abufletcher

What are your feelings on building from scale kits? Discussion on this topic has crept into a number of recent threads so I thought it might be a good idea to give it its own space.

I'll get the ball rolling. Kits, which represent, however tentatively, a real aircraft, are hugely varied in quality, scale fidelity, and complexity. There are those few "premier" museum scale kits that everyone talks about building "someday, " examples from WWI kits, being the Proctor Albatros or Jenny (or more recently their D7) or the GTM Hanriot (which seems a bit more scale than Glenn's DrI designed decades ago) or the Mick Reeves Camel or Pup. The Proctor museum scale kits, in particular, are almost legendary for their all inclusiveness, scale authentencity, and meticulousness. Sorry, I can't speak for WWII or Civilian buffs.

Other kits, often just as well-known, just as admired, just as well-loved, and far more frequently built, such as the offerings from BUSA and Flair, are much less rigorously scale -- and in fact might be more accurately labeled "fun scale." The SR Eindecker is a particular favorite in this class of fun scale kits. Somewhere in between these and the museum scale kits are the VK kits sold by Proctor, the kits by various designers being offered by AZM. The CD ScaleDesigns Snipe and Pup probably fall into this broad category.

Kit builders also seem to be as varied as kits themselves. Some people just want to put a kit together exactly like the instructions say and take immense pride in having their model turn out just the way it's shown on the box (often using the exactly color scheme shown). Others can't seem to leave anything alone. These are the inveterate, and oh so incorrigible, kit-bashers who positively revel in "deviating from the plan."

But I wonder sometimes. Is there anyone out there who kit-bashes a Proctor Albatros or a Mick Reeve's Camel? Would anyone want to? Would a dyed-in-the-wool kit-basher be able to find happiness with this type of kit where everything (well most things) are already thought out for you? Or is it just that the "creative building" and scale exactitude is merely pushed into even higher more lofty realms? I must admit I find myself torn as to whether I would really want to do a "precision build" like the Proctor Albatros. Could I ever hope that MY model might be BETTER in some way that those of all the outstanding builders who have gone before me? Would a kit basher be happier with a less scale kit to start with?

Mode One

Hard questions! Maybe a little deeper thought then I do, when it comes to making build choices.

I like to add things to make a kit look a little better than what I consider average. I am completely O.K. with the fact that Balsa USA kits are designed to look good and fly well. Although I'd like to build a "Museum Scale" airplane someday, someday may never come as I also see many airplanes which I'd like to build that fly well.

Generally "Museum Scale" airplanes don't get flown much, because of all the effort put into them. I guess it comes down to the fact that I understand changes are made to an offering, for many reasons; price, ease of assembly, flying quality, to name a few. Since these things are a part of the equation, these are things acceptable to me.

Helijack

I get disappointed in kits and the lack of information in the plans, deviation from scale, the garbage plastic part or piece of wood. Cheap hardware....with the exception of Proctor. The Proctor Jenny, is an everyday flyer, a musuem quality aircraft with hangar rash. But, it flys so sweetly and looks so real in the sky....... I did end up making some parts on my own from fiberglas because the plastic warps, so it got kit bashed too.

Kits are okay for low experience builders. Kits just require bashing if you want it to look good. What is more important is accuracy of plans, additional detail on the plans....cockpit, seats, instruments, etc. I find kits slower to build because I have to read the instructions so I can stay 'on track'. I don't assimilate well from numbers or words. Give me drawings, or let my mind do it's 3D thing. Damn I wish I could draw what I can visualize.

Someone said to me once regarding scale"Where do you stop?" I have a model of the USS Constitution, scratch built, after 9 years I still don't consider it done. Everyone else thinks it is marvelous. Works the same way with RC stuff.

Oh, and control surfaces radio locations on kits suck. They are usually outdated, wrong, create CG issues, or bind if you do it the way they say. I totally ignore all electronic notations and drawings in kits.
Jack

abufletcher

The instructions on the Flair Legionaire and the Flair Puppetteer are sure night and day. The instructions on the Legionaire consisted of 5 pages of obviously hand typed (remember typewriters?) and very idiosyncratic British English. The Puppetteer came with the plans and a sheaf of 3-D "construction drawings" with little or no text.

Reading plans is a bit like reading music. In doesn't take much time to learn the names for the notes or what this or that kind of line means. But most plans are little more than tidy-looking sketches and they secretly rely on the builders knowledge and experience (and abilities to visual in 3-D) far more than they actually explain. And even the best plans inevitably contain minor (and occasionally major) errors. Things like missing lines or a line in the wrong place. The experienced builder can just look right past that sort of thing but it'll trip up a less experienced builder.

