RelativeBrit

Jennings is 100% correct, a little education is needed. Rubber molds for plastic were never used. That is usually for resin. The limited run molds were in a form of resin. Problem is that after so many kits, the mold usually cracked. The early ones also lost the ability to retain detail. While I do not believe Eduard is using beryllium-copper like the Chinese or Japanese, it is just about there. They may be using aluminum or a steel. For the limited run kit a master is made. For the more advanced mold, it is CAD and machining that creates the mold design.

This is actually an old kit. About 12 years old, if the copyright date on my box is correct. Over the years it has been subject to extensive criticism because of the shape of the nose. There have also been a couple of after market correction sets for it. One was from DACO Products of Belgium. Now out of production. There are two schools of thought that have evolved: (1) The nose is bloody bollixed up and piddle poor. New nose required. (2) Not bad and looks like a Spitfire when built. I have the the FR. Mk. XIVe and the Mk. XIVc, but only one DACO set. Guess I'll swing both ways.

Test shot. Bull puppies. What you see is what you'll get. That test shot business is a bunch of crap. Only a major, major error will send it back

Mr. M. Guru, if I may; I believe there is a slight flaw in your argument. How can you positively say it looks like a Hellcat, so we should leave well enough alone? The only way one could do that is by being around one or by looking at pictures of a Hellcat. So, if all you have done is looked at pictures of Hellcats and say it looks like one, then you are the greatest advocate of the flawed concept. If the only arbiter of quality or accuracy is one who says that it looks like a Hellcat, then in 1/48 we would have not progressed beyond the old Monogram kit. To say it looks like a Hellcat begs the question of precisely what does a Hellcat look like. It may look like a Hellcat in the broadest of senses, but to one who tries to look closely at all available evidence, it may not be what one considers to be a Hellcat under the best of circumstance. As to Eduard's making sure it would not make a mistake on the cowling, Eduard is not without error in previous kits it produced. It was criticized for the cowling of the I-16s. After much fussing on Eduard's part, they re-engineered the cowling. The point of all this is you seem to say that it looks like a Hellcat to you, so it is a representation of a Hellcat and we should be quiet about any misgivings we have. The arrogance is not in criticizing the kit, but in saying it should be accepted as is and without comment, because it looks like a Hellcat to you.

I have heard rumors that this kit actually originated with Eduard as a sub-contracted deal. It is good that there are some extras with it, as the interior is about as basic and primitive as it can be. Even though it has inappropriate panel lines down the side, it does build into a decent model. The price does seem to be inline with recent limited run releases, especially as it does have the Eduard photo-etch and expanded decal markings.

Thank you Graham for a large dollop of good common sense. It is also so very condescending and demeaning to assume that the we cannot evaluate and think on our own. It does hurt to run out and spend precious Pounds or Dollars only to find out that one needs a new resin cowl if one wants it "accurate" or make do, as the case may be. From where I sit, many of the pictures posted showed a very valid comparison. As for FAA Hellcats, I'd love to do a Mk. II aboard Empress or Speaker in GSB with the big blast plates and rocket rails. Now where did I put those spare parts from the old Monogram Hurricane?

That is a magnificent build,and who would have imagined that the Tamiya kit could be improved to such an extent. But, I'm a bit confused. Was not the metal on the Swordfish painted a Cirrex (did I get that correct) Grey (Light Grey)? Was there a time when the entire aircraft was in silver/aluminium dope and silver/aluminium lacquer?

Regardless of the subject, the Tamiya Fi 156 is a bloody beautiful model kit. It is also nicely packaged. Perhaps might even appeal to those for whom modeling is only a marginal hobby. Sometimes a kit transcends the subject; this is one. As for the rather have three cheap kits than one expensive kit. That is the mentality of "I'll eat crap, just put a whole lot on my plate". Seen that mentality on cruise ships. I'd rather one Tamiya Swordfish than any number of SMER Swordfish kits, even if they were £1 each. Same with the CA Do 17 and the Hobbycrap kits.

