This one has been sitting in the stash for a while now and according to Mr. Jackson before he left the hobby in a huff said the wings were all wrong and would need massive reworking to get right.

So, what's the deal with this kit? Any resin upgrades or help articles for the old -66 or just pitch it in the bin?

Even if it truly is That Bad ... Either enjoy it yourself or give it to someone to practice with.

Some people just tear a kit up so horribly that others get the feeling you have. Hold the parts together, maybe even tape them to see what the overall impresion is. I have never ownedor handled the Testor B-66, but always wanted to. Box art looks good.

Surely there are many good features about the model !! It's 1/72, iosn't it ? george

If you're a passionate super fan of the B-66, then you should look to making it as accurate and detailed as possible. If it's just another plane that you find "pretty cool" (as I do), build the kit and enjoy it. I have one that I'm eager to build, using Wolfpack Decals.

[IMG][/IMG]

The fit of the canopy isn't great (didn't mate that well with the fuselage at the back), and things like flap and hatch hinges, vents, etc. had to be scratch built, but it looked pretty good when finished.

When and if it ever comes out... The Italeri kit is about it so if you want a B-66 its that or nothing in 1/72. The old Monogram kit is smaller than 1/72 and is not that good.

...and the thing is, I can not find any problems with the upper fuselage and wings, I've compared and looked over technical drawings and I'm just not seeing it. SO, I wonder if the "angry anti-modeler guy" was mistaken, perhaps keeping the old Revell "box scale" B-66 kit in his mind.

Yes, it looks unusually good on the box top, I've seen it converted to a Vietnam era EB-66 (Bat 21?) before, that's neat.

As for the markings, I know the -66s were not known for their eye catching squadron markings even so, Wolfpack decals make it nicer?

The thing is, I do like it 'cause it's not the usual subject normally seen at contests or even at my club and is a somewhat forgotten bird among all the WWII subjects.

Thanks for the feedback!

"I over came the odds to get even."

Build it if you like it. I've handled a friend's completed -66.
It looks just fine. Now I know squat about the airplane so the wings might very well be wrong, and that description fits 99.7% of modelers. If someone appears at the show with 72d B-66 plans and heads to the judge's meeting, then worry. It's a lovely airframe.

Your passion for the type should drive your need to accurize. I obsess over sabres & MiG15s, most everything else will be good enough or fixed to the level I care about.
So long as we are still free to point out problems so that we might decide what needs fixing w/o the "be glad you got it" "don't kill the hobby""we must pretend all kits are perfect brigade" trying to shout us down.

So, end of lecture, looks at the photos of the kit and the real thing, if it looks good enough, it probably is so far as our home display shelves are concerned. Of course, if you dig Canadair 215/415s like I dig MiG-15s...you might never get one built!

Wow you all must have been reading my mind, for some reason the first thing I did this AM was look for reviews of the B-66 kit on the net & I just finished a search of the plane talking forum for more info when I come here & youre talking about it, I seem to remember something about building up the center fuselage because of fit problems or something to that affect but never heard if the kit was accurate or not like I did with the Italeri B-58 kit, it sure looks like a B-66,

..for B-57 & Canberra kits, decals and info, thinking about doing an opposing pair from the South Asian wars; a Paki B-57 and Indian Canberra. Sure enough, Hannants just got in a decal sheet devoted to both sides of the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. One problem solved.
The next day I surf back here and 'what's new' includes a Desi Canberra done with that same sheet!
Cool.

After re-reading my post above, I should clarify. I too nitpick in the info gathering. Here on the sites I want to know the kit's issues to the Nth degree. But when I build it, I've found that obsessing means my enthusiasm burns out before the kits gets completed - unless it is a sabre or patton or obscure Soviet Gaz or...

Here's a link to a review posted on MM today:
http://www.modelingmadness.com/scotts/viet/b66.htm

Frank B

I did not know that.

What was the reason?

....said he got sick and tired of "playing with toys" so he turned to building speaker boxes for sound systems, made a lot of money he tells me.

