Airlinercafe Home Page

Stop being a lurker - join our community and get involved. Sign up and start a conversation!
 

      Author Message

      fizzychops


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 258
      Location:
      Occupation:
      Age:

      Post #68783, posted on 12-06-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Hi All

      My googling skills are not the best so I'm asking is there really much difference in 1/144 scale between a B2/B4 and a -600? Just wondering why you wouldn't just use the Airfix kit as there is only 3mm in scale length difference. Or am I missing the point? I also notice people using Beluga wings and engines. Again is there that much difference?
      Thanks
      Tony

      Author Message

      scotty100368


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 275
      Location: Queanbeyan
      Occupation: YSCB ramp
      Age: 49

      Post #68784, posted on 12-06-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      The entire rear section after the fuselage extension (including tail & stabilisers) is common with the A310.

      Look and compare the stabiliser scuff plates on the Bs, A306 and A310 - they are a dead give away...

      Scott Garard
      YSCB/CBR

      Author Message

      skippiebg


      Contributors

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 855
      Location: Sofia
      Occupation: interpreter and translator
      Age: 61

      Post #68785, posted on 12-06-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      As noted, the rear fuselage (the tapering part) is indeed the same as that of the A310, meaning it is a tad fatter than the A300B's. It is also a tad longer.

      The wing between the subtypes is the same, except that the -600 has no outboard ailerons.

      Importantly, the -600 tailplane has a noticeably shorter span than the A300B's. As noted, it has a different shape scuff plate where it meets the fuselage tailcone.

      Also importantly and perhaps most visibly of all differences, the -600 has entirely diferrent engines to its predecessor. In fact, the A300-600, Beluga, and A310 engine sagas are as long and convoluted as the A300B's engine saga is brief and insubstantial.

      As to whether all this matters or not in 1/144 scale, only you are the judge!

      ---

      People do indeed use Beluga bits, but are only partly right to do so, to my mind. The Revell wing and tailplane are definitely much better detailed and more precisely defined in terms of shape than the rather bland (yet perfectly good and faithful!) Airfix offerings. But the (otherwise perfectly formed) Revell engines are substantially overscale, getting on almost to be the size of Boeing 777 engines.

      Author Message

      B747FAN


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 587
      Location: Holzgerlingen
      Occupation: electric engineer
      Age: 54

      Post #68786, posted on 12-06-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      so for a correct A300-600 you have to use a Beluga + Braz-kit + Braz engines or take the best, the AA

      Author Message

      skippiebg


      Contributors

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 855
      Location: Sofia
      Occupation: interpreter and translator
      Age: 61

      Post #68787, posted on 12-06-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Well, the Authentic Airliners kit is without a doubt the best minature sculpture of the -600.

      Some might want to do a conversion themselves, though, if only for the fun, or possibly the economy.

      I would agree that, apart from the Airfix A300, they would need a Revell A310 for the aft fuselage and tailplanes (they are identical on the A300-600 and A310) and engines from either the same Revell A310 (uhm...) or else from Braz (great!). The Revell A310 is, to my mind, a good sacrifice -- it is altogether a rather bad kit that just happens to have faithful tail taper, tailcone, and tailplanes.

      I am not sure a Revell Beluga would help all that much. I mean, depriving a perfectly good and rather expensive kit of a wing just to transplant the same wing onto a kit with a perfectly good wing of its own seems a pity, but that's probably just me...

      Author Message

      scotty100368


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 275
      Location: Queanbeyan
      Occupation: YSCB ramp
      Age: 49

      Post #68788, posted on 12-06-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Tony,

      I forgot to mention that F-rsin do an injected kit. It's mostly the Revell Beluga but with new parts for the fuselage and tail:

      http://www.f-rsin.com/pages/collection/A300-600.html

      Cheers!

      Scott Garard
      YSCB/CBR

      Author Message

      dave6376


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 313
      Location: Perthshire, Scotland
      Occupation: Retired lawyer
      Age: 65

      Post #68789, posted on 12-07-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Quote
      skippiebg :

      .........

      I would agree that, apart from the Airfix A300, they would need a Revell A310 for the aft fuselage and tailplanes (they are identical on the A300-600 and A310) and engines from either the same Revell A310 (uhm...) or else from Braz (great!). The Revell A310 is, to my mind, a good sacrifice -- it is altogether a rather bad kit that just happens to have faithful tail taper, tailcone, and tailplanes.

      I am not sure a Revell Beluga would help all that much. I mean, depriving a perfectly good and rather expensive kit of a wing just to transplant the same wing onto a kit with a perfectly good wing of its own seems a pity, but that's probably just me...



      On the Revell A310 ithe fairings at the base of the fin are far too big and ďboxyĒ and look completely wrong. They can be fixed but itís tricky and fiddly.

      Considering that both the Airfix A300 and the Revell A310 are out of production and would need to be sourced from eBay or the like, cross kitting them wouldnít be cheap, particularly if you threw in BraZ engines. It would also be a lot more difficult than combining the BraZ fuselage and the Revell Beluga which is my own preferred route - I already have the parts in my stash and itís only a matter of finding time (or living long enough!) to get started on the build.

      Iíve read mixed reports of the F-RSIN kit. Iím generally a fan of their products but their A300-600 isnít on my shopping list.

