Airfix Spitfire Mk IXc 1/72

[Guest]

Troy, Giorgio pretty much nailed it, although I'll add that the panel lines are way too wide and the plastic too soft. I really dislike the wheels, the cockpit interior is a bit simplified and has nothing on the sides. The prop blades are vile and the u/c is too short.  It feels over engineered to get too much out of it.  There are a few good bits in it, but apart from the tailwheel, I can't think of any others.

 

The Airfix mk IXc was released in Sept/October 2009 and after their PR19.

 

Thanks for the vote of confidence too!    I'd argue with some modesty that your knowledge is probably a lot greater than mine, certainly in 48th.  I've just built a LOT of Spitfires over the past decade and have a feel for what's seems right.

[Andre B]

The Airfix Mk. IXc was announced 2008 albeit not released until 2009...

More on the Italeri Mk. IX...
http://modelingmadness.com/scott/allies/gb/72spit9.htm

Edited May 26, 2017 by Andre B

[Greenshirt]

Just an observation on my part, but it seems to me that the IXc and XIX kits are close to each in terms of development, and do seem to share some design elements. They also seem to be, in terms of corporate timing, when Airfix were improving and learning their modern-ish design principles. Before LIDAR most certainly so still CAD only but could be with a huge learning curve. The teams seemed to both share learning and yet keep small items close which resulted in key differences where Modelers would not have expected. 

 

They seem to to be very cohesive today and share quite a bit amongst hemselves. 

 

They can be mated to create a XIVc quite easily, and the look is nice, albeit not perfect. I've also modified the IXc into a IXe using the 3D-Kits upgrade sprue, which has an improved prop as well. I like how it looks on the shelf. 

[Andre B]

For sure they are close to each others in terms of design and development. But when compared to the old "Mk. I/Vb/Vc kits" it's more like that the Mk. IXc kit is the poor cousin to the Pr..XIX kit with its spartan interior. It's strange that someone didn't make a "qualitycheck" with those older kits concerning dimensions as they are well knewn for their dimensions and outline. Somebody at Airfix involved in the Mk Ixc / Pr. XIX kits must have been involved within the "thick c-wing" for the old Mk.Vb kit before the Mk.IXc/Pr.XIX. And in some ways this wing is closer relative to the Mk. IXc and Pr. XIX (but didn't they do their homework and learned of the critics when they designed the Mk. I/II/Va kits)...

Could an better management and qualitycontrol at Airfix made an better serie of Spitfire's that shared parts such as wings, interior, landinggear and wheels? One can probably say that AZ and Eduard did their homework much better than Airfix but it has a price...   

 

AZ...
http://www.hyperscale.com/2012/reviews/kits/az7393reviewmd_1.htm

...and Eduard...
http://www.detailscaleview.com/2017/05/eduard-172-spitfire-mkixc-late-version-7431-review.html
http://www.internetmodeler.com/scalemodels/flaviation/Eduard-1-72-Spitfire-Mk-IX-Royal-Class.php

Edited May 26, 2017 by Andre B

[AWFK10]

The designer(s?) of the 'new' Spitfire IX and Bf109G does seem to have used the 1950s/60s relics as a starting point. The first shots of the Spitfire had a radio hatch on both sides of the fuselage, a mistake made on the original Airfix Mk IX. Similarly, the 109G has the bulges over the breeches of the fuselage guns joined together to form a single unit, which the sketchiest research would have revealed is completely wrong - but again, the old 109G has this feature. It's almost as if someone was handed examples of the legacy kits and told to produce something based on them but rather closer to modern standards of kit design (though not necessarily accuracy).

[Denford]

When Airfix was first taken into Hornby Hobbies, they initially had only one designer.  No doubt he (or she) was under pressure to play their part in bringing the Airfix name 'back onto the shelves' asap.  Here are some drawings and photos, now design us a tool: they may or may not have been responsible for the decals and instructions too.

Many of the above postings seem to assume that the above and any subsequent designers, if not aircraft enthusiasts, are at least familiar with them.  Not so: they would have been engaged on the basis of their 3D computer skills, and previously could have worked on plastic cutlery, castings, piping or even toilet seats: anything requiring 3D computer design.  Or they  have been 'moved over' from Corgi, Scalectrics, Hornby trains etc.  It wouldn't have been a job requirement to check the accuracy of whatever drawings they used: they probably would have had no idea how, nor how to source correct information.  Remember too that Airfix alone have tooled airfield equipment, army quads and other items.  Nobody could be expected to know all these and be a skilled computer designer.

