Well, at long last I plucked up the courage to order one of these beauties, after the profound disappointment of the 1/72nd Airfix version (H, i think?).
I’m planning on getting the Flightpath PE update set, and I’ve got an article from an old FSM that deals with detailing the rear compartment and accuratizing the weapons, so I think I’m good to go, but I’d appreciate any comments from people that have built this kit as to pitfalls, other updates & things to look out for.
I have not built that kit and cannot offer any tips or suggestions, but I can share with you a FANTASTIC video I came across a few years ago called: “USAF-Aerial Gunner.wmv”, which showcases several aerial guns applications, including some great AC-130 in-cabin footage during active operations. ie: “105” loading and firing, 40mm loading and firing, and 20mm firing, plus the affects on the target below.
It’s 5+megabites. Ready for downloading now @ 10:45am, usa time.
(I especially like the sequence at the first of the video, showing a CH-53 ramp gunner firing his .50cal while flying low-level)
I’ve built this kit, but it was many seasons ago, long before I knew that there was such wonderous things as PE or resin correction kits. So I can’t recall any serious issues that I had with it (beyond my own inexperience and impatience). Sorry. I do know that it’s still hanging from the ceiling of my old room, collecting dust. Hmmm…I may have to see about packing it up and shipping it to my current domicile. I think I didn’t glue the wings in, they fit tight enough, and I wanted to be able to dissasemble it at some point…
I built an earlier variant of this kit and hope to build another someday. I enjoyed it immensely. I only remember having to modify the bulkhead between the cockpit and the rear compartment, but that may have been corrected by now. Definitely post pics!
Just been drooling over the Flightpath update set. It’s a generic “C-130” kit, and includes some basic airframe detailing, as quoted from their site:
If it’s anything like the 1/72nd scale version, it’ll be pretty hot, and demand quite a bit of cutting of styrene to accomodate the flaps etc. Can’t wait!
I need to see if I can find some bulged wheels - I wonder… Would you believe it? Paragon Designs are going to release a set in 1/48th. I guess it’s just a case of waiting for Neil Burkill to get his production facilities back up to speed after his time away.
Well - the kit arrived yesterday, but I didn’t have too much time to look at it, as I was in the middle of a surprise birthday party! I got the box open later on, and this kit is truly HUGE! The fuselage is so big it’s in 2 parts, and there are a heck of a lot of parts to both the cockpit and the interior of the fuselage, which is heartening. The raised panel lines are very fine, and as such won’t take much getting rid of when I re-scribe (hadn’t thought of that!), and I think it deserves some Flightpath etched brass, plus the Paragon bulged tyres when production re-starts. What a monster of a kit - I’ve got NO idea where I’m going to put it when I’ve finished it! [:D]
I’ve been reading some reviews of the Flightpath set, and it’s a “must have” for every 1/48th C-130. There’s a lot of detailing for the cockpit, the access ladders are amazingly detailed, and there’s also quite a lot of structural bracing for inside the main load compartment. There’s a replacement floor for the access ramp, and the detail on the flaps has to be seen to be believed. Finally (that I can remember), there’s detailing for the wheel wells. Well worth the money by the looks of things. [:)]
mikeiw,
I’ve built Italeri’s C-130(H?) and I have some info that might help. First, the wings. The span is HUGE and the wings are heavy. The kit has a spar that runs through the fuse, but it was my experience that it wasn’t enough. I used the spar and some brass tube both fore and aft of the kit provided spar to add a bit of strength. Also, you mentioned the fuselage coming in to pieces; the “forward” section and the “rear” section. If you leave the parts as is, the locating/alignment tabs provided don’t allow the greatest fit. What I did was remove the tabs, and instead, used some styrene strips run the length of the inside seam to provide a better seat. Not only does it give more surface area for adhesion, but also gives it (the seam) some strength. I didn’t have to worry about the parts separating.
That’s my two cents. I hope that helps.
Cheers,
-O
That’s very helpful Oortiz, thanks. I’d already noticed the fit issues with the front & rear halves, and was thinking of some styrene strip re-enforcement. I think the fuselage halves could also do with some re-enforcement. I read a review somewhere where the guy also recommended attaching the front & rear parts together BEFORE gluing left to right. This will probably help somewhat with alignment issues too.
As to the wings, it hadn’t occurred to me, but I’ve spotted some brass tubing in a box somewhere in my garage, and will make sure I add some when I’m building it up.
Hi there!
I also had the Italeri Gunship. The size was impressive but there are many pitfalls,
First, the interior is of the Basic C-130. It doesn’t heve gunn breeches, the Battle Management System Booths…
Second, the beaver tail is incorrect…
Third, it doesn’t have the HF antenna probe (right wing, near the ECM pod)
Fourth, the ECM pod pylons are way wrong from the real deal
Fifth, the engine cowlings are shorter, it should have the longer H cowlings
(well that’s based on comments made by our fellows at Aircraft Resource Center.
I was really disappointed with this, given the kit’s expense…
I made the 1/48 Spectre gunshp a while ago, about 6 years. It goes together well. I used the great build article on the 1/72 Italeri AC-130 in the August 1988 issue of FSM. It has great drawings to correct the tail, add the control box insid ethe fuselage, add ammo rack for the 40mm cannon, and lots of other corrections. It also gives you the conversion factors top enlarge the drawings to 1/48 scale. Here is a link to the FSM issue, sorry, but article is not online. http://www.finescale.com/fsm/default.aspx?c=i&id=11&mid=27&auth=a6c1dc5574df814452277b80861681f5c63a0768244028292235107dad7d3cb8
That’s the one I have, too, HeavyArty! Your paintjob looks a lot better than mine. I left the black plastic as is and just added the camo scheme (at the time, I thought “Why bother?”) I enjoyed building this kit, though and I’d like someday to take another crack at it, just to see if I could do a better job. Maybe even add some of the detail sets that have been mentioned here as well.
I have this kit as well, and here’s some pitfalls to watch out for:
AC-130A’s (3 bladed props) do NOT have the external tanks between the engines;
They hydraulic centers go on the forward walls of the wheel wells;
as mentioned earlier, fuselage and wing fitting is something of a problem.
This kit BEGS for superdetailing. There’s an excellent book out, C-130 Walkaround, that is great for the interior detailing. And I can help you out with some of the schematics of the basic airframe interior… the Gunships were modified from standard Herks. And that 105mm in real life is awesome to behold…
Heh - I’ve got the back issue from 1988 you guys were talking about, shipped over at great expense, because I’d read about the article! I believe the engine pods ARE too short, for the A version, but I’ll be building the U-Boat, and will have a look to see if they need any work. Flightpath’s detail set (I think) has different engine nacelles which may be of use, but I’ll have to check my references.
Thanks for the heads up on the C-130 walk around. I’ve also got some good pics from a guy that did an A on ARC or somewhere (I forget right now).
As always, any help you guys can provide will be greatly appreciated. Think I might order that Flightpath update over the weekend, just in case he runs out of them, as his stuff is all short run, and I often see a “coming back soon” sign on some parts.
I’ll be ordering the Paragon C-130 bulged wheels too, cos they’re AWESOME! [:D]
I noticed that there were instuctions for choppiing off the integrated beaver tail & adding a separate part from the “version specific” sprue. Whether that’s in response to criticism of earlier versions, or is the wrong version you were talking about, I don’t know. I’ll check that against references before I do any work. Thanks for the tip. [;)]