Part of me really likes kits and feels that scratch building must be a sad and lonely pasttime. The other part of me wants to "take that road less travelled."

Edwin

My Feedback: (2)

I fall in the "Can't leave it alone" camp. I see a sport scale kit as a clean slate or starting point if you will. Some get more mods than others, just depends on my mood at the time. The only reason I dont go for the museum quality kits is price. I believe if you're a basher you're probably pretty cheap too. I'm always looking for a way to do something cheaper. And like was said, I have my own process for equipment setup, no matter what the plans say. Generally, I only need enough info to get the basic frame up and I'll take it from there.
Edwin

CoosBayLumber

My Feedback: (1)

Well, my bug-a-boo is always the blatant label that mentions "High Quality" "(exact) Scale" when we know that the contents of the box will be obsolete in one or two years.

High Quality seems to be a standard word every manufacturer has used since die-cutting of parts began more than 50 years ago. What is Quality today, may be average tomorrow, or already. In many respects, I read of new innovations being done to contents within that box by a manufacturer. One thing omitted, is that it may very well be new to them, but it also may have been used by another firm a few years prior.

An Exact Scale model is often infeasible also. The control surfaces for full size and model vary by needs in area. Moreover, it would be helpfull for the manufacturer would let us know what is considered original size and what is model sized. Outlines to more scale appearances were often shown on plans years ago. Not anymore.

In an advertisement last month I read about some new model by a manufacturer that now had CAD drawings included. "Well, welcome to the 20th Century! Unfortunatly this has been around for more than ten years now. So, when we going to see some of your work from the 21st century as it is now?" The problem as we all knoiw here is that CAD is slow and tedious, and sometimes the result is that the creation is not possible to build.

Tell them Don't Lie to Us.


Wm.

TFF

I think some marketing has come into play also. For WWI types there were only Proctor,VK(befor and after Proctor ownership) for a long time. When these two companys were started the modern digital radio had been only a couple of years old. Think of flying the neuport 11 with a reed radio, flipping switches; very possible at the time, so there use to be a lot at risk flying a scale model untill the mid 70's. The thing is these people armed with new equepment still had the mindset of reliability. Flair and others eased the pain by making things more simple for the average model builder, but at the expence of scale. But instead of building a new courious generation who were willing to build and then scratch build, the arf hits big. Instant gratification. I dont know what my dad would have done if I wanted an arf? For Christmas one year I wanted a Jemco P-51, the only 40 size P-51 at the time and I only had 40 engines, It came with a foam wing; every time he looked at it he would say it was cheeting to have a foam wing.

I learned to build from my dad( ff/control line) looking over his shoulder when I was 5, getting help when 7, by 12 building my first rc trainer. I learned from that how to read plans and make parts fit; the stuff needed to build. Tthe arf guy who is use to Lego construction is lost, understandable. Kits are in an interm period. You have some still being manufactured with out computer asstance and the new stuff that is. The conversion to laser is probably what killed Pica for the volume of kits they were making.

Another part is flying and flying ability. It is much harder to fly any of my scale stuff than any sport stuff. I have a coulpe of known profile designers, who sell kits and stuff at my field, and they freek when I fly my stuff; they are much better aerobatic flyers but are not better stick pilots; they dont know how to deal with instabiliy or want to. The people ,who could buy a Proctor kit then, were buying a piece of fine furnature to show off, the were not going to risk it flying. Ones who risk it were the competion guys. They had a goal which they were willing to reach. Ramble,Ramble.
The kits are not there because the arf market takes up the manufacturing quota. Industry always fallows money. When I was a kid, late 70's-80's, all modeling was cottage industry kits were made in garages with bandsaws; unless you were a Goldberg or like who had been in busness from the thirties, volume was low. Guys had figured how to make a living on their hobby. With big companys in volved proffit and growth hve come into play, marketing monopolys like hobbieco/ tower makes it hard to break in without their blessing.

I think I am stabbing and missing the target!