I was a saddened by his strange turn of heart, he is a really good scale modeler and I enjoyed reading his articles on the various subjects he built. The A-37 Dragonfly he was building a few years ago was outstanding, much of the corrections he did using scrap metal from bullet casings! He made his own aftermarket parts! Hard core modeling!

He's also out on the border and is, as far as I still know, standing guard against the tide of illegal Mexicans coming into this country. He really has no time for scale modeling anymore, such is life and I wish him lots of luck in dealing with any future lawn boys and fruit pickers sneaking in!

n/t

I'm not really a pompous ***; I just play one on HyperScale!

Michael McMurtrey
IPMS-USA #1746
Carrollton, Texas

The wonderful articles I just read plus the correction pics convinced me I should keep this kit, I really have a soft spot or lesser known birds.

Any time a new P-51 comes out, I wonder where my Seastar is.
A new Bf-109 comes out, I yawn and wonder where a nice 1/48 scale T-2 Buckeye or Skyknight or even Sea Dart might be hiding! Oh, under that eight-days-deep pile of P-40s and Avengers. (-_-)
I kindly ask Roden to help me out....they offer me a bunch of WWI bi-planes! Such is life!

Not to detract from his excellent model building skills, but the "issues" he has with certain subjects are often very subtle, and not agreed upon.

Regarding the B-66, the only thing i really see "wrong" with it is the leading edge slats are molded integral with the wing and the triangular flap hinges were absent on the original B-66 issue. The panel lines are a little deep but not quite Airfix-deep.

Having compared the model to photos in the Aerofax title on the "Destroyer" it looks very much like a B-66 to me; it does not have the gross dimensional and outline errors of the B-58.

Build It.

david

The only challenge was the engine pylon mounts on the wings... takes a bit of care to get right, but otherwise was a good build...

After decades of study, it has become obvious that Murphy was an optimist...

Hi,

Italeri did make some fairly significant goofs on the wings of their B-66 kits, yet strangely I've never seen anyone else point this out. The problems are easy to fix, however, with a little scribing and some filler.

In short, Italeri added a non-existent second set of ailerons outboard of the real ones, they missed out the outboard trailing edge flap, and they positioned one of the flap hinges in the wrong locations.

Here are photos of the top and bottom of Italeri's EB-66 wing (from a trashed kit, and I cut the slats off):




In these photos:

A denotes scribed lines to be filled. The outboard 7.25 feet of the B-66 wing had no control surface. Perhaps Italeri were looking at an A-3 Skywarrior, which does feature large ailerons extending to the wingtips.

B on the lower surface denotes the hinge line for the outer trailing edge flap, missing from the kit, while on the top surface it indicates the break between the spoiler and the flap, also missing.

1-4 indicate the flap hinge locations. On the original B-66 kit, these are depicted as scribed lines. On the EB-66, they are raised traingles. Hinges 2-4 are in the correct locations, while hinge 1 is strangely positioned in the middle of the aileron. This hinge should be moved just outboard of the engine pylon. The position of hinge 1 is in line with the fuel dump mast, which is not included in the kit (though the ones in Hasegawa's Skywarrior are very nice!)

Technically, the leading edge slats should be down while the EB-66 is on the ground, but lots of other kits have this same issue.

There are a few other minor issues with the E/B-66 kits, depending on how far you want to go with fixing them:
- Break between forward and lower aft section on main gear doors is incorrect. Forward main gear doors should be smaller, aft lower main gear doors should be five sided in shape, rather than rectangular
- Refueling probe too small in diameter, no detail on tip
- Missing prominent crew escape hatch hinges
- Small rectangular vent on forward stb fuselage should be located further aft (directly under rear cabin window), not same location as portside vent
- Main gear torque links moulded in fully extended position (most photos show them almost totally compressed on the ground)
- B-66 20 mm tail guns feature bogus cooling holes, dont resemble actual guns
- Missing cabin air exchanger intakes under main nacelle intakes
- Exhaust sections of nacelles should be smooth and flush with the rest of the nacelle, kit features raised ribs and a step in the nacelle contour
- Large blade antennae on fuselage sides of EB-66E are not 100% accurate in shape or section

The kit also suffers from a weak fuselage seam, so I'd recommend reinforcing it, particularly around the wings.