      Author Message

      skippiebg


      Contributors

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 855
      Location: Sofia
      Occupation: interpreter and translator
      Age: 61

      Post #68790, posted on 12-07-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Quote
      dave6376 :

      Considering that both the Airfix A300 and the Revell A310 are out of production and would need to be sourced from eBay or the like, cross kitting them wouldnít be cheap, particularly if you threw in BraZ engines. It would also be a lot more difficult than combining the BraZ fuselage and the Revell Beluga which is my own preferred route - I already have the parts in my stash and itís only a matter of finding time (or living long enough!) to get started on the build.

      Iíve read mixed reports of the F-RSIN kit. Iím generally a fan of their products but their A300-600 isnít on my shopping list.



      Agreed, the Revell A310 fin base bulges are irritatingly and eggregiously wrong. Sorting them out is nasty and prone to damage surroundings.

      On cost, the A300 is available new and decal-less in DACO guise. Both kits would seem to be in "reasonable" secondhand territory (20-odd quid or less), but then I tend to be spoilt for choice, what with KitKrazy and The Aviation Bookshop nearby... Having said that, Kurt seems to me more and more justified in charging "high" prices -- when I tot-up my spend on pedestrian kits plus bits-n-bobs to make them halfway passable, I am often horrified!

      As to the Braz versus F-RSIN fuselages, though I am a huge fan of both makers, the French offering seems a good tad better to me. but that's just me...

      Author Message

      Holmes757


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 206
      Location: Trinidad
      Occupation: Aviation Security Officer
      Age: 34

      Post #68791, posted on 12-07-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Hey Guys can you all shown pics highlighting d difference?? I have a A300 kit that I haven't start so I want my kit to be accurate when I finish build..

      Author Message

      buzz


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 485
      Location: Geneva/Devon
      Occupation: Airline industry
      Age:

      Post #68792, posted on 12-07-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Something to note re the Braz A300-600 conversion fuselage (in my early example at least, I don't know if it's been revised).

      The tailplane rubbing plate area copies the Airfix A300B flatter shape and does not provide the more bulged contours of the A300-60o.

      A correct decal will disguise some of the discrepancy and that may be close enough for some.

      Roy
      GVA

      Author Message

      scotty100368


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 275
      Location: Queanbeyan
      Occupation: YSCB ramp
      Age: 49

      Post #68801, posted on 12-08-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Another annoyance about the BraZ fuselage is that it doesn't have a nosegear bay - you're supposed to build it in-flight.



      Anyhow, I finally found the conversion guide I made for a local producer that I contribute to:



      Cheers!

      Scott.

      Scott Garard
      YSCB/CBR

      Author Message

      dave6376


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 313
      Location: Perthshire, Scotland
      Occupation: Retired lawyer
      Age: 65

      Post #68802, posted on 12-08-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Quote
      scotty100368 :
      Another annoyance about the BraZ fuselage is that it doesn't have a nosegear bay - you're supposed to build it in-flight.



      .....

      Cheers!

      Scott.



      It's not exactly difficult to open up a nosewheel bay. Anybody who builds vacform kits will have done it. I have absolutely no intention of building mine "in-flight"!

      Author Message

      scotty100368


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 275
      Location: Queanbeyan
      Occupation: YSCB ramp
      Age: 49

      Post #68803, posted on 12-08-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Quote
      dave6376 :

      It's not exactly difficult to open up a nosewheel bay. Anybody who builds vacform kits will have done it.


      Vacforms, yes - but resin (BraZ), not so much fun... (for me anyway)

      Scott Garard
      YSCB/CBR

      Author Message

      buzz


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 485
      Location: Geneva/Devon
      Occupation: Airline industry
      Age:

      Post #68804, posted on 12-09-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      ^ The Braz fuselage halves are hollow, so no different to vacform or indeed plastic when it comes to cutting holes in them.

      In fact my example was so thin in places and short-shot on the edges in places, I had to re-inforce it with plastic strips. That, plus the wrongly shaped rear fuselage, are the reasons the built fuselage has been languishing in a box for years.

      Roy
      GvA

      Author Message

      fizzychops


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 258
      Location:
      Occupation:
      Age:

      Post #68808, posted on 12-10-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Thanks everyone for the replies. Clears it up nicely.

      Scott, so if you use a 310 rear section on a 300 as pictured, you need to add 11mm? Why not 3mm as that's the actual difference between a b2/4 and a 600?

      Author Message

      B747FAN


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 587
      Location: Holzgerlingen
      Occupation: electric engineer
      Age: 54

      Post #68811, posted on 12-11-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Quote
      fizzychops :
      Thanks everyone for the replies. Clears it up nicely.

      Scott, so if you use a 310 rear section on a 300 as pictured, you need to add 11mm? Why not 3mm as that's the actual difference between a b2/4 and a 600?



      If you look at the picture for cutting, you will see, that you add 11mm shown in blue, but also have to cut 8mm shown in green when using the original A300 fuselage. So the A310 fuselage should be shorter these 8mm

      Author Message

      fizzychops


      Members

       Online status  

       
      Add As Buddy
      Posts: 258
      Location:
      Occupation:
      Age:

      Post #68814, posted on 12-11-2017 GMT-5 hours    
      Now I get you.
      Cheers