Modeling use to be driven by competition. FF and controlline is still that way. RC is now more of a pass time for most. Would you bash a Proctor kit? If you had an eye for competition, yes. you have to convence the judges you are the best. i think I read in this fourm that the guy who won the world scale champs had documentation of the fade diffrence from the sun top to bottom of his a/c. Ouch! Would I bash a Proctor Albatros, no. Am I going to modify my VK Camel a little but bash, no.I added some details to my SE5a, modifyed my plans built Fokker EV. I would love to compete, but That is a whole nother world. I have been buying 1/6 plans for ww1. MAN Fokker EV, circa 1985, RCM Fokker dVII, 1965, And the talked about Pfalz DIII, FM 1971. The dVII is the closest scale outline as per plans but it is just structure, you have to come up with the details. I modded the fuse on the EV but did not have to much. The Pfalz wing needs to be modded to an undercamber airfoil which makes rigging more important.

Tom

Bud Faulkner

My Feedback: (1)

I have the Proctor jenny and have done extensive research on it and I have only the highest respect for Proctor kits but the jenny is not true scale. I'm sure there are scale builders out there that have built the jenny and will tell you the same thing. I have the actual drawings and rigging details for the full scale jenny and almost too many museum photos. Proctor did a fantastic job on their kit and it truly is a beautiful sight in the air or static but if you are a serious scale guy and want to compete in that area you have to add the correct detail that some would think only a heart surgeon would have the talent to do something that intricate. To the average eye seeing one out of the box complete they would be in awe but to the judges......be prepared.

abufletcher

Bud, I think the problem is that what counts as "really scale" has moved on over the years. For example, when Glenn Torrence originally released his DrI back in the 80's (I believe) it was really the most amazing thing ever. But compared to his more recent offerings like the Hanriot and DVIII the DrI kits seems almost, well, old fashion.

The Jenny has, I believe, been around a bit longer than the Albatros, though it's not listed the Proctor 1982 catalogue I hold clutched in my hands at the moment. Curiously, this catalogue DOES list a "Curtis Jenny Hand Book " for $8.25.

Proctor products are very VERY good -- but not flawless. For example, they are the only company in the world selling scale Fokker-style cowl fasteners. Unfortunately, the shape of these fasteners is not authentic. At top competetive levels today that probably matters.

Bud Faulkner

My Feedback: (1)

Abu, I may be wrong but I think the Glenn Torrence DR-I has some redesign to it since it's original release. I've been drooling over one on his site lately. The Hanriot is such a beautiful kit! The build thread on that one almost had me ordering one. Wish I could find a really scale spad VII or XIII. []

khodges

My Feedback: (1)

Interesting thought, Abufletcher. I kind of get a mental image of Buddha in his cross-legged seat with a R/C transmitter in his hands.

I'm one of those who can't leave it alone, I'm compelled to change something, no matter how minor, just depends on what kit I'm working on and how it's designed. I think i'd be less likely to bash on a Reeves than I would a Torrance kit, and less on a Torrance than a BUSA. I agree that the BUSA kits are much closer to "fun scale" than the others, but with a little work they can be made into VERY nice airplanes. Sort of like the difference in a kid's paint-by-number, an advanced paint-by-number, and a blank canvas. If I ever (and I doubt I will) buy a Mick Reeves model, I'm hoping that the price I paid for it will get me all the details that I'd have to research and add myself to a BUSA kit I paid a lot less for. Some things I probably wouldn't change, such as the airfoil shape, that you've commented on in several of your posts. I know the thick section of BUSA's kits aren't even close to the thin, undercambered sections of the prototype, but it sure makes them an easy plane to fly, gives them good performance. I don't know how well the "more scale" airfoils fly in comparison, but there must be some reason (and you may have said it--structural strength of thicker spars, etc) that BUSA makes their wing the way they do. Otherwise, we might have to have fully functional flying wires, etc, and stuff like that makes the plane a bigger hassle for the "common man" hauling it back and forth and assembling and disassembling at the field and so forth. So... I'm willing to accept those "non scale" variations for the sake of convenience and flyability. To me, those are the details you HAVE to overlook sometimes, and most people who aren't devoted to the craft would never notice anyway unless it was pointed out and explained.

