Jacarre

Hi all, i read a review in the 72 scale census and they said that Revell F-16 are 3mm more longer than certain drawings. Also, they criticized the lack of taper of the aft - wing trailing edge rear fuselage, saying that it's one of best things of the Italeri one is the shape of the rear fuselage. Have you compared the Hasegawa and Revell with drawings? Are they right? Thanks a lot in advance. Here's the link of the analysis: http://www.72nd.webs.com/aircraft/GD/F-16.htm Javier

Hi all, i have in my stash the old Hasegawa's 1/72 RF-101C and the very beautiful Revell's 1/72 F-101B. The fuselage width of the former it's more wider compared to the later one. Anyone has compared Hasegawa's offering with the more state of art Valom single seaters Voodoos? Thanks a lot in advance! Greetings from Chile Javier

Great pics Nuuuman! Thanks a lot! Tailspint Turtle, can we say that the J-52 engined versions had more fuselage width with the intakes, and the P-408 engined (Super Foxes and Ms) ones had yet more width? Thanks a lot in advance. Regards., Javier

Thanks a lot Junchan! Beautiful pics in your flickr album!

Thanks Tailspin, it's a pleasure for me to have your post in this topic, because i'm a avid reader of your excelent blog. We're measuring different kits and in my IPMS Chile friends's view the Fujimi kit has a fuselaje too great in width, and has 1 mm more of height of some drawings. I'll wait for your analysis. Thanks a lot in advance! Javier

Hi tempestfan, we take the measures in the area where Fujimi's kit has the "cut" for the different front fuselages of the different kits. . Is behind the intakes area. And we are measuring the new Airfix A-4B, the old A4D1 is rather crude... Thanks a lot! Javier

Hi Uncle Uncool, sorry, i forgot to say that our studies are about 1/72 kits. Regards, Javier

Hi all, i have a question about Scooter's fuselage cross section width. In our study group of my friends of IPMS-Chile we noticed important differences between the different kits in the cross section after the intakes. Fujimi has the more width (and height), Esci less, Italeri less, and Airfix is the more narrower one. Anyone has compared these kits with a good set or drawings or has the measurements of fuselage cross section? I consulted in the excelent Tommy Thomasson's Tail spin topics blog but i didin't find the data. Thanks a lot in advance! Regards, Javier

Thanks Hook! I'll take a view on this link. Regards., Jacarre

But my friend Esteban forgot a one little thing... Academy, Hobbycraft and Heller got 6-3 wings, it's necesary the matchbox wings or another set of an Airfix or Hasegawa Sabre Dog...

Thanks a lot Tony for the tip. Well folks, here's our Sabre study. Mi friend Fernando Diaz of IPMS-Chile converted all of the measures to 1/72 and compared to a series of kit: Airfix (new tool), Heller, Fujimi, Hobbycraft/ Academy (same mold we think)... comments are welcome! Javier Wings: Wing leading edge: Airfix ok, Heller 1,5 mm too long, Hobbycraft – Academy (H/A) 3mm too short Wing trailing edge: Airfix ok, Heller 1 mm too long, H/A 2 mm too short Wing chord at the root: Airfix ok, Heller ok, Fujimi 1 mm too long, H/A ok Wing chord at the tip: Airfix ok, Heller ok, H/A ok 2 mm too long Total wing span: Airfix ok, Heller ok, H/A ok. Fujimi has a ok span for F-40 Tail horizontal surfaces individual span: Airfix 1 mm too short, Heller ok, Fujimi ok, H/A 1 mm too short Fuselage: Nose to leading edge: Airfix 1 mm too short, Heller 2 mm too long, Fujimi ok. H/A 1 mm too short Wing trailing edge to tail: Airfix 2 mm too short, Heller 1,5 mm too short, Fujimi 1 mm too short, H/A 1,5 mm too short Nose to tail: Airfix 2 mm too short, Heller ok, Fujimi ok, H/A ok

Yeah Tony, i mean, our Sabre it's very similar externally to an F-86F-30. Regards., Javier

More udpates... Academy are more shallow in the exhaust area, and Hasegawa are more fat there and in the after wing trailing edge fuselage. Rest of the airframe very similar. Regards., Javier

Thanks John, is the leading modelling blog here in Chile and Esteban, my friend, is one of the mox experienced modeller of our country. Here in Santiago a group of modellers of IPMS-Chile are working taking measures of a real example - ex Honduran AF Canadair Sabre Mk 4 with 6-3 wings. It's very similar to an korean era F-30 but with a MB seat. I hope to bring here some results soon.

