Zendocon

I agree with you. It's not the fact that they've used raised panel lines, it's the fact that they've raised them twice as high as necessary. On a stealth fighter, it's got to be a subtle effect. It's subtle on the real aircraft. Even still, if it were only the panel lines then that might be forgivable. But it's the panel lines, the join lines, the inaccurate horizontal stabilizers, the wrong size for the exhaust nozzle... it's just a poorly executed model.

Ukrainian_Falcons

Wow we're Boeing even trying ? lol It's like they were kind of going back to the whacky experimental designs of the 50's and 60's lol

tripoli

"I agree with you. It's not the fact that they've used raised panel lines, it's the fact that they've raised them twice as high as necessary. "

Actually, if you look on the actual aircraft, the panel line paint is highlighted around recessed inward panels to the airframe. So there is no paneling sticking out, the test bed aircraft highlight that are panels slightly recessed into the airframe. So it not just over emphasizing the paneling, it is incorrectly highlighting the panels on the outer skin that don't exist at all. That makes the error stand out so much more than it should.

__________________
Jeff

b2spirit

Yeah I agree with tripoli. The panel line should go IN, not stick out. (just like the HM's f-22 raptor)

Zendocon

Yeah, I see it now too. Absolutely correct.

Zendocon

Also... notice that Hobby Master has added extra detail to the canopy that's not present on the actual aircraft??

b2spirit

Is it just me or the 3d model looks much more thinner and longer. (the nose cone/cockpit specially).

If that 3d model is correct than HM screwed up the entire structure of the model as well.

17275

I'd rather compare to an actual F-35 in stead of a computer rendering.

WilliamHL

Anyone also think the engine nozzle is awkwardly smaller then it should be?

__________________
Sir! We have acquired 1/200 Air Superiority!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

b2spirit

Does anyone have a picture of the f-35 schematics? It would be more accurate

to compare.

I googled around but I couldn't find an official version from Lockheed martin.

(it might be classified though)

A-Holt

I would say yes, the engine nozzle does seem substantially smaller than it should be.



Compared to:



Unfortunately a lot of work seems to be required with this one before I would consider it redeemed

tripoli

So the major issue of the model at this point:

Panel lines need to be taken off the upper and lower fuselage,
Access panel lines on wings need to be taken off,
Proportion of the nose slightly of on length and top side needs to be trimmed to proportions more like the F-22 as seen with the nose shape,
Bottom detailing needs to be smoothed out,
Engine nozzle needs to be enlarged to flush with the fuselage body,
Canopy should be with just the one support bar front running left to right,
Wing lights need t be moved forward to front of the wing,
Rear elevator panel lines should be eliminated.

Anything else?

__________________
Jeff

sarcasm

yes there is, B2spirit posted a picture that shows how the HM's elevator is off. But the picture by A-Holt shows to me that the elevator by HM is accurate. In A-Holts picture the elevator don't seem to be too short on one of its side as shown in the picture by B2spirit! Are there different sets of elevators?

Zendocon

The picture B2spirit posted is not a photograph.

SuperKungFu

people really gotta stop comparing photo to that 3d rendering photo of that top down view...compare it to real photos.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Comco

Not sure the engine is as bad as it looks...See this video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feip4lx26dQ

When the vanes are closed, it does get pretty small...Would really need to see a top-down view to get a sense for it. That's not to say that it wouldn't look better with the nozzle fully opened - just that HM may not have made such a large error as some people are thinking...

Edit: Another video that shows the engine nozzel in what I assume as "low thrust" mode...

aritrixa

The seam lines, stretching from the nose to the mid section need to be re-engineered

__________________
You want to make a background check of a seller? Contact me, maybe I can give a name of the con-artist.....
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

b2spirit

I used photoshop to compare. I only retouched the size to compare. (I used shift tool to shrink so no proportion has been damaged)

I cant really tell if it's wrong or not, you guys be the judge... (the actual photo and HM's f-35 have a slightly different angle... so it might be correct. )

sarcasm

I don't know if I can forgive B2spirit for what he did, you really mislead me. I didn't know it was a drawing. Now that I saw a photo of the real jet I can tell that HM got everything right except the nozzle, and the nose (may be the canopy too). The nose seems to be more pointed than HM model. Even skinner was wrong with some of his comments. There is not radial curve at the shoulder, it looks straight in the real jet as well.

Going back to the nozzle, HM model do not depict the jet in closed nozzle version. It looks so far that the model is made to be an open nozzle in which case the nozzle indeed looks too small.

b2spirit

Yeah the snout definitely needs to be more pointier/leaner at least from how i see it.

