HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102) - DA.C
 

Go Back   DA.C > Ground Control > Military Model Aircraft

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 03-15-2015, 08:34 AM   #1
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 47
Default HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Hey all!

I recently got the Sea Harrier from my local hobby store. It was pretty cheap at HK$ 480. Just wanted to show anyone else who may be interested what it looks like out of the box!
There is a bit of blue tac because the outer wing gear is a bit loose fitting. But overall quite a nice final product; if a little bit bland.












Last edited by n8d0g; 03-15-2015 at 08:41 AM.
n8d0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-15-2015, 12:20 PM   #2
Reft crosed trafficah
 
Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Upland, CA
Posts: 671
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Interesting. I have HA4101 (SATAN1) already and now have HA4102 on the way, picked both up on sales. 4101 only came with 2 AMRAAMs, but 4012 has the double Sidewinder racks as well, and I never considered the AMRAAM pylons fit in the fuel tank spaces, nice to see it all loaded up.

I wish HM had provided the gun pods and gun pod pylons on this mould, Sea Harrier FA2s carried AMRAAMs in lieu of gun pods as well, freeing up the wing stations.


Jumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2015, 03:30 PM   #3
Insane Collector
 
Richard from Rotterdam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 1,592
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

My friend has this one and I must say the model looks much better in the flesh than in photos.
Richard from Rotterdam is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Old 03-16-2015, 05:13 AM   #4
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 1,111
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Yep, have one myself. Think they are a beaut little tooling. I think I might get another, although I don't like SATAN to much.

The nose is a bit off, but not much.
PBRStreetgang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 08:48 AM   #5
Senior Collector
 
Feynman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Shefford, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 362
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Lovely model, though if I'm being critical I was a bit disappointed by how HM has done the check pattern on the vertical stabiliser; on the real thing the checks are square and at an angle to the horizontal, but on the model they have been skewed into rhomboids so that the 'horizontal' part of the checks are parallel to the bottom of the stabilizer.
Feynman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 09:36 AM   #6
Insane Collector
 
tker76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,240
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Great pics and nice model.

I have a GR.7, though no SHARs - this makes picking one up very tempting though.
tker76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 09:57 AM   #7
Senior Collector
 
Feynman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Shefford, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 362
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tker76 View Post
Great pics and nice model.

I have a GR.7, though no SHARs - this makes picking one up very tempting though.
I have all three and, despite the error with the check pattern, this one is my favourite of them.
Feynman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 10:08 AM   #8
Insane Collector
 
tker76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,240
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feynman View Post
I have all three and, despite the error with the check pattern, this one is my favourite of them.
It has a lot of charm, that's for sure.

Luckily some of the local hobby shops here have dreadful websites; I'm occasionally surprised by some of the models I know where to find on tbe primary market
tker76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 11:45 AM   #9
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Under the Jolly Roger
Posts: 32
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Probably the best scheme they released. Shame it's such an awful tooling. I doubt anyone else will produce the FA2.
Adour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 12:13 PM   #10
Senior Collector
 
Feynman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Shefford, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 362
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

What don't you like about the tooling? I thought it was decent.

Would love to see more schemes of these Harriers and Sea Harriers; would also love to see HM do FRS1 and GR3 toolings but I suspect that is wishful thinking.
Feynman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 02:32 PM   #11
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Under the Jolly Roger
Posts: 32
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Far from decent. Big picture; the mis-shapen radome, windshield, canopy and upper fuselage mean it fails the broad "does it look like a SHAR" test.

Now for some of the gory details.

Worst offence for those intending to display it gear down is the fixed retracted airbrake. Like all Harriers, there is a mechanical gear-airbrake interconnect. It is impossible to be gear down airbrake in. HM wouldn't even consider this - "impossible", for some reason.

Next, aux air doors, admittedly a modeling difficulty - so they should have put serious thought into a solution. They weren't prepared to do that, the compromise we have was my suggestion (which is why they're different to HM's Harrier II). Frankly though, not really good enough. Basically there are three common positions - all closed in conventional translational flight as per HM. All open in jet-borne flight. Uppers open, lowers closed, shut down on the ground. An oversimplification, but again HM's FA2 is only correct in conventional flight.

Missing yaw vane ahead of the cockpit. A small detail? Not really, one of the unique features of a Harrier for jet-borne flight, unlike the provided pitot heads - which are similarly small but far from unique. Heck, even Corgi gave it a go.

The intakes should be raked backwards top to bottom so the face is not parallel to the line of aux air doors.

Comedy "jousting lance" AMRAAM. Why are these so different to HM's other AMRAAMs? When I first saw them I didn't recognise what they were meant to be. I thought it was an attempt to tool ALARM - which we never had in my day.

Mountng for the detachable AAR probe (which was tooled) was in the wrong place. I think they gave up on it which is why we haven't seen one.

There's a bunch of small stuff related to aerials, personal taste on nose gear doors etc that I can't be bothered to get into.

Anyway, the basic shape is so poor because they chose the wrong kit. After that all the rest is academic really. I certainly wouldn't want an FRS1 from them until they are willing to spend the money to make an accurate tooling instead of half @rsing it. That requires a sponsor who not only knows the aeroplane, but who will demand a goid standard, not just think about minimum cost. I think that only three (slow selling) releases from this tooling demonstrates that some of the "commercial" (read cost cutting) decisions on this were wrong headed. They certainly haven't done the last all-British fighter justice.

