Head in the clouds. Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Does any one have any experience of the above make of models, I am looking for some DH Sea Vixen models and have found a couple at a reasonable price, considering the price of Sea Vixen kits on the second hand markets. Any pointers would be a great help. Thanks Gary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
825 Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Are good for shape, etc. But they are limited run and do need your modelling skills to a fair degree. The build into nice replicas but be prepared for a lot of filler, filing and sanding. As well sometimes forming your own aerials, struts, etc. The instructions are good and take you through the build well and interior detail is usually pretty nice. There are sometimes resin parts and you have to assemble propellers from constituent parts. (Although an issue for the lovely and wonderful Sea Vixen). Good transfers as well. If I recall some have vac foremost canopies. Good for clarity but not as easy as moulded. I've built a Seafire 'sans' propeller at the moment, and I replaced the canopy with a spare moulded one. Unfortunately I cannot upload photos into Photobucket at the moment to show you but it does look good . Hope this helps. By the way the world can never have enough Sea Vixen models. But that is a personal opinion. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canberra kid Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I can only go by the Canberra which are very accurate, the most accurate in 1/72 but they are by no means an easy build. John 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Agree with both above. I've built both kits and have both in the stash, they are both the most accurate 1:72 Sea Vixen and Canberra, but they both require time and effort to put together. The only thing to watch with the Vixen is that the FAW.2 pinion tanks are a bit wide, I think so that they could fit over the FAW.1 forward boom parts. Can look later, but I think they are fairly easy to thin down. Decals are good as well. There is good after market cockpits and undercarriages out there for both types, they may fit and improve the kits further. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratch Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I can't speak of accuracy, but their Beaufighter was a trial for me http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=172&t=29842&hilit=high+planes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds. Posted March 16, 2017 Author Share Posted March 16, 2017 Thanks for the prompt replies folks, I am not afraid of short run kits as what I build is/can be predominantly short run, I just needed a heads up before buying which I shall. The costs of Dragon and Cyber Hobby kits on evil bay is mind boggling but no news there then. I have brought after market decals so no worries there and the after market parts is a good way forward. Thanks again. Gary. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 (edited) BTW I can get pics of the kit contents if you want, but if they're cheap I would just get them. It appears that Highplanes are completely reworking their Mirage III kit, so I'm praying they will do the same with the Vixen and Canberra. In the kit you get a nice resin pilot seat, nose gear and wheel, two main u/c legs and the rear tail pipe fairing. The canopy is vacform and crystal clear. You only get details for the pilots cockpit, which is fine if everything is closed. When I build this one I would definitely source resin main wheels PS avoid like the plague the Dragon/Cyberhobby kit, it's the reverse of the Highplanes, nice detail and engineering but shocking shape wise Edited March 16, 2017 by 71chally 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJP Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I agree with the comments made by above members - I have only built the High Planes Sea Vixen which is quite accurate in shape but being limited run requires a bit more work than a mainstream kit but well worth it. http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235011296-high-planes-sea-vixen-faw1/ CJP 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boffin Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Their Mirage kits are a straightforward is build, the older stuff not so much george 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I have few of their kits, including the Sea Vixen. They are old school short-runs, with very wide sprue gates and plenty of flash. Every part requires proper cleaning to fit but once this is done fit can be better than expected. In any case better have a motor tool and a good supply of filler, if you are used to old short runs you will know how to deal with them. Don't expect Special Hobby quality though, they are much harder to build. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 There boxes used to say "For Experienced Modellers only" "Requires Some cutting, filling and Sanding" They were not wrong. Some good kits though. Julien 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 9 minutes ago, Giorgio N said: Don't expect Special Hobby quality though, they are much harder to build. I'd qualify that to "current Special Hobby quality". Their Wirraway was at least as good as the first attempt at the Wirraway from the MPM stable. And more accurate in shape. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossm Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 9 hours ago, Graham Boak said: I'd qualify that to "current Special Hobby quality". Their Wirraway was at least as good as the first attempt at the Wirraway from the MPM stable. And more accurate in shape. But their Boston/Havoc family isn't. I have a Turbinlite on the shelf of doom with oval engine nacelles/cowlings having tried and failed to get them right. It's likely to stay there as I now have the MPM kit which looks much nicer - haven't tried the fit yet though. As MPM don't do a Havoc I I also have a High Planes one of those to build but some of the small plastic parts like exhausts look unusable. I think these are some of their oldest kits and judging from comments above newer ones are better so I'd just say try to get an opinion on exactly what you want to buy rather than judging the whole range on the basis of one item. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 1 hour ago, rossm said: . I think these are some of their oldest kits and judging from comments above newer ones are better so I'd just say try to get an opinion on exactly what you want to buy rather than judging the whole range on the basis of one item. Like any model company their products are evolving over time so wise words. