This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      Ongoing DDoS Attack causing Forum Slowness   26/04/17

      In case you have missed the announcement, the reason that the forum has been slow at times since the minor version update the other day is due to a Denial of Service attack, brute force attack on our email, and judging by the lag with our FTP response, that too.  If you're feeling like you're experiencing a glitch in the Matrix, you're not wrong.  This is the same MO as the attack in September 2016 that occurred when we transitioned to the new version 4 of the software.  We're currently working with US and UK cyber-crime departments, who specialise in this sort of thing, and we're hopeful that we'll be able to track them down this time by using the accumulated evidence already held.    We are pretty certain that it's a continuation of the same attack last year, only at a reduced intensity to deter people from using the site "because it's terribly slow", rather than taking it down completely, and we're also sure of the motivations of those responsible.  Spite.   Please bear with us in the interim, and wish us luck in dealing with these.... "people".
Rob P

Airfix 1/72 Phantom FG1

506 posts in this topic

I mentioned this in my Airfix catalogue post. Has any one else seen the odd position of the fin on the box top art work It looks like its fitted directly behind cockpit. Also The port intake looks too prominent in the angle shown. Remember the Lightning F^ artwork error!!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The inlets are angled inwards a tad so a bigger port orifice looks normal to me.

 

The fin/vert stab was a classified mod. It could slide five feet forwards to increase yaw during SNEB rocket attacks, for extra area coverage. The Nav had a special crank handle.

 

Tony

Edited by tony.t
to edit
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it my eyesight, or is there only one nosewheel there? I know the FG1 had some issues with the nosewheel steering, but that's taking realism to extremes...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11 January 2017 at 11:55 PM, Paul J said:

I mentioned this in my Airfix catalogue post. Has any one else seen the odd position of the fin on the box top art work It looks like its fitted directly behind cockpit. Also The port intake looks too prominent in the angle shown. Remember the Lightning F^ artwork error!!

 

I still have not come across a corrected artwork Lightning box top... bloody frustrating as I wanted to frame the error & corrected boxtops!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, XV107 said:

Is it my eyesight, or is there only one nosewheel there? I know the FG1 had some issues with the nosewheel steering, but that's taking realism to extremes...

 

Whoever set that up that company "promotion" should be fired. The laughable canopy positions are also a highlight, not to mention the missing rudder, and the horrible "paste" job on the stab.

 

Gene K

Edited by Gene K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gene K said:

 

Whoever set that up that company "promotion" should be fired. The laughable canopy positions are also a highlight, not to mention the missing rudder, and the horrible "paste" job on the stab.

 

Gene K

The rudder is there, but is lent over to one side, but agree about the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jabba said:

The rudder is there, but is lent over to one side, but agree about the rest.

 

Could be, but I think the 1:1 rudder doesn't flop over that far. I assumed it was missing since, in that rear area, the "promoter" also lost the rear fuselage dump mast insert ... . Black Knight's link shows how the display should have looked! 

 

Gene K

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if someone dropped the display model and did a bad repair job. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Enzo Matrix said:

I wonder if someone dropped the display model and did a bad repair job. 

 

Looks that way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Good Sergeant said:

I'm most anxious about the model's panel lines. Airfix has a way to go to meet the standard that's been set by Tamiya and Hasegawa.

Actually, the last few new tool Airfix kits I've gotten have been entirely satisfactory in this area. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad to see Airfix do this RN aircraft. Even though it's not my first choice in 1/72nd scale (the Bucc or the Sea Vixen would be), still, Airfix are moving in the correct direction as far as I'm concerned.

 

Regards,

 

Jason

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Learstang said:

I'm glad to see Airfix do this RN aircraft. Even though it's not my first choice in 1/72nd scale (the Bucc or the Sea Vixen would be), still, Airfix are moving in the correct direction as far as I'm concerned.

 

Regards,

 

Jason

 Hopefully those two will follow with a new tool Buccaneer and a scaled down Sea Vixen, I suspect the Cyber Hobby Sea Vixen put them off bringing out the Sea Vixen now and the Buccaneer might be waiting to see what the turks actually do, where as the British Phantom is not readily available (no importer for Fujimi when they repop the kit),so its a choice i'm quite happy with.

 

21 hours ago, Gene K said:

 

Whoever set that up that company "promotion" should be fired. The laughable canopy positions are also a highlight, not to mention the missing rudder, and the horrible "paste" job on the stab.