Notes on Zinc Chromate and P-47s. 1. ZC in its normal state, as used during WW-2, was a greenish yellow. A sickly looking colour. Not bright yellow. The Tamiya Yellow-Green is pretty damn close. 2. The "green" shade of ZC was used only when a second coat of primer was requires, on USN aircraft for example. It was made green to allow inspectors to verify that a second coat had been applied. It was made by the addition of Aluminium powder to ZC, but when Aluminium became scarce it was done by adding black pigment, black enamel or lamp-black. Since it was made at the work site, the actual colour could vary. Adding a bit more black gave one Cockpit Green. 3. ZC was not the final coat on the gear legs. Early on the the P-47 C it was aluminium lacquer. When Aluminium was in short supply, they used Olive Drab, then down the road, near the end, back to Aluminium. 4. ZC, tinted green, was not used on the internal surfaces of a P-47. The cockpit was Dull Dark Green and the inside of the cowling was either ZC or near the end, dull aluminium unpainted.

I wonder if we could go back to the old system of waiting for a kit to appear before saying it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, sex, pubs you could still smoke in, the internet, Margaret Thatcher, Airfix, Princess Diana, and so on and so forth. England swings like a pendulum do, and so do observations on new kits.

You got that right Graham. Bloody awful nacelles, cowl and engine. And what is with the intakes? Cannot remember it extending on to the cowl. About that added piping. Russian influence? Not going to be able to do a WW-2 bird. Looks like they did copy a later model C-47. Probably something the Chi-Coms bagged in Viet Nam. Then there are the little pits all over the model. On the C-47 they are just wrong. Should look more like the 1/48 Tamiya Wildcat All things considered the Monogram is still a great kit. You even get, or use to get, paratroopers. But it is from Trumpeter and so we will sing its praises regardless of cost or general appearance.

Seeing that this thread has made the rounds (your site don't rate unless this is discussed), there is not one reasoned answer as to why RoG would even think of doing this. How can they trump Tamiya? Price? Detail? How many Mk. IVs does one need in one's collection? Perhaps they'll put swastikas on it as a marketing ploy. After the crappy, yes it was crappy, Airfix two-stage Merlin effort, why not at least trump Airfix and give us a proper one.

In 1/48, the Tamiya -1A for the first 410 Mk. IVs and the Tamiya -1D for the remaining Mk. IVs 857 Corsair IV serialed KD161-KE117. Goodyear Built. USN BuNos indicate that the first 410 were FG-1s or FG-1As (there is no clear distinction made in the USN records) and the final 447 were FG-1Ds. All but the first 400 aircraft had blown canopies. All the RN FG-1Ds seem to have had the smaller propeller and the final 125 also were fitted to carry 5 inch rockets under the wings but there is no evidence they served operationally. There were a further 120 FG-1Ds slated for transfer to the RN as KE310-KE429 but this order was canceled. FG-1A KD161-255 BuAer 14592-14685 FG-1D KD255-560 BuAer 14686-14991 FG-1 KD561-570 BuAer 76139-76148 FG-1D KD571-867 BuAer 76149-76445 FG-1D KD868-999 BuAer 87949-87998, 88134-88158, 88269-88293, 88404-88428, 92171-92177 FG-1D KE100-117 BuAer 92178-92195 (Source: Air Arsenal North America; Phil Butler & Dane Hagedorn)

It is all true. I read it on the internet. There is even a site devoted to this very subject http://greyfalcon.us/German%20UFOs.htm As to being Nazi, if it was under the auspices of the government, then a Nazi government would produce a Nazi flying saucer. While not all Germans were not Nazis, nearly all were in the service of the Reich.

Ah yes, the yellow leading edge. Pictures are quite few of factory fresh Thunderbolts. Most clearly show the RAF national markings and the sky fuselage band. But I have never been able to determine if the yellow leading edge is there or not. There is a most unusually marked P-47 on page 3 of Geoff Thomas' RAF Thunderbolt publication. It appears to have a yellow leading edge. But then again it was photographed in India with India Command markings, a Sky fuselage band, white cowl ring and appears to be in Olive Drab / Sea Grey/ Light Grey. But a somewhat poor photograph on page 4 seems not to show a yellow leading edge. The aircraft is at Boscombe Down.