Thanks Jure, it's not my effort but of a Esteban and Sergio, two of the most experienced modellers here in Santiago, Chile. Regards! Javier

Here a friend of mine here in Chile is building and improving the matchbox offering, here's the link of the article in his blog (in spanish, but provide google translation below) http://modelismo-historia.blogspot.cl/2014/02/el-f-86a-y-la-guerra-de-corea-2.html It seems incredible, but true: we enter the 2nd decade of the 21st century and there is a good Sabre model 'A' on the market (according to current quality standards) and discontinued kit Matchbox PK-32 with more than 35 years edited Sabre remains the only series a 1/72 scale production (There is an F-86A 1/48 of Lindberg # 70553 mark, but is uglier than hitting mom). Two views of the current presentation, very outdated current standards of quality and lacking in minute detail kit # 70553 Lindberg that distinguish the Sabre 'A' (click on the image below to check). Now, looking critically at Matchbox kit is easy to notice that several of his rare 22 pieces (that bring it to the category of an 'Easy-kit' Hobby-Boss) are openly rude and Spartan simplicity; the fact that the pilot figure is one of his finest details just does not speak well of the model. All this makes it understandable why there modelers colleagues who have chosen to modify a Sabre series 'E' Hobbycraft (or clone Academy # 1681) to obtain the initial version of the famous game. But for the Matchbox kit (and project) you can say that, like most of the models is very correct missing marker of linear forms (or on flat ground profile and if you like) and its section tail and rear fuselage is really the best and most appropriate for Sabre model 'a'. The windshield while, usually the detail referenced to distinguish type early famous jet fighter, really is a poor remilgo the characteristic front bezel of the F-86A, a strong feature knowledge that will have to rebuild on their own . In parallel, through the web are available valuable photographic references both historical and current, especially useful is the Sabre 'A' preserved in pristine condition flight by the Museum Duxford in England (which lacks the 'slats' in the wings for reasons of flight safety). Sabre photos of this gave me good information flood of details that do not usually appear in photos of the time and static displays in other museums. The best angle of Sabre Matchbox, top floor, which highlights the striking blue color of its wings (right shape and size). But their profile are obvious limitations raw: the base of the cab line is clearly curve (must be straight), the nose too sharp and very short train. Here the arrows mark the buts that has this F-86: curved nose something fall, very sharp "chin" very low train, wheels out and stabilizers are right if it does not intervene. The instructions make the same mistake posture! According to the known limitations of the kit and robust information I was accumulating, as time passed I was adding other kits F-86, as it were buying 2nd hand or barter, for the sole purpose of 'sacrifice', extracting those pieces which vastly outnumbered in detail to those provided by the Matchbox kit (something not very difficult by the way) and giving it pass those parts of which completely lacked, such as ponds or droppable control panel. Some will ask why not use resin kits improvements? Easy: There are none designed for Sabre Matchbox and also polystyrene kit is good (neither hard nor brittle) and I find it more ductile and manageable, incidentally I avoid using aggressive adhesives for dissimilar materials together. A practical example of how simple and easy it is to improve this Sabre with parts from other kits. A) Airbrakes F-86F Heller v / s Airbrakes Matchbox. C) Train Tapas Matchbox v / s D) Tops Heller kit. All that said, the first concrete step I with the model is cut, remove and add on both sides of the fuselage all those sections: correspond or not, are not consistent with the actual aircraft or