Smer 1/72 F-16B Fighting Falcon

SMER (INTECH) 1:72 F-16B FIGHTING FALCON

Reviewer: Brian Manning (rec.models.scale)
Kit Review submitted: 28 October 2002

Kit Details:

SMER F-16B Fighting Falcon (art:0868) 1/72

Aircraft History:

The F-16 Fighting Falcon's history is known to most modern era jet fighter modellers so I will only concentrate on a few points of interest surrounding the F-16B and the subject I am modelling, a Pakistan AF example. In the beginning, the General Dynamics company built eight full scale development F-16A/B airframes and the first F-16B flew in August 1977. The addition of the second cockpit did not alter the aircraft's dimensions, weight or aerodynamics as it effectively substituted fuel storage. In the main, the two-seat F-16B performed primarily training roles although it was used for other tasks in different air forces, and one role envisaged for the type was defence suppression, or as we would know it, 'wild weasel'.

Pakistan were a controversial recipient of the F-16A/B and the type has been used to down "intruding" aircraft. The order was for 28 F-16A and a dozen F-16B aircraft. The F-16B was primarily ordered for training and were diverted from USAF production and delivered from January 1983, with the rest following and finalising in mid-1986. Pakistan AF F-16s have been used in anger shooting down an Su-22 which attacked refugee camps that same year, while a year later an F-16 was shot down by MiGs. One incident that occurred in late 1986 that wrote off one of their aircraft, although an F-16A, was when a wild pig wandered onto the runway as the aircraft was taking off.

The Kit:

Another SMER reboxing, this time it is of an Intech kit. SMER generally provide annoying end-opening boxes and this is no exception, so no easy made jig or place to put your spares while you are building. The bottom of the box does feature colour artwork for one of the options in the kit while the instructions includes the other. Humbrol number chips are given.

Inside the box all the parts come inside a plastic bag while instructions and decal sheet float loose in the box. Just over 50 parts are contained on three grey sprues, two of which are dark grey, the other light. There is a fair bit of flash, notably around wing edges and smaller components. These small parts are a bit crude and lack detail. Panel lines, however, are engraved and overall detail is okay. There is one large clear canopy for the aircraft.

Instructions:

This comes in a small booklet form with brief history and specification data on the front. There are six assembly steps to follow which are easy to digest. There is also a 1/72 scale profile provided although I don't know how accurate it is. Humbrol colour numbers are quoted for the external scheme but of some annoyance, there is a complete lack of painting information during the construction phase.

Construction:

Assembly starts in the cockpit which is sparsely catered for and needs a lot of work to bring up to scratch. Two cockpit tubs go together inside the fuselage halves. There is no detail provided and the ejection seats are crude. There are no instrument panels to speak of either. I salvaged the situation as best as I could raiding the spares for some instrument panel detail I could use, some generic etched stuff for seat belts, radio boxes, and some stretched sprue was used to represent the distinctive sidestick throttle. No reference detail could be found on Pakistan AF cockpit colours so the cockpit was painted in the standard FS 36375.

Before the fuselage halves were brought together some decent amount of nose weight was added and is necessary. Some small fishing weights in the nose cone should do the trick. The fuselage halves don't line up unless you remove the locating pins and butt join. This presents some seam line problems which need filling and sanding to blend in the join.

Wing sub assemblies feature upper and lower halves affixed to the fuselage. As is my normal practice, pylons are also added at this point. Problems occurred when affixing wings to the fuselage. The wings are a larger thickness than the root area on the fuselage and there is also a step at either end as the wing will not sit centrally. Those locating points are too thick and have to be reduced to rework the above. I wasn't able to fully overcome a small step at the leading edge. Filler, seemingly best applied with a trowel, was squeezed into the wing root to plug up the large resultant gap. Note that the instructions do advise about the trimming of the lugs to aid fit.

The rear tailplanes are also problematic and the locating pins again don't allow for a flush fit. The instruction sheet again advises about this but this doesn't make assembly any easier. The F-16 has a distinctive anhedral and fitting the tailplane without any work will not allow one to achieve this. More filler was also needed at the root.

The intake was a poor fit without a doubt. After slicing to at least allow a reasonable looking fit, more filler was needed to plug up the resultant ugly gap. To get the area smooth I almost needed to use a sanding machine! A story not unlike this one can also be told for the tail assembly, but it was marginally better while that fillet area, right at the join with the fuselage, needed a bit of filler. These paragraphs above best sum up the construction process in the main part.