I doubt I will ever even approach the level of a Mick Reeves or museum quality Proctor plane, but I don't devote my every waking minute to the design and construction of these things. I build to please myself, and take pride that it's well done within the scope of what I aimed for. If everybody else who sees it is as pleased or more so, then it's icing on the cake for me.

feep

We're discussing this from a modeler's point of view and that's valid but a lot of times we overlook the manufacturer's angle and I think it's valid also. I talked to the guys at SR about their choice of an E1 over the much more numerous E111 with so many more schemes and it came down to what size will fit into a vehicle. They were in the process of doing a Jenny but it was too complicated and large and it simply would'nt sell. The E1 was shorter and would fit better in an SUV. BUSA kits are designed to assemble easily at the field and will sell better than Proctor kits because of this. The scale companies forgo the practical considerations and aim for those modelers who want scale and are not as concerned with price or size or ease of assembly. When it comes to scale I personally like GT" angle. They will provide you with a basic kit or a delux kit with just about everything. I want a scale model which gives me the thiings I can't easily produce and leaves me to my own devices when it come to the things I can make myself.

khodges

My Feedback: (1)

That's bang-on. I know a lot of people will relate to this: you builders out there, don't you look at everything you see in packaging, scrap material and such that you run into, or pitch in the trash, thinking,"What the hell can I make out of this?", or "Wait, don't throw that away, I can make a machine gun barrel, or lift handle, or....whatever.... out of that." This is what I love about this hobby, the building part, that is. I'd love to get the kit with all the turnbuckles and stuff that you have to have a machine shop to make, but do as much of the detail as possible out of ......junk. And when you get done, it doesn't look like junk, it looks like what you intended. I made the fuel cap, filler neck and "fuel gauge" for my L-4 out of the end of a Bic pen and a paper clip. When I got through, it looked like a fuel filler, not an ink pen and you'd be hard pressed to figure it out. Stuff like that.

eagledancer

well over the years proctor has always stood behind thier stuff and even as technology changes it is still a very hard act to follow.
i am finishing a proctor albatross now. this has been a long build but i am taking my time on it and yes i have found some things that need changing here and there. but here is the kicker on a scale a/c so many changes were done during production runs and at the field that you will find changes here and there, check your docs! and they use "stock hardware" here and there on the kit, it helps to keep the prices a touch lower but my god there is a lot of parts in that box!
i just bought a mick reeves 1/3 camel, i could not beleave the fittings in that kit! they are a work of art in themselves. it would take me years to make them all out of stainless. not to mention some of the other items in there. this one is next up on my building table (even tho i am pushing many other kits i have here to pick from (yep 2 other proctors as well as others)
busa kits are a very nice kit for the money, i have had several, and still have a 1/3 pup as well as a bristol. the other guys are right they were designed for the guy that wants to throw it in the suv and head to the field. i can assemble the pup in 10 mins, yes i did rib stitch it and a few other things, but no i didnt do a complete cockpit or went hole hog on detail. its not that type of kit,its a build me lets go have fun, mine is 7 or 8 years old and still fun. i have flown it with 25 mph winds gusting to 35 on down to no wind conditions as well as cross winds. yep when i finish my reeves camel and its blowing 25 out there will i fly it or my pup, to be honest and its NOT a contest i will probally fly the pup. but also my camel or albatross will not be hanger queens either!
MOST of the time in this hobby you get what you pay for. i have been known to do a bit of extra detail to a busa kit but not a lot, just enough to make it stand a bit taller on the flight line or to make it look a bit better on a fly by.
but heres another thing to think about, when you build from a kit and you really do a nice job it does reward you. and no i am not saying throw it together and then spend some time detailing. i am saying from the first glue joint all the way through. you will end up with a plane that will both fly well and last a long time. i have a bridi rearwin speedster that is 20 years old, a ikon monocoupe (this one got bashed a bunch) that is pushing 17 years. and i could go on and on i end up selling planes just so i have room to build more lol

eagledancer

here are just a few of mine, and these are throw in the truck and trailer and lets go fly

Bud Faulkner

My Feedback: (1)

Eagledancer, I like the Mick reeves kits but have yet to figure out the prices in US dollars and shipping?

BobH

My Feedback: (2)

Bud figuring the pricing for Mick Reeves is really pretty simple. Just look up the cost of the kit and the shipping and then find a web site that does the currency conversion. That's all there is to it.

Stickbuilder

Why not bash them? That's what sets us apart from the herd. I still enjoy taking a Pica, or an Ikon kit, and using the kit as the starting point, finding a full scale example, or a good set of photo's to work from, and replicating the full scale in miniature. If it requires working 3 hours in the shop to make a miniature fitting that looks exactly like the real thing, then, to me , that's what this hobby is all about. I'm not a Pack Rat, but virtually anything I see, I can imagine a use for. Often it does not work out in practice, but when it does....It's magic, and I'd rather build a part than buy it. I know that it's original, and unique.

No, I can't leave one alone, but all my models are in a constant state of evolution. I have even been known to strip the covering off the wing, in order to make a better flap hinge, or to add that one little detail that must be under the covering material, or embedded in the finish.