are straight away: When cutting the fairings (lacking any detail) where the airbrakes are housed, to wear after then extracted the F-86F Heller 2nd hand. the rear end of the jet cockpit was cut, which is integral with the fuselage, this in order to leave open the canopy excellent replacement, also taken from Sabre Heller. A. The red line marks the true bottom profile Sabre B. The shape and size of the airbrake is correct, unlike Fujimi, Academy and Hobbycraft kits, ALL erring in this piece C. The tail section is the best of F-86 Matchbox, very faithful to the original. the surplus on each side then roughed inside and extracted airbrake wells Heller kit will stick. Adelgazamos as possible the inside of the exhaust gases to accommodate the excellent internal nozzle kit from F-86F Fujimi. The diameter nozzle Fujimi scale is much more accurate than the original Matchbox kit (somewhat unsurprisingly) A) = 6.4 mm Fujimi matchbox = 4.5 mm The length of both pieces without embargo is another story. Here it is what premium fit with the tube inside the fuselage and obviously the original part is designed for effect and Fujimi option is considerably shorter. A) Matchbox = 11.5 mm Fujimi = 8.5 mm Real view of the nozzle of the F-86A exhibited in the Smithsonian Museum in the large hangar Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly County, next to Dulles International Airport in Virginia. Another characteristic feature of the model 'A' Sabre are the slats of the leading edge of the wings and are notorious part of the "look" of these early F-86. At this point I resorted to barter with a friend as the only model available was the Sabre said parts of the Hobbycraft brand, the HC1380 kit promptly representing a Canadair Sabre Mk.4 with wings without slats and therefore did not harm the model's take those two pieces, so the modest cost of a pair of decals got my 'slats'. Returning to the fuselage, one of the items most impoverish the Sabre Matchbox is his cabin, after a couple of brief tests assembly, Heller transparencies are closest to the ideal, as well as inside cabin. In this view the cabin 'A' is the original Matchbox and 'B' comes from, much more correct kit F-86F Heller in shape and dimensions. While the air intake 'C' is the same kit Heller and 'D' matchbox belongs to none of the two is quite correct and will need to make a junction between the two. This view shows a quick comparison front of both air intakes, while the profile of the Heller is better, the interior shape of the "mouth" of Sabre Matchbox is more accurate and precise, but see the photos taken at MNAE and Smithsonian. After taking several measures foot underground and calculator more comparisons with appropriate pictures and the same CL-13 (F-86F) of MNAE I took the decision to remove the base of the windshield to be well advanced and a little over sized in scale, then accommodate the windshield Heller to adapt (easier said than done but the dice are already cast!). In total 8 holes of different sizes and angles they are drilled to emulate those six secondary air intakes and ventilation Shaft turbine not represented in the model as well as the 2 wells airbrake. Finally, we began modifying the nose section of the F-86A ,, so better recreate the shape of this ... again I urge you "do not do this at home," this madness is an adventure and a personal apostolate this particular kit. If you are interested in becoming a Sabre of this same model, the easiest way is to modify the tail section of an F-86E Academy or Hobbycraft and make-up of the windshield and voila! or wait for some manufacturer inspired edit it ... what happens first, heh-heh! As you can see the profile Heller is more accurate than the Matchbox. First test assembly, overlay only. We left here the first phase of assembly and correction Sabre Matchbox (soon there will be more), giving special thanks to my great friend JAT, who rescued data on the hard drive of my broken laptop, making possible the publication of this article .