To overcome this HH recruited an Airfix Researcher (Simon Owen) now described as Senior Researcher and if this a promotion, then none was better earned.  Whilst screenworkers often assist, he does the legwork gathering data, and is no doubt able to collect data for several potential future subjects on a single journey as well as all and any supporting information.

To answer questions on compatability with earlier designs a) If they were analogue this isn't really possible b. If the 'earlier' design wasn't verifiably 100% accurate they won't compromise accuracy for convenience.

It would seem that 'variations' in design must be considered ab initio, eg He111, B-17, Blenheim.  It not my subject, but others have 'detected' future variations of HP Victor. The Me 262 sprues seem to allow for a 2 seat version.

Now I wonder what Airfix have in mind for their forthcoming B-25 release.....

 

 

[Denford]

On ‎26‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 3:44 PM, Andre B said:

For sure they are close to each others in terms of design and development. But when compared to the old "Mk. I/Vb/Vc kits" it's more like that the Mk. IXc kit is the poor cousin to the Pr..XIX kit with its spartan interior. It's strange that someone didn't make a "qualitycheck" with those older kits concerning dimensions as they are well knewn for their dimensions and outline. Somebody at Airfix involved in the Mk Ixc / Pr. XIX kits must have been involved within the "thick c-wing" for the old Mk.Vb kit before the Mk.IXc/Pr.XIX. And in some ways this wing is closer relative to the Mk. IXc and Pr. XIX (but didn't they do their homework and learned of the critics when they designed the Mk. I/II/Va kits)...

Could an better management and qualitycontrol at Airfix made an better serie of Spitfire's that shared parts such as wings, interior, landinggear and wheels? One can probably say that AZ and Eduard did their homework much better than Airfix but it has a price...   

 

Didn't want to 'overload' my posting above, but the Airfix that produced the "old Mk l/Vb/Vc" isn't the same as that now at Sandwich!

The original company, based in Wandsworth, went bankrupt in 1981, was sold on to various parties who also went bankrupt, before being bought in 2007 by Hornby Hobbies then based in Margate.  I think it very very unlikely that any of the original Wandsworth staff are now working for HH.

Analogue and digital designs don't really mix and the original 1/24 Mosquito designs had to be reworked to digital.  It's lucky they survived as several moulds (heavy steel) were lost so what hope for paper!  As explained above, nobody at the then 'new born' Airfix would have had the expertise or inclination to try and 'match' the designs. 

[Andre B]

2 hours ago, Denford said:

Didn't want to 'overload' my posting above, but the Airfix that produced the "old Mk l/Vb/Vc" isn't the same as that now at Sandwich!

The original company, based in Wandsworth, went bankrupt in 1982?, was sold on to ?? who also went bankrupt, before being bought by Hornby Hobbies then based in Margate.  I think it very very unlikely that any of the original Wandsworth staff are now working for HH.

Analogue and digital designs don't really mix and the original 1/24 Mosquito designs had to be reworked to digital.  It's lucky they survived as several moulds (heavy steel) were lost so what hope for paper!  As explained above, nobody at the then 'new born' Airfix would have had the expertise or inclination to try and 'match' the designs. 

But the "newborn Airfix" staff made the new mould c-wings to the Airfix Mk. Vc 2005. A kit that in basic is the old Mk. I/Mk Vb. So they had the expertise and chans to match designs. They had already done it before 2008...

Cheers / André

[Denford]

8 minutes ago, Andre B said:

But the "newborn Airfix" staff made the new mould c-wings to the Airfix Mk. Vc 2005. A kit that in basic is the old Mk. I/Mk Vb. So they had the expertise and chans to match designs. They had already done it before 2008...

Cheers / André

I'd say 'opportunity', but the conversion wasn't very well done (lacking expertise perhaps) to the point that Aeroclub issued replacement wings! 

And yes, they might have matched the wings of the lX and XlX to the V, but I feel to what purpose?  The lX 'c' wing could then be grafted to the Vb (though extra work would be needed to make a true Vc) or the XlX wing to the lX as a starting point for a PR Xl perhaps?  It's my opinion that neither would have made much sales difference.

However now the situation is quite clear: no new parts for old kits.

To digress a little: I wonder if Eduard will use their 'c' wings and other parts as a basis for a Vc or Xll

[Greenshirt]

1 hour ago, Denford said:

To digress a little: I wonder if Eduard will use their 'c' wings and other parts as a basis for a Vc or Xll

 

The CAD would likely be reused...but that presumes Eduard would want to do a V series or even the XII. I've heard tell Eduard will do a subject in 1/48 first...and that bears out mostly...so watch that space for indications of their intentions in 1/72. They could get more mileage from their designs by doing the XIV/XVIII before most other variants.