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caerbannog Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 I have some of their 1:48 Reno racers and finally completed the Griffon powered P-51 in the last KUTA GB: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235012714-p-51-precious-metal-racer-high-planes-148-finished/ This Mustang and the Bearcats I have look like corrected and revised Tamiya Mustangs or Testors Bearcats. They have soft blueish thick plastic but the surface details are quite good whíth very fine recessed panellines. The smaller plastic parts are mostly useless as too chunky. But u/c legs etc are provided in metal and other details in resin. Canopies are vacuformed. As the above kits have a close relationship to other kits of the general subject in the market I decided to use spare parts from these kits. The Mustang racer above has a Tamiya cockpit inside (the Tamiya kit has a resin cockpit...). The decals included are very good as well btw. All in all great kits but they will ask for some extra care. Definitely not a starter kit but very recomended to those which maybe like a little challenge off the mainstream. That said I really hope for more racers in 1:48 from them. René 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds. Posted March 17, 2017 Author Share Posted March 17, 2017 10 hours ago, Caerbannog said: I have some of their 1:48 Reno racers and finally completed the Griffon powered P-51 I made the fatal mistake of looking at their website and saw those very models...just when I said I was not going to look at other genre's . They look nice and a little left of centre which is just up my street. Gary 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 I should clarify that when I mentioned quality I only meant mould quality and (hopefully) fit (that is generally related to the former quality), I'm not considering issues like accuracy here, although I'm all for accuracy myself. Comparing the "old" HP kits with the recent Special Hobby is sure unfair, mainly because the most recent SH kits are now the equivalent of mainstream kits and really I think that now SH quality is on par or superior to the likes of Airfix, not to mention Italeri... Going back to the days when SH kits were made using "short-run technology", I have built several of their kits over the years and I've sure seen the huge improvements. Have I seen the same with HP ? Yes and no... the kits have improved but the mould technology does not seem to have changed and regardless of the age, I always know what to expect when I open the box of an HP kit. Again, talking about short run HP kits, not the recent Mirage kits. Were the first MPM/SH kits better of worse than the HP ones ? Personally I've built the MPM Spit XIX and have the original Ju-87A, both some of their very first kits. I find these better in terms of mould quality compared to the HP kits. They are all kits for experienced modellers but the HP ones IMHO need a bit more work. If we then compare with later SH kits the difference is even larger. With the above I don't mean to belittle Hi Planes, they have given us some very interesting kits, I've bought several and will happily buy more when I find something of interest. They feature quite nice panel lines, are generally quite accurate and often include some very good details. They are clearly made from someone who loves our hobby. Not only that: whenever I dealt with Hi Planes I always had a top notch service from them and knowing that a kit is coming from good guys makes me even happier in buying it. As with all the products of this type though, better be aware of what a modeller should expect. A modeller aware of this, will happily go through an admittedly difficult build and will likely have in return a very nice model. A modeller not aware may feel disappointed after a first look in the box and put the kit back for sale, so missing the chance of a very good model Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratch Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 On 17/03/2017 at 8:39 AM, rossm said: But their Boston/Havoc family isn't. I have a Turbinlite on the shelf of doom with oval engine nacelles/cowlings having tried and failed to get them right. It's likely to stay there as I now have the MPM kit which looks much nicer - haven't tried the fit yet though. As MPM don't do a Havoc I I also have a High Planes one of those to build but some of the small plastic parts like exhausts look unusable. I think these are some of their oldest kits and judging from comments above newer ones are better so I'd just say try to get an opinion on exactly what you want to buy rather than judging the whole range on the basis of one item. Oh dear, I've a Turbinlite in the stash too 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jckspratt1 Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 More recent HP kits are, in my opinion, very nice overall. I've one of their recent tool Mirage IIID/5DM kits on my 'to-do-soon' list, and I'm really looking forward to it (whereas earlier HP IIIs were a little iffy in some respects, but still built up very nicely). The usual small outfit caveats still apply, but they are constantly improving and are well worth the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossm Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 5 hours ago, Ratch said: Oh dear, I've a Turbinlite in the stash too I've just looked at mine again and it definitely needs a lot of careful preparation, kind of like an injection moulded vacform. With the benefit of hindsight I just wasn't careful enough. Even saying that a lot of the small parts suffer from flash / mould misalignment or wear and need a lot of cleaning up. That problem doesn't exist on the HP Canberra I have where all the small parts are cast in resin and look very sharp. The injection parts on the Canberra look to be in the same plastic and moulded with the same technology as the Havoc though so will need preparation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C. Bahr Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Frankly speaking, ALL available Vixen kits in 1/72 are rubbish! You just need to figure out how to pick your poison... whether you want to try to upgrade the old Frog/Novo kit, make somewhat of a semblance out of the MPM/Xtrakit mess or the follow-on Cyberhobby mess, or the final mess of the Highplanes... I took the route of kit-bashing the latter final three to get to where I was happy... http://z15.invisionfree.com/72nd_Aircraft/index.php?showtopic=3678 http://z15.invisionfree.com/72nd_Aircraft/index.php?showtopic=4232 The booms and pinion tanks of the Highplanes are way too fat/bulbous to be seriously considered IMHO. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trenton guy Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 High planes kits are difficult and time cosuming but I persevered with their Beaufort and was rewarded with one of the nicest builds in my 65 year collection. Perhaps I'm not demanding enough but I think the Dragon Sea Vixen yielded a very nice model that looks very much like a Sea Vixen. A resin cockpit to replace the fictional one supplied and a resin nose to correct the front end shape are absolute necessities but, otherwise, very nice,IMVHO. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ancientmariner Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Anyone built the High Planes ME 110G-4 aircraft kit? This is the actual 110 that I want, and the only one that I can actually find. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbird Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 (edited) On 16/03/2017 at 6:46 PM, canberra kid said: I can only go by the Canberra which are very accurate, the most accurate in 1/72 but they are by no means an easy build. John I agree.. looks good when its together but needs lots of hard work. Edited May 15, 2017 by speedbird Speeling mistook 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hook Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 3 hours ago, ancientmariner said: Anyone built the High Planes ME 110G-4 aircraft kit? This is the actual 110 that I want, and the only one that I can actually find. Martin No offence meant, but: with the gorgeous Eduard 1/72nd Bf 110G-4 readily available, which is both a superior kit and cheaper, why..? Cheers, Andre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now