In any case, a very presentable model can be built with a little work. Here's mine, converted to a late EB-66C, sporting Wolfpack decals as the famous BAT-21 (not the greatest photo, but it shows the modified outer wings):



Hope this helps,
Will

`

Hi Will,

Thank you for the very useful information--I've saved it for future reference. I love the B-66. I even have a actual navigator's ejection seat from one in my model room!

Excellent job on Bat-21, that is a beautiful model. In case you are interested, when I worked POW/MIA investigation and recovery with JTF-FA (and later JPAC), I remember talking with one of our old-time photo interpreters who used to analyze aerial imagery from the Vietnam war and was still doing the same thing for us 30 years later, looking at SR-71, U-2, RF-101, etc, imagery to help determine possible crash site locations for us to search for. One of his interests was in finding the Bat-21 crash site. Much has been written about the ejection and subsequent evasion by Lt Col Hambleton, but nothing had been done about the missing crewmen from Bat-21. Well, Bill requested some SR-71 imagery of the area in which Bat-21 was shot down, both slightly before and after the incident. He found a picture that showed a large chunk of wreckage lying in a paddy where it obviously fell from a great height (versus impacting at an angle). We sent a team into that area in 2000 to investigate the wreckage, but nothing was found. The wreckage was removed during the war, as it usually was, and the field continued to be farmed ever since. And, since this was near the DMZ, the NVA had removed most of the North Vietnamese citizens from the area. Most of the re-settlers after the war were from different areas. None of the current (as of 2000) citizens knew anything about the shootdown or wreckage. Dead end. But it will always be listed as an Open case in-case we manage to find someone who has information of the missing crew, particularly where they are buried.

In memory of the Bat-21 crew:
Robin F. Gatwood
Wayne L. Bolte
Anthony Giannangeli
Charles A. Levis
Henry M. Serex

Regards,
Don

Thanks, Will! That was what I was wondering, the wing area had goofs but until now NO ONE could correctly identify them exactly.

Beautiful build BTW on your BAT-21 -66!!

Thank you much!!

"I over came the odds to get even."

Fantastic Destroyer Will. I had never even noticed those 'pretend' ailerons before !!

Cheers,

Haydn.

And the photos depicting the extra aileron were most helpful. i remebered comparing the kit wing to photos and drawings; that always puzzled me. Thanks for clarifying!

david

I made an EB-66 from the Italeri kit and although I cecked the kit parts against the Datagraph B-66 monography I didn't notice the wing problems and some other details you pointed out - so many thanks for your infos ,I've stored your note because I've 2 more Italeri B-66 kits in my stash and it'llbe very useful when the time will come .......(I've more than 700 modern aircraft kits in my stash, mainly 1/72 scale) !!!!

Alberto

Alberto Accumolli

G.M.B. BRANZACK

Will - this is really useful.

Would you mind if I posted a copy of this on our SIG website (www.usaf-sig.org).

Many thanks!

Chris

Chris St Clair
IPMS UK USAF SIG
www.usaf-sig.org

Thanks to everyone for your comments. Hope you find the information useful.

Chris, feel free to share the information with the USAF SIG (as an very occasional almost member myself).

For my model I also used elements of the Airwaves EB-66C conversion, though I ended up scratchbuilding the late tail cone configuration, and replaced the forward canoe fairing.

Will
(who apparently takes the hobby too seriously, according to Britmodeller)

Very much appreciated Will - I'll post a link once I've uploaded the article.

Chris

Chris St Clair
IPMS UK USAF SIG
www.usaf-sig.org

Article is now up - many thanks!!

http://www.usaf-sig.org/index.php/reference/27-kit-corrections-a-detailing/417-italeri-b-66-wing-fix-by-will-alcott

Chris St Clair
IPMS UK USAF SIG
www.usaf-sig.org