By now more time had been spent on this kit than any other in recent memory, on a comparable basis to the same point in construction. But thank the heavens, the remainder of the kit was pretty straight forward.

The undercarriage was crude and too simplistic and riddled with mould marks and join lines that are best removed. The canopy is thick, distorted, and a bit on the "this window has not been washed for six years" side. It is probably best replaced, but I did use the kit example and it passes off okay, at least without getting too close. The rear exhaust is very basic and even the instructions tell you to scribe in some detail, while you can add stretched sprue to show up some parts on the nozzle.

Options:

The only options in this kit come in the form of wing mounted weapons. On this a pair of Mavericks, which are overscale and a bit thick, and six sidewinders are provided. The sidewinders look okay but must be early examples as they are simplistic and a bit heavy.

Versions/Decals:

You can choose one of two colour options from this kit, a US example based at Fort Worth in 1980, appearing to be wearing the standard "Charcoal Lizard" scheme then oft applied to many USAF aircraft of this ilk. This seems to be what the boxart suggest but the Humbrol colours quoted are not right to produce this, in my opinion. I've seen the well done and very valuable "Manufacturers Opinion" page on this site (click here if you want to go straight to that page - Ed) and noted with interest the webmaster's comments and criticisms about SMER in getting exact colour matches wrong (actually credit to Kevin R and Dave McD for that info - Ed) so I am confident they have fouled up here again! Guys, I can't give you the definitive colours because that is not the bird I built, but looking at a couple of Fort Worth birds in my F-16 photo collection they do look like they are wearing the above named scheme, so best to consult your paint information accordingly. I'm happy for someone to stick the right colours here if they know for sure.

Moving along, the aircraft I chose was the second option from the Pakistan AF in overall two-tone grey upper surfaces. The FS 36118/36270 greys were used with the former, darker, colour applied across the midsection as shown in Warplane, which is not the standard F-16 camouflage design most people would be used to. Not as unique or colourful than the one above but at least it's not USAF! This aircraft is from 11th Sqn at Sargodha in 1983. The decal sheet is Propagteam so is excellent, featuring stencilling and roundels with very good colour register. Of course the main irritation that presents itself is getting the decals placed in position first time, because they are likely to stay put wherever they are placed. I find I need no decal setting solution, just plenty of water so they can be coaxed around, then a dab from a damp rag to remove excess water to set them. Once sealed in with a semi-gloss varnish there was no hint of silvering. The decaling bit on this model is long and arduous but in the end worth it.

Accuracy:

Let's check the measurements which reveal the kit is overscale by only a millimetre or two. I think this is quite acceptable in this scale. But mine may be slightly more in span thanks to the copious amounts of filler used in the wing roots. It has to come into play somewhere.

In all other areas the kit certainly passes itself off as an acceptable replica. When comparing to reference photographs and subsequent scrutiny, there were several areas that were not quite up to scratch. I'd suggest suspect areas include the intake shape, canopy and tailplanes. The underwing points look a bit dodgy in my opinion also. Two other things of note to take into account are the simplistic moulding of such things as the undercarriage, and the lack of any real external features.

Overall assessment? Let's say the basic profile is quite acceptably represented.

Conclusion:

I am sure there are much better options on the market, shall I say Hasegawa, albeit not at the good price I purchased this kit for. Given that this is a reboxing of the Intech kit, I'd suggest that this review might as well apply (apart from decals as noted on the boxarts) to the original boxing as well. Can we assume the SMER F-16A is the Intech kit as well.... I will be looking elsewhere then!

Be prepared for a number of fit problems to overcome, and supply your own tube of putty. The lack of interior, or assembly progress painting information on the instruction sheet is annoying, but given that SMER seemingly has (again?) fouled up the USAF external scheme colour research, perhaps I am not too out of place suggesting we might be better off forced to do our own research.

I cannot really recommend this kit because of the simplistic and heavy mouldings in addition to the other problems as noted elsewhere and above. It is truly only one of those for "the must haves" or "no other options available" or "who cares, it is cheap!" I am afraid. On the plus side I would have to pike up and say don't be put off by SMER with this review, they generally rebox some good moulds. Not this time though.

Related Reviews:-

Related INBOX Reviews:-

web hosting • domain names
web design • online games