Also how could you not tell that was a 3d model? I've said it more than once, and also it's kinda obvious..

Comco

Also - Wing lighting strip / formation lights placement looks pretty spot on to me and doesn't need to be moved forward...



All these comments are forcing me to look closely at the F-35 and I've got to say - kudos to HM on this one. I can't find anything nasty to fault on the general shape!

Mikael

The shape isnt an issue on the HM F-35, it is within the acceptable limits that models in general are made. Not even the best plastic kits are able to be 100% exact, especialy on modern era jets. Diecasts have even more limitations in these terms.
However, the main issue with this one, at least for me (even though I am not planning on buying the first batch, gotta wait for the possible Israeli marking) is the seam line on the whole front of the fuselage, the wing seam lines, and of course, the panels. They look like someone welded them on the plane. Also, the lines on the canopy *could* be a little thinner than they currently are, but that is a minor issue tbh

Comco

Ok. Sorry for the image spam...But in answer to comments regarding the additional lines on the canopy...

It appears what we're all seeing on the pre-production model's canopy is what I believe is the det-cord for the ejection sequence. As in - it's a cord of explosives that are fired milliseconds before the ejection seat fires to break up the canopy. This technique is used - one can only presume - to prevent any tragic Goose-killing incidents in the future. RIP Goose.

I did a bit of looking around using Google Image Search because there was some strange discrepancies between photos I was seeing.

Random fact #3456673 - As far as I can tell, the F-35A and C models (that is - conventional and carrier borne versions) have a canopy that extends further back, while the B model, which features the addition of the lift fan behind the cockpit that necessitates a smaller canopy.

Interestingly - probably for the purpose of parts interoperability between the models, the det cord shape appears the same for all models. That is - the det cord on the A and C models runs the same shape as the C model, meaning it cuts across the rear of the canopy as is seen in the photos attached.



It also runs down the centre axis of the canopy from the cockpit support brace. So that's what you're seeing on the pre-production model.

There's certainly still an argument to be made that it should or should not be there - just thought it worth mentioning, again, it appears HM have certainly done their homework.

If anything, given the scale, they could actually increase the main canopy strut slightly - which would also have the affect of making the the det cord lines not look so large...

Mikael

I didnt say they shouldnt be there, as they clearly should, and kudos to HM for that little detail, the only concern I have, that due to scale, they could be a little thinner, thats all

tripoli

So at this point,

Panel lines need to be taken off the upper and lower fuselage,
Access panel lines on wings need to be taken off,
Proportion of the nose slightly of on length and top side needs to be trimmed to proportions more like the F-22 as seen with the nose shape,
Bottom detailing needs to be smoothed out,
Engine nozzle needs to be enlarged to flush with the fuselage body,
Rear elevator panel lines should be eliminated.
Thin thicken the canopy support line so the det line looks more proportional.

I kept the nozzle as it was listed as the video shows the nozzle contracting like the nozzles you see on the Century Wings F-14's.

__________________
Jeff

Zendocon

That first video is of an F-35C, not the F-35A. The F-35C is quite different than the F-35A with a rotating nozzle, larger wing surfaces, twin wheels on the front landing gear, etc. The second video portrays both aircraft, but I still think the base of the nozzle remains MUCH wider than portrayed on the Hobby Master model.

Zendocon

Besides, the worst part about the new model isn't in all the subtle details anyway. It's the AWFUL join lines and the bumpy panel details. I really don't think this mold can be salvaged. I think it would have to be a "back to the drawing board" approach to make this one work.

17275

HM could end the whole panel discussion with taking the raised panels off and replace them with a matt grey layer of paint, just like the real thing.

mar_ji

am quite excited to see the first model....how it looks like and all....seeing it in the flesh is the best thing to do before jumping to conclusions and deciding to buy it or wait for the next issue.....not all but most first issue of a new mold has its faults/ mistakes and are corrected for the next one...I put all my trust to HM to produced the best model that they can and remain the world leader in our beloved hobby....price/ quality....the best we can have as collectors.....

tripoli

Yep open that door to accepting a sub par design so the competition can get a leg up on HM. That's the spirit.

__________________
Jeff

mar_ji

i really wonder who would dare HM to make a much better model of the F-35.....Century ?....Corgi ?... Witty?....... who knows....perhaps americom or oxford could make it much better and much more accurate.......

b2spirit

Look at it from the side view. It literally looks disgusting.

It seems like it just had some sort of allergic reaction to its skin

and had a very severe mutation.