Are we perfectionists, or are (to steal a phrase from Lexus) we in the relentless pursuit of perfection? I'd like to think that we are striving to find perfection, and always falling a little short. That's what provides the drive for us to spend the long lonely hours in the shop creating these wonderful models that others drool over, but will never attempt, because they fear failure. We succeed because we have failed, and not given up.

Okay, I'm off my soap box now.

Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1

mgnostic

When I was in college I dragged a thouroughly neglected Austin Healy Bugeyed Sprite (I was insane at the time) back to the dorms where I lived.. I fixed the points and drove the wheels off of it until the engine blew up two years later. I discovered that you can fit 4 girls and 2 guys or 2 guys and an Eagle 63 trainer in a little british car with the top down. Fast forward 20 years and I have a beautifully restored Bugeye that I can't bear to drive cause I planning on selling it and I don't want to risk the paint. Instead I drive my beater MGB and enjoy the ride. I tend to be the same way about airplanes. My BUSA Bristol is a hoot and I'm building a BUSA N 17. It will be a flyer too although I've ordered a set of Rosendaal drawings to use for a little extra detailing. I have a Proctor N28 that only lacks painting the wings and finishing the rigging to be complete. It is a beautifully designed kit and in the 70's it was a world beater but today would just be a beginning for a competetion level scale model. It's a shame but it will probably just get flown at funfly's and local contests because again I may not be able to stand the risk of thrashing all that work. 99% of my flying involves tossing my models in the back of the truck (the 1/12 combat scale birds will fit in the MG) and catching some flight time when I go into town (the closes RC field is an hour away). Bottom line...Everybody ought to pull off a hardcore scale plane once in a while but most of the time a moderately scale but convienient plane will get a lot more flight time and will still knock the socks off the ARF boys.

abufletcher

Easy. With the current exchange rates you can basically just about double the pound prices! []

abufletcher

Another dimension to the "kit or not to kit" question is that kits vary from near all inclusiveness to being little more than a box of balsa sticks and blocks. I remember the old Sterling rubber band kits which consisted of nothing more than sheets of balsa with part outlines stamped on them.

Full kits are very nice for folks that don't have easy access to a fully stocked hobby shop -- and believe me when I say that the internet DID NOT solve this problem for those of us overseas! For all practical purposes, if I don't bring it with me from the US I've got to make do with whatever I can find or order through the local hardware store. So my circumstances have almost forced me to become a scratch builder. Now if I lived in Osaka or Tokyo things might be a little different.

Anyway, back to the "Zen of Scale Kits." There's no doubt what part of my personal modeling philosophy is that these things are SUPPOSED to be cheap! After all it's just some balsa and coverings, right? I'm used to thinking in terms of around $150-200 for a scale kit and maybe an equal amount (wishfully) in building costs -- though the reality might easily be twice that. Some poeple could do if for much less -- and some would spend a fortune.

My BUSA Eindecker kit was a bit over $80 bucks. But when you figure that I only used 20% of the kits that's a lot. But I was happy to pay the money -- count it as "educational expenses." A couple of times I started tallying up the costs of doing one of the "museum scale" kits. I usually stop after I add the cost of the kits (typically $500+) and the engine (often also 500+). The Laser twin 200 that seems like the de facto norm on many of these cost over $800.

Of course ameliorated over three or four years of building fun....

So I stick with 1/6 scale, basic engines, and a basic radio. No $300 dollar retracts thank you very much. I suppose this will always limit me as a scale modeler. If I can find a cheap solution to a scale problem, I'll do it. But I'm not going to spend $100 doing a dummy engine or some such. This way I figure I can reasonably afford to be doing one maybe two scale kits per year.

It's the classic YIN and YANG of building: COST and TIME.

Bud Faulkner

My Feedback: (1)

What he said.

Bud Faulkner

My Feedback: (1)

I remember the old kits with the parts stamped in blue ink quite well....I have the razor blade scars to show for it. I have a friend who buys the balsa USA kits just for the wood, says they're a lumber yard in a box.

Stickbuilder

Bud,

Thanks for the kind words. I always enjoy sitting in on a conversation with you and /or Abufletcher involved. You will always see well thought out answers and fleshed out thoughts. Talk (type) to you guys later. There's a YMF calling me.

Bill, AMA 4720
WACO Brotherhood #1

Bud Faulkner

My Feedback: (1)

Right back at you Bill. Always a pleasure.


Bud