Last edited by Adour; 02-17-2017 at 05:11 PM.
Adour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 07:36 PM   #12
Senior Collector
 
Feynman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Shefford, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 362
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

I'm not sure I agree that the fixed airbrake is the worst offence, but then I suppose that comes down to where one draws the line in what one is willing to accept when it comes to the inevitable compromises that have to be made in the creation of a mass-produced commercially viable model. I suppose anything could be argued along those lines - including my beef about the checks on the stabiliser - but some things are simpler to get right than others and that is why I believe the checks on the stabilizer is the worst offence. I could easily go off on a tangent here because I will never understand how why the simple things - such as selecting the correct colour - aren't always done correctly. There is absolutely no excuse for those 'mistakes'.

I'm not sure I understand what you're referring to on the intakes but then perhaps I am showing some ignorance. As for the other details: again I take your point, but again I do think it comes down to what compromises one is willing to accept and that is going to differ from one person to the next.

On the general shape of the model: I can't see what you're seeing but again perhaps I don't have as finally tuned an eye as you do. I had noted that something didn't quite look right about it - in particular I couldn't help but feel that the length proportion was a little high - but nothing to bother me enough.

So I suppose it just comes down to what you're willing to accept, and part of that comes down to how much you know about the plane, I suppose, and you clearly know a fair bit. I will reiterate, though - for reasons already given - that mistakes in colour selection and tampos are the most unforgivable, because it takes so little effort to get those right.
Feynman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 08:52 PM   #13
Insane Collector
 
Eagle_Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 1,371
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

From what comments I can remember of the DAF forum, it was the error with the nose profile they found to be the most annoying. I seem to recall one member even going as far as replacing it with an after market part.
Eagle_Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 04:21 AM   #14
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Under the Jolly Roger
Posts: 32
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

I was referring to the most unforgivable tooling error. Sure, tampos etc are easiest to get right, but at least they can always release another one. Correcting toolings is pretty rare. I'd agree that the nose is the worst bit, but I'm not brave enough or skilled enough to try to fix it.
Adour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 04:56 AM   #15
Senior Collector
 
Feynman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Shefford, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 362
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

It is a bit long. But I still don't think the tooling for this model is any worse than the average tooling - none of them are perfect. Now I suppose it could be argued that none of them should have such errors, but I don't think this one deserves to be singled out over others.
Feynman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 06:32 AM   #16
Insane Collector
 
Eagle_Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 1,371
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feynman View Post
It is a bit long. But I still don't think the tooling for this model is any worse than the average tooling - none of them are perfect. Now I suppose it could be argued that none of them should have such errors, but I don't think this one deserves to be singled out over others.
You are also spot on with the statement in your earlier posting.

"it comes down to what compromises one is willing to accept and that is going to differ from one person to the next"

One collector can consider an error to be a deal breaker and another doesn't.
Eagle_Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 07:19 AM   #17
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Under the Jolly Roger
Posts: 32
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feynman View Post
It is a bit long. But I still don't think the tooling for this model is any worse than the average tooling - none of them are perfect. Now I suppose it could be argued that none of them should have such errors, but I don't think this one deserves to be singled out over others.
You're right that none of them are perfect, even some of the very best toolings (IMO this would include HM's F-101, F-102 and A-4) still have defects, but capture the look well and make excellent models.

But you're wrong to suggest that I'm singling out the Sea Harrier over others as being not good enough (read, will someone else please have a go). Here's an incomplete list of the top of my head to show I'm not picking on the FA2:

Witty:
F-15, F/A-18C, Su-27, Javelin, Sea Vixen, Gannet, Tornado F3.

Falcon:
Storch, Panther, Mirage III, Mirage F1, T-38.

Skymax:
Bearcat.

Corgi:
Fury, A6M series, flat winged Spits, P-40B, new mold Hurricane, Sea Harrier FRS1 (crude but not as bad as the HM FA2) EE Lightning, Euro Typhoon, Tornado F3.

HM:
1/48 Stearman and most Merlin Spitfires.
1/72 Harrier II, Sea Harrier FA2, F-106, F-15C, F-35B (OMFG!!!).

Century Wings/ X-plus/ AC:
SR-71, F-4B/J.

Air Force 1:
B-17, B-29, SR-71.

AV72:
Draken (until the canopy was improved), Tiger Moth.

So the FA2 has plenty of company in my book. As always though, buy what you like (and I own many from that list). Eagle_Flyer's last line about sums it up - obviously.

Last edited by Adour; 02-18-2017 at 07:30 AM.
Adour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 07:57 AM   #18
Senior Collector
 
Feynman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Shefford, UK
Age: 43
Posts: 362
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Yeah I was disappointed with the F-35B for a number of reasons. I can't see HM giving it another go, but someone surely has to? It will be a ubiquitous bird in the next decade and so will be crying out for a decent model.

Also agree on the Corgi Zero, Warhawk and Typhoon. I'm particularly annoyed about the Typhoon for a similar reason to the F-35B.

The SR-71 is good but, yes, it has a couple of flaws, not least the chasm mid-fuselage.

Not a fan of Witty, AF1 or AV72 generally, so can't comment on individual models.
Feynman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2017, 12:17 PM   #19
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 15
Default Re: HM Sea Harrier Pictures (HA 4102)

Great pictures, thanks for sharing them.
iLoveA10s is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:18 AM.

Latest Threads
 

Models of the Week
 



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.