 

Gene K

 Its the lithograph model created from the CAD that they showed at SMW in November, its not the kit or even a test shot as those are not done yet, that model is just used to sell the concept and after SMW it will have done London and now Germany. Like most of us how do display models at shows, damage and on the fly repairs are a matter of course.

 

Don't bother moaning about it wait to we see the sprue shots and test builds later in the year before passing judgement

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Geoff_B said:

Don't bother moaning about it wait to we see the sprue shots and test builds later in the year before passing judgement

 

That's a laughable (!) statement in light of your opinion that the model "is just used to sell the concept". The concept is and has been entirely sold, and the model appreciated in it's undamaged form ... it's the presentation that is being criticized. No judgements were passed except yours.

 

Gene K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Geoff_B said:

 Its the lithograph model created from the CAD that they showed at SMW in November, its not the kit or even a test shot as those are not done yet, that model is just used to sell the concept and after SMW it will have done London and now Germany

 

Yup.  Limited time to set up the booth + probably limited talent to fix the model + a bunch of miles on a delicate prototype + an audience that doesn't particularly care whether it's a contest-quality build, merely the saleability of the product.  I get that it doesn't look its best, but it's clearly due to hasty repairs on the display floor.  It's a minor aesthetic issue on par with an ugly backdrop in the Airfix display booth.  In terms of the actual model kit, it really doesn't matter.

 

13 minutes ago, Gene K said:

 

That's a laughable (!) statement in light of your opinion that the model "is just used to sell the concept". The concept is and has been entirely sold, and the model appreciated in it's undamaged form ... it's the presentation that is being criticized. No judgements were passed except yours.

 

Gene K

 

You said that "whoever set up that display should be fired."  But that's not a judgement?

 

It's a trade show.  It's *the* major European trade show for the hobby industry.  Its purpose is to sell kits to wholesalers and distributors from around the world.  You and I might be all-in for the kit, but MMD, and Great Planes, and Udisco, and Pocketbond, and CPC, and Glow2B, and Vestergaard, and Beaver are the ones being convinced right now.  The trade show is about *them* buying kits (and in what quantity), based on purchase price, sale price, feature set, forecasted demand, marketing support, etc.  The people placing bulk orders with Airfix probably don't know - or care - that the canopy on the display model was tacked on at the wrong angle.  They understand that prototype samples get bashed around, and are more interested in the core financials.

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed. It's not the competition floor at SMW. Those prototypes have done a lot of miles and have had a lot of handling; that is what they are for.

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Xtradecal - ref. 72268 - McDonnell Douglas Phantom FG.1 Collection pt.1

 

- XT866/W - Phantom Post-Operational Conversion Unit - RN Leuchars 1970s;
- XT859 725/VL - 700P NAS Intensive Flying Trials Unit - RN Yeovilton 1968;
- XV567 011/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection - cross decking with USS Saratoga 1969;
- XT872 005/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection - 1973;
- XT860 014/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection - 1976;
- XV590 001/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection -Colonial Navy cross decking with USS Saratoga 1978 with final cruise nose flash;
- XT865 004/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection - 1978;
- XT872 004/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection - 1977;
- XT863 014/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection - 1977 with FAA Jubilee nose flash;
- XT864 007/R - 892 Sqn on HMS Ark Royal selection - 1975 with final cruise nose flash;

 

X72268.jpg
 

X72268 X72268 X72268

 

X72268

 

V.P.

 
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still like the Colonial Navy one on the Saratoga.

 

Paul Harrison

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks VERY similar to the old Model Alliance sheet, right down to (if my eyesight serves) to the wrong date for the 1100 years of King Alfred's Navy marking. Still an inspiring sheet though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..anyone know what the kit options are likely to be yet? OK found it, Geoff B's post (Jan 6) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dr Evil said:

Looks VERY similar to the old Model Alliance sheet, right down to (if my eyesight serves) to the wrong date for the 1100 years of King Alfred's Navy marking. Still an inspiring sheet though.

Highly likely that it is as they bought the remainign stock and probably rights to do the sheets.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F4767.jpg%22

 

(unknown photographer, photo print in my collection, published in Patrick's book..)   One of the RAF machines (XV 579) loaned to RN/767 hence the Dark Green/Dark Sea Grey variegated camouflage finish . Decals on the RAM Models sheet " Early British Phantoms"

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
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