to give all that detail and then cover it up.  Only thing I can think of is that they were expecting scratch building or aftermarket to provide the rails to slide the cover so it could be open.  Seems sloppy for as much money as they want for the kit.

John

I see that  the SAAF markings has the eagles actually correct with 2 looking left and 2 right, most makers have that wrong. Well done to them.

Theuns

I am in the final stages of producing the F-35C kit. I have built the A and the B variant already got the guys at Lockheed, and I can tell you that while the intentions were good, the engineering is poor. So many areas that fall extremely short, wings that don't have any connection points, and fuselage joins that are horrible are all a start. It's like no one there actually attempted to build it before they shipped it. What's worse is that all three variants share the same common mistakes. You'd have thought for sure that they'd have listened to the community and tried to rectify some of the issues by the time the C variation was released. There are some moments of brilliance, but they're quickly overshadowed by the many design concept flaws that continue to raise their ugly head. Maybe their other kits are better, but I'd expect a few curve balls along the way just to be safe.

I've just started the Kitty Hawk OV-10 and have run into problems.  The instructions list a Sprue G.  However there's no Spue G listed on the Parts page and no Sprue G in the kit.  I e mailed Kitty Hawk but haven't had a reply yet.  Gonna give it a few more days and then figure a work around.  I've alreeady ordered after market seats.  I didn't like the ones in the kit.

I've built the Bronco, Airacobra, and Kingfisher.  I've had issues with the first two but it was workable.  The Kingfisher was just pure rubbish.  

Square peg into a round circle situation, literally!!!!  I had to whittle parts to fit.  Every step of the way!  I will never recommend nor purchase a Kitty Hawk product ever again.  

Just to say so I purchased a 1974 sealed boxing of a Monogram P-61 blackwidow.  I spent $20.00 including Shipping and Handling.  I also purchased every available PE and resin AM parts available for the P-61.  I spent a good $60.00+ dollars for all of the AM parts.  

I'd rather build a 1974 P-61 kit spending a total of $80.00+ dollars then build a Kitty Hawk.  You couldn't give me a free a Kitty Hawk kit!!!!  View my Kingfisher thread.  This is from my own personal experience.  You be the judge.  Good luck sir with your build!

Toshi

I have several in the stash, F-94, TF9J, F2H and the Kingfisher.

I have read several reviews on the Voodoo and they list fit issues and pebbly plastic in a couple. I have also read critical reviews about the Kingfisher. I followed Toshi's WIP and as he pointed out had several issues with it. It did turn out very nice after the headaches were set aside.

I shall find out about the ones I have once I get to them.

I've been fooling around with my KF in the areas that Toshi had issues with and I am not running into those issues with my kit. Perhaps my sprues popped out of the moulds better, who knows. I do know their instructions are flawed and you have to be careful and not follow them exactly. I built their AH-1Z which came out prior to the KF and it was a fantastic kit, aside from the mistakes in the instructions. After building the Revel P-40 I think just about anything is gonna be less trouble.

BK

Hey BK

Glad to hear of your info on the KF. What I have read was difficulties with engine part alignment. Hopefully Toshi's case is an isolated one as a bad batch, sort of the same as the bad Alclad black primer batch.

I was looking over my Banshee and the detail fidelity in just mind blowing. The only negative report I've found so far is difficulty with the decals.

I have a retraction to make.  I complained that The Sprues for Kitty Hawk OV-10D (KH32003) were missing  the "G" Sprue.  Upon closer examination I've found that the "G" Sprue parts are on the "J" Sprue.  So sorry for the complaining over something so simple.

Greg

gbaron64

I have a retraction to make.  I complained that The Sprues for Kitty Hawk OV-10D (KH32003) were missing  the "G" Sprue.  Upon closer examination I've found that the "G" Sprue parts are on the "J" Sprue.  So sorry for the complaining over something so simple.

Greg

 

Understandable Greg. It has hapenned to me several times when two sprues are molded in the same tree. Trumpeter likes doing that.