Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm really excited to hear about MPM's plans for a Whirlwind in 1/72- they plan three versions. I saw a Pavla Whirlwind kit go for £30 on eBay recently! The first boxings (fighter and fighter bomber) should be out in January 2010, the third "different Whirlwinds" in March.

Also a Short Sunderland Mk.V in June.

These were what excited me most, I'd not heard anything about them- has anyone else heard anything?

New Item on Aeroscale.

Posted (edited)

I`m really looking forward to the Maryland, Seafire Mk.II and Aussie Spit Vc in 1/48th scale plus the civvie Fulmar (Fairey silver and blue scheme??), Boston III, Sunderland Mk.V, Sea Otter (at last!!) and the updated Wirraway amongst many others in 1/72nd...looks like I`ll be putting off the house jobs for yet another year!!

Cheers

Tony O

Edited by tonyot
Posted

And how much is it going to cost? If you get change from £50 I'd be very suprised...

Frankly, I can't get excited by the MPM release schedule any more. We're still waiting for kits they announced 5 years ago and I am weary, not to mention bitter, twisted, jaded and cynical, of their empty promises.

Posted

Ah Wooksta, Bitter Jaded and Twisted, I agree but better some hope than none at all.

Yours, Still living in hope after all these years

The Cockney

Posted
And how much is it going to cost? If you get change from £50 I'd be very suprised...

Frankly, I can't get excited by the MPM release schedule any more. We're still waiting for kits they announced 5 years ago and I am weary, not to mention bitter, twisted, jaded and cynical, of their empty promises.

Wooksta, I know precisely how you feel! At least you're bitter, twisted and jaded, but not stirred! B) I'm still waiting for Trumpeter's FW 200 series in 1/72!

Byron

Posted

I wouldn't bother with the Trumpy Condor, given the availability of the Revell kit. It's far better than Trumpeter's promises, although may take some effort getting earlier variants out of it. The old Fw 200B civil Condor is also well worth the money, but in the military transport boxing as the plastic was better.

It's the promised MPM/SH Spitfires and Seafires I'm after. If they did an Argentinian IAe Calquin as well I'd be ecstatic. However, there's more chance of Sunderland winning the Champion's League.

Posted
I wouldn't bother with the Trumpy Condor, given the availability of the Revell kit. It's far better than Trumpeter's promises, although may take some effort getting earlier variants out of it. The old Fw 200B civil Condor is also well worth the money, but in the military transport boxing as the plastic was better.

It's the promised MPM/SH Spitfires and Seafires I'm after. If they did an Argentinian IAe Calquin as well I'd be ecstatic. However, there's more chance of Sunderland winning the Champion's League.

Well, you're certainly right about the quality of the Revell Condor, and it's doubtless less expensive than the Trumpeter version will be. By the time Trumpeter gets around to releasing theirs, RoG will probably have released the earlier variants anyway... (witness the Ju-290 A7)

Byron

  • 2 months later...
Posted
I was hoping for an earlier one, but you can't have everything!

John

John,

The HE-J markings in the fighter version are quite early, aren't they? I think they may have become confused about that aircraft's colours though, as I understood the early Whirlwinds had blue undersides with a black port wing, with sky ID band on the tail and sky spinner being added later. They have it with sky undersides and pale blue ID band and spinner....

04.jpg

Posted
Do you know if the Wirraway is a new tool? If it is the old one - forget it. Too fat.
Special Hobby #SH72194 - 1/72 - CAC CA-9 Wirraway

One of the very successful 1/72 scale MPM Production kits was Wirraway. Similarly successful was its 1/48 scale cousin. Therefore we decided to produce, completely new kit from new moulds in 1/72 scale. The kit contains two sprues with grey plastic parts with injected canopy, detailed resin and photo-etched

parts. Decals included offer three machines from the mid production version CA-9, one of them with nose art painting. Just to remind you the history: Even before the outbreak of the World War 2, Australia had been looking for aircraft suitable for advanced training and possible ground attack support. The solution was license built NA-16 aircraft, the predecessor of the famous Texan.

The mass produced aircraft received combat name Wirraway. It was used for ground attack support, target bombing, patrolling, even it as occasionally used as a fighter. But it mainly served as a training aircraft during WW2 and in post war years.

Whether they fixed it or not, I don't know!!

Dave, still hoping for the promised updated/corrected Battle!

Posted

When I see MPM's future releases announced my heart sinks because I know it reduces the possibility of other manufacturers releasing buildable kits in real plastic of the same type.

