So I'm reading my latest FSM....

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Mad-Modeller - 24 Dec 2008 06:24 GMT

And I ask myself, "Why didn't the article on the Su-27P explain WHY it
was necessary to kitbash two kits to get the 'P'?" I feel a little dull
because I've always had an interest in Soviet aircraft and I can't
recall what it is that makes a 'P' different. The designation suggests
an interceptor-optimised aircraft. Being unfamiliar with Hasegawa's and
Airfix's kits, I can't say what versions they represent.

All that said, the model was very well done.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

Reply to this Message

El Viejo Dragon - 24 Dec 2008 16:23 GMT

> And I ask myself, "Why didn't the article on the Su-27P explain WHY it
> was necessary to kitbash two kits to get the 'P'?" I feel a little dull
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

Possibly because the Airfix is most accurate, and Hasegawa has finer
details but less accurate shapes?

Reply to this Message

Mad-Modeller - 28 Dec 2008 05:02 GMT

>> And I ask myself, "Why didn't the article on the Su-27P explain WHY it
>> was necessary to kitbash two kits to get the 'P'?" I feel a little dull
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Possibly because the Airfix is most accurate, and Hasegawa has finer
> details but less accurate shapes?

I suppose so but that doesn't answer the question directly. What is it
about a -27P that made it - necessary - to combine kit parts? Without
that answer it was just an article on how to combine parts from other
kits and aftermarket suppliers to get a really nice model.
The jist of the article was stated early on that when you can't buy what
you want already kitted, you can do thus and get the result you want.

Sorry if I'm the only one who felt the article came up lacking.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

Reply to this Message

Model Forum / General / Models / December 2008

So I'm reading my latest FSM....