Thanks tempestfan! I finally bought Academy offerring and compared Academy and Hasegawa fuselage and the length is almost equal; wings and tail are the same, with japanese kit fails off in the lenght of the variable incidence area on top of the airframe, and in the ventral fins. I will check now the fuselage width. Regards Javier

I let my self introduce a study made here in Chile, my country, of my friend Esteban Cornejo and fellow modeler Sergio Sánchez in his blog, comparing four Mosquito kits: Airfix, Hasegawa, Tamiya and Matchbox. Here's the link: http://modelismo-historia.blogspot.cl/search?updated-max=2015-06-14T12:10:00-07:00&max-results=1 Here's the translate spanish - english (about the models section of the article, thanks to google): The four were chosen Airfix kits Series 3 (Ref.03019) representing 3 variations (NF.2, FB.6 and MK.18), Matchbox (PK-116, then when Revell 40116 bought the molds) that offers 2 versions (BMK.9 and NF.30), the Hasegawa (HM83) which is a FB.6 and Tamiya (Ref.60753) that lets you choose between a BMK.4 and PR.4. they represent a range of before and now on the twin-engine De Havilland models. The oldest of the four is the Airfix, first released in 1972 (see photo above) although planned for 1971, has since been almost permanently catalog until today, ergo has been -probably- kit Mosquito Top sellers of all times. In 1999 he added pieces to embody one NF19 RAF or Swedish J-30 (ref.03062) and has since gone into account special commemorative box or can imagine: Medium Starter Set, 100 Years of Flight (ref.93019 in 2003 ), RAF Diorama Set (ref.93302), D-Day Anniversary Gift Set 60 (ref.08601 in 2004), VE-Day Anniversary Set (ref.10301 in 2005) and since 2009, when Hornby relaunched boxes' Dogfight Doubles 'she replaced the 02001 kit already mentioned before (ref.A50068, although the I-262 is still the same old mold). Of course this mold was also edited in parallel by the brands associated with in the '70s Airfix, MPC' Profile series' (Ref.2-1516, from 72 to 76) and the 'Bonus' series (Ref.2-0211, 76 to 78), also it left by USAirfix (Ref.30040) in the '80s and in Brazil by Kiko (Ref.3019) mark during the same period. In his capacity as "workhorse" of Airfix and given the age of the mold, it is logical and expected to see some deterioration or faults in the injection of any of the 97 parts of the kit A03019 in current or recent editions, so we took the precaution make us a 'classic' box (thanks Anselmo!) and so analyze it in original condition. It still can say that was the first serious kit DH-98 in 1/72 and the time it came outside and detail ways they were the best; as though the instructions start with the armed classic interior, this in itself was not the most relevant of those days, in fact manufacturers privileging as detailed 'top' putting a good pilot figure, but apart from once prized figurines brought a reasonable (and much improved) detail basic cabin, not in the wells of the train where it is below current standards. The decals are well printed, but lack the stencils needed for the Mosquito, an alternative extra for the perfect finishing touch is required, as Hornby has not optimized the original specifications and follow the same shortcomings. ABOVE: The first two photos reveal molding old Airfix kit since 2 semi-fuselages and wings are filled so 'loose' and not a tree integrdas pieces like the rest of the model. DOWN: Both the circle and the arrow mark the altenativas pieces for making a Mk.18 "Tse-tse" veneer barrel has bulb gun fairing far ahead, it is necessary to leave sanding smooth and put another bulb more back in the ventral area of ​​the front gates (see below FB.18 Hasegawa kit) The rest of either injected and detailed, even by today's standards very good kit. The downside however is in the area of ​​the bow and cockpit. Now, Airfix gives us the alternative of building a MK.18 "Tse-Tse" anti-ship equipped with 57 mm cannon Mollins (derived from anti-tank 6 pounds), but for this we must replace the entire bow cutting it, because the nose serves to make the FB.6 comes NF.2 and solidarity with the rest of the fuselage. And although the cutting section is well marked, kept a steady hand and patience to separate good thick and firm nose hunting is required and then make the MK.18 the optimal fit, which reveals how outdated engineering it. The other thing it shows both the eye and against planes (and other models) is along the base seems nose kit from the windshield forward the bow: about 2 mm, a detail that does not result in a without embargo armed catastrophe or general appearance. The 1999 edition, the kit 03062, representing both an NF.19 'early' Group No. 100 as a pair of postwar J.30 of the Swedish Air Force. In the lower image, the extra tree with the parts needed for the J.30 and plan for NF.19 paintings and rubbings (even the invasion stripes came in calca). Edits present: new box, same content and in 'Dogfight Double Gift-set' with the I-262A more glue and paints included. Turning to