Posted

I haven't had your problems, just the usual random errors of shape that most manufacturers come up with. Mind you, I haven't started on the Hudson that John McIlmurray hated so much, but the Lodestar is less of a problem. I rather doubt that I would have obtained a Lodestar from any other company had MPM abstained. Your problem was with the Wellington, I seem to remember? The existence of the MPM doesn't seem to have stopped Trumpeter.

Thinking of the Wirraway, they have done another NA 16 variant - the NA 57/NJ 1 - which had a more sensible fuselage, so there is reason for hope.

Posted
I haven't had your problems, just the usual random errors of shape that most manufacturers come up with. Mind you, I haven't started on the Hudson that John McIlmurray hated so much, but the Lodestar is less of a problem. I rather doubt that I would have obtained a Lodestar from any other company had MPM abstained. Your problem was with the Wellington, I seem to remember? The existence of the MPM doesn't seem to have stopped Trumpeter.

Thinking of the Wirraway, they have done another NA 16 variant - the NA 57/NJ 1 - which had a more sensible fuselage, so there is reason for hope.

Yes, the Wellington. I don't even think it looks right when I look at built-up kits but can't put my finger on what is wrong with it - maybe the fuselage is too fat. The horrible soapy plastic resisted glueing. The engines had separate cylinders - in plastic for goodness sake. The whole thing gave me a prejudice against MPM kits - probably totally irrational.

A MPM Whirlwind sounds like a nightmare.

Posted
Yes, the Wellington. I don't even think it looks right when I look at built-up kits but can't put my finger on what is wrong with it - maybe the fuselage is too fat. The horrible soapy plastic resisted glueing. The engines had separate cylinders - in plastic for goodness sake. The whole thing gave me a prejudice against MPM kits - probably totally irrational.

A MPM Whirlwind sounds like a nightmare.

Hi Nick ,

I had similar problems with the Sword 48th FM2/ Wildcat MKVI. The tail just doesn't look right. possibly not the only thing wrong with the kit , but it is what spoils in in my eyes.

As for the Whirlwind I've 3 Classic Airframes in the stash . They were I believe copies of the vac form produced by Roy Sutherland .

If the MPM 72nd scale kits happens to be ascaled down version then it may not be a bad as you think .

Still only time will tell .

Regards

Terry

Posted
Yes, the Wellington. I don't even think it looks right when I look at built-up kits but can't put my finger on what is wrong with it - maybe the fuselage is too fat.

The fuselage is too narrow around the nose, the cockpit glazing is substantially too long, and extends too far downwards. The nose and tail both turn upwards towards their ends, they should be considerably more squared off. The gun turrets on the early variants should be identical front and rear, but they're not. By comparison, the much maligned Trumpeter company got their Wellington shapes pretty much spot on, with no more than a couple of niggles regarding the undercarriage (which still isn't as bad as MPM's!).

Cheers,

Bill.

Posted
John,

The HE-J markings in the fighter version are quite early, aren't they? I think they may have become confused about that aircraft's colours though, as I understood the early Whirlwinds had blue undersides with a black port wing, with sky ID band on the tail and sky spinner being added later. They have it with sky undersides and pale blue ID band and spinner....

The HE-J markings are late 1940-early 1941.

The original Whirlwinds carried the upper surface camouflage right round the fuselage and nacelles and, very unusually, on to the spinners as well. Wing undersides would have been black and white. I'm not sure how much of the underside was repainted Sky originally - I think the blue was a Paul Lucas speculation - but I'm fairly sure they never had the regulation black spinners.

John

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

the prices are up on the CMKkits.com site: €23 and €24.30 for the Whirlwind fighter or fighter-bomber kits. Pretty pricey!

Posted (edited)
John,

The HE-J markings in the fighter version are quite early, aren't they? I think they may have become confused about that aircraft's colours though, as I understood the early Whirlwinds had blue undersides with a black port wing, with sky ID band on the tail and sky spinner being added later. They have it with sky undersides and pale blue ID band and spinner....

04.jpg

Hi

colours for HE-J look right, it was photographed well in early 1941, ( I think IWM has the photos in their archive ).

price is currently 68.5 PLN appx £15 so I suppose not to bad.. ( correction £16.80 at hannants )

the main interesting one is third release,

what is it ...

the various protoype options , PR nose, 37mm nose, 12 gun 0.303, mkII nose ?

or the speculative for the USN example used in the USA P6994 ?

or Luftwaffe colours for the rumoured captured example ?

Or perhaps I hope for to much..

I'm glad I didn't spend my money on an airfix 1/24 mossie now...

cheers

Jerry

Edited by brewerjerry

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...