Jump to content

1/32 - de Havilland DH.103 Hornet by HpH - released


Homebee

Recommended Posts

So far, HpH kits have been pretty much dead on for accuracy, so I would expect the Hornet to be nothing less than that. Their L-29 is spectacular, and from what I've seen, their Walrus is just as good.

I think it would be smart to wait until some test shots start appearing before tearing it apart, okay? All that has been presented so far is the box-art. Anyone else remember the Academy box-art for their Me-109 with the half-size landing gear and wheels? The kit still was pretty accurate once plastic hit shelves. There is a lot of questionable art-work out there folks, but that usually has no connection what comes in the box.

Just my read. I'll probably be getting one, I think the Hornet is a sexy plane.

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm sorry but IF the artwork they are showing is any indication as to the plans they're using I don't hold much hope. The profiles are pure Huntley or the extremely similar Scale Planes (Fred Spring) Australian ones. Just look at the windscreen profile.

John

Can I suggest that my initial post is read correctly,please. The word there that's important is IF . To me the illustration suggested that, as it's a profile and not a pretty perspective painting, it's based on drawings. IF those are the drawings originally by Ian Huntley (which are in wide publication and have been used as the basis for other work) then we can expect trouble with a capital 'T'.

So the previous Hph kits have been "stunning", according to posters here, I would just add a word of caution. The L.39 is a Czech aeroplane with lots of access and data especially in their home country, I would hope it to be right. The Walrus is pretty well documented but do we know if the drawings used are absolutely accurate. The point is they look right. and are highly detailed.

The Hornet like other beautiful British aircraft (Spitfire, Hunter) has been badly served by poorly researched and plagurised drawings, compounded by de Havilland putting erroneous measurements on three views and then other authors persisting with these errors of despite pointing out physical changes in development in their text.

A lot of what I know of the Hornet came from collaboration with other people, with incomplete gen and documents, one of which certainly came out of a skip at Hatfield and some out of the garden shed of an ex DH employee. There are some documents held by a national archive but they'll cost you an arm and a leg to access, which I'm sure now some of my detractors can't wait to spend their money.

Isn't it all rather IFfy.

John

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Soo tempted to get one if available at Telford...

Any thoughts on what the shapes look like from those knowledgeable on the Hornet?

If those in the know think it looks right I'll probably take a sharp intake of breath and shell out for it....

Iain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The drawings used were probably based on Huntley or Spring IMHO. I'd like to see a proper side on shot and see what the dimensions scale out to.

I can see three areas of doubt. But then what do I know!

John

Open carb air intakes- not on the ground!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that Mr Collins has some views on this based on the breakdown of parts, but I'm sure he'll be along at some stage to elaborate. Of course bearing mind that he hasn't yet seen it in the flesh

Edited by 12jaguar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DH Hornet is one of my favourite aircraft and this kit is one I was really dreaming of. But now there are some concerns about shape, not only here but also here:

http://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?showtopic=28641&page=40

I hope that Hornet experts will help in sorting out these doubts. Given the price of 184 EUR, a less than accurate model wouldn't be accettable for me.

Daniele

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I have the beast - picked up at Telford and very impressive it is too. The HPH team handed me their test build and it was very solid indeed (grabbed it by the rear fuselage).

I went over and had a good look initially as there were a couple of concerns that I had. I went to consult a reference on another stand and came back and my initial concerns seemed to have disappeared.

While I am happy to bash through Tamiya kits I am not scared of some correction or scratching so i would be interested in a discussion on any corrections to the kit.

Will

Edited by Scimitar F1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too went to have a look and this only confirmed my suspicions. It has faults. Do not use the drawings in the Warpaint series for reference as these are the source of all the troubles in my opinion.

John

How tough to rectify John? Or is it a case of you need to live with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kept going back several times for a look - and kept walking away...

Eventually they sold out - which made my decision for me - but I have now pre-ordered one from Hannants - with a mindset that I'm prepared/expecting to do some work on it.

Iain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi been reading this with interest. Having done a lot of work on a CA Hornet last year ( with Dave "Mr Hornet' Collins invaluable assistance), the one thing I'd check is the fuselage length. The CA model is very short in the rear fuselage length ( between the front of the fin and the wing trailing edge - so an easier cut & shut fix). If HpH used the same plans as whoever tooled the CA kit, then this might also be an issue.

I think the Warpaint plans also show a too short fuselage (from memory).

heres the link to what I did incase it provides some pointers

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234923967-the-dehavilland-sea-hornet-nf21-classic-airframes-148th-model-with-a-few-embellishments/

Jonners, hoping the above is of some use

PS saw model at Telford, it looked lovely , but didn't really stop to stare so can't comment on it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect it will have the too short fuselage but that is the most difficult aspect to see and which I suspect might be in the region of 3/8ths of an inch.

The one that is the easiest to see is the windscreen and cockpit area. The lower edge (glass) of the side panels of the windscreen are a straight line projection of the cockpit rails in side view and they do not curve upwards as in the Huntley drawings and in nearly every kit made. This throws the entire nose contours out with the 'bridge' of the nose too high. This gives away the Huntley drawings and it was copied by the Australian Spring and it's this, that is the eye catcher.

To correct this will mean scrapping the kit windscreen... but before folks throw a wobbly, the real screen of the Hornet has hardly a curve in it and the whole thing can be made up from flat pieces of clear sheet. There is the merest curve on the lower edge of the glass side panels aluminium "glass to wood" fairing strip. The lower edge of the bullet proof screen in front view has a curve and this is quite shallow. The stepped main spar, missing on every kit and drawing is a different thing to fix but then who knew it was so?

It will also need the slight extension to the stbd nacelle behind the spinner. A ring of 20 thou plastic card will sort this out, hardly the worst of your worries

John

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

I bought the model at Telford on Saturday morning and walked out a very happy man. I was aware of some of the likely issues that John, Jon and Dave Collins have talked about before regarding Hornet plans. I could not resist as I think the DH Hornet is the most beautiful prop aircraft ever built IMHO and having one in 1/32nd is a dream come true. I have done an approximate measurement by placing pieces against each other and the length appears to match the dimension quoted in the DH Hornet book that Dave Collins was involved with. I am in the middle of cleaning up all of the parts and hope to be in a position to tape together and confirm dimensions against said book in the next 24 hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Addendum

. Unlike the model seen above the windscreen bullet proof panel does not have wide painted angle strips down the edge. The front screen panel is actually held in place by two steel rods behind the glass which trap the top and bottom of the thick windscreen between the sloping frame and the hidden lower frame and all you see is the edge of the actual bullet proof glass with a thin line of sealant.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...