the canopy, the front profile plane is a little low and noticed that the windshield lack the small central box housing the wipers, additionally frames the cabin are all molded in over-emphasized and this is only really valid for the part front of it, because in the back third only the central bolt of the piece of plexiglass goes on internal frames, so here are 2 ways: either straight buy a vacu cabin replacement of the original (Squadron has a very good and economical) or put to work carefully sanding and polishing those outstanding frames incorrect. However, the Airfix kit 3 series is still a valid alternative grata and even after 43 years of editing. The second kit is another classic model, the Matchbox (PK-116) mold. Since this is a brand eternally linked Die-cast metal toy cars and invaluable to childhood memories, ergo its products line construction scale models were focused on the same market: children. Thus the kit is less commitment to the fine detail of the 4 analyzed, although as usual in the Matchbox models and contour lines are very precise and correct; first released in 1976, originally it came in plastic 3 colors (gray, green and black) to save your child paint target audience; then in the final editions until 1992 (through Revell-Germany) kit came only in gray polystyrene. Its main shortcomings are: very low windshield 2 cabins and supplemented like the Airfix in on relief, the propeller blades are as thick as out of shape, the spinners are short and stocky. The interior cabin is merely testimonial and if you. Dear reader is fond positions well detailed cockpit, and at this point has a lot of work to do, besides the known issue of the large paneleado low relief (the "trenches Matchbox") present only in some of its parts. However, within the 61 pieces that make up the kit, there are alternative parts according to the two very different versions offered: 2 cabins, 2 types of engine exhaust, 2 different prows (glass or bulging with radar), and pumps or underwing tanks. The rest, as already indicamos- fine detail is minimal and needs a lot of work to leave the level of current models. The second generation box we got through another colleague (thanks Rafael!) Still retains traditional trees 3 direntes colors. The 2 main buts Matchbox kit. A) propellers with contour too straight and too thick the windshield of both versions is very low. The rest of the model is more than acceptable. But on the other hand, its simplicity of construction gives attractiveness to take quick 12-step a finished model; reinforced this philosophy has been taken up successfully by current brands as HobbyBoss and Zvezda, being (from our point of view as modellers) alive the legacy of Matchbox part. Construction versions are: A BMk.9 RAF Squadron 105 in 1943 and 85 Squadron RAF NF.30 in late 1944, clear that the decals are basic and lack any stencil. In addition, after almost 40 years after its first edition, it remains the ONLY Mosquito injected in 1/72 comes standard with dual-stage Merlin engines (ranging in mosquitoes late last series 2GM and postwar). It is now discontinued, but it is not hard to find (and expensive) on websites selling online. The third kit which came from the cellar were ready Sergio, a fighter-bomber FB.6 Hasegawa, a consecutive its various editions and versions with different decorations. This brand had launched a series of excellent editions of Japanese twin-engine 2GM during the 90s, which varied to take a family of Bristol Beaufighter (to compete with contemporary family Tamiya Beaufighter in 1/48) and then began his Mosquito DH own family in 1999, again in response to Tamiya had already launched his remarkable Mosquito on 1/48. All the different editions (mostly rubbings change except FB.18) Hasegawa kit. However, the Mosquito is in mockup, unlike the Beaufighter- a major challenge, because it is a plane with multiple configurations of cabs, engines, noses and arms, so that it is clear Hasegawa was faced with the dilemma classic cost-utility and having to design a modular kit covering both the bombers and fighter versions without having to change too many pieces, so that -forzosamente- the result was less happy with his Beaufighter achieved. This tendency to modular kits is common to all current major manufacturers. In the absence of the initial mold Hasegawa 1999 (CP17 or # 51217 representing an Mk.IV) for this multiple comparison, we turn HM83 kit (No. 00750) which mainly embodies FB.6 418 RCAF fighter squadron. Batante time after this initial analysis, another friend and colleague (Blackhawk) gave us the initial kit with the bomber version, but this re-packaged by Revell and found that except for the nose and canopy assembly, the rest is identical. Apart from the huge box provided by Revell-Germany, the kit is exactly the same as the initial Hasegawa, a bomber Mk.4, with the curious transparency cabin divided into two (to paste a mess and it is good). As usual, and injection molding are excellent and surface detail comes in fine low