I know that it's just a toy, but comparing with my HM's f-22, it's like night and

day.

tripoli

As popular as the F-22 has been for HM, I am sure the F-35 done right by a company will grab that niche. Leaving it as is leaves that door open.
If you do something, you need to do it right the first time or it can be a costly error.

Should HM do so, they will lock in that niche market. If they don't, they open the chance for another top come along and unseat them.

By the way, Dragon has already noted they are interested in doing the F-35. They made a pretty good F-16. Other manufacturers know that when there is good demand, to jump into a niche market.
The F-35 mold will be one that will produce a product line of models for quite some time down the road.
Why in the world would you advocate mediocrity?

__________________
Jeff

blu3hamm3r

Base on the picture, it really look ugly.... >.<

BrazilianAce

"It seems like it just had some sort of allergic reaction to its skin"

I'm laughing that much.

Skinner67

I was wrong on 1 & 5. Apparently, I was looking at early prototypes, the C variant, and the computer-generated images.

It's very easy for me to get the A and C mixed up, but looking at the wing fold line on the C helps me to differentiate the two. I know the C has a larger wing area and different exhaust, but they are easily confused with each other.

I still think it's an ugly model. Looking at the side view, I do have a problem with the raised panel lines. It looks terrible.

I hope they do serious revisions and re-release some updated pre-pros or I won't be getting any of these.

Darkside

Yes, the model seems very disapointing ! I'am too desapointed about this model, I hope this mould will be improved for series editions... If not, this one won't be in my collection, whereas it is a must have !

Seventy2ndScaleEdward

Just sad that it's the Edwards AB model that's gonna be riddled with issues.

sarcasm

the mold, as well as the colors, is real nice and impressive (except for the nose) but the raised panel messed it up. Hopefully they can update it for collectors sake.

Sachiel

I feel the same way guys. I think thus far Hobby Master has done a fabulous job on every release. I have tried very hard to work with Hobby Master to make the necessary changes and in return William along with the rest of the design team at the company have worked hard to implement all my suggestions. But as you know since the pre-production pictures have been released it would appear that the model has still many more issues that needs to be worked out before being sent to the presses/factory for mass production.

I've sent William at Hobby Master a few emails highlighting our concerns and so far have yet to hear back. It may be that we are not the only concerned parties that have been contacting him enmasse since the pre-production photos have been released on Hawk's Hobby Master Collector website. I'm sure they're hard at work considering the alternatives to solve these issues. Looks like we're going to see a significant delay if we want this bird done right. And I would prefer it that way. Hobby Master needs to secure the market for diecast 1/72 F-35 models. If they don't do it right now it will come back to haunt them for the next few years.

tripoli

I would much rather see a significant delay and have HM come out stronger down the road with this model.
HM has become a dominate die cast model maker and I would love to see them continue to do so.

__________________
Jeff

mar_ji

looking at the pre- production....the model really looks horrible if i may say....now, i fully understand the whole concern and commotion going on....i really hope that HM akes the necessary correction...those panel lines look horrible.....i guess even tickers will do and look much better

Comco

Easiest way to differentiate the A and C is to look for the refueling port on the top centre-line of the aircraft. If it has one, it's the Air Force's A model. If it lacks one, it's the Naval C variant with a retractable refueling probe instead.

aki

Walkaround shots!

PT 1

aki

PT 2

aki

PT 3

tripoli

The nozzle is terribly off:




The lines all over the panels just don't exist on the actual aircraft, looks nothing like a stealth aircraft.
Hm has drastically dropped the ball on this model. The model's surface should be comparable to the F-22 model.
Its like whom ever designed this either copied a bad example or decided to pop on details that just don't exist on the real aircraft to make it look techie.

Blah.

__________________
Jeff

Skinner67

I wish Hobby Master well on this mold, but it's definitely not up to their past standards.

Pass.

Sachiel

I personally think that while I don't agree with the raised panel lines present on the model I am aware of why HM did decide to eventually do it. Sans the raised panel lines, the small nozzle, and the seams present on the nose cone, the model is otherwise a great representation of the F-35 in diecast form. HM recently forwarded me the pre-production model and I look forward to getting the production model of the HM F-35 to add to my collection. I'll be doing an in-depth review behind my involvement with the design process and the evolution seen in this model.

Comco

I too understand their reasoning on the panels but still think it's been far too exaggerated, which is a shame.

HM had already established the scale for such detail on their F-22 model. Given how many collectors will put these two examples next to each other, they really should have gone to lengths to keep them looking similar in terms of panel line scaling etc. It's a real shame. The panel gaps are also some of the worst I've seen on any HM model.

Looking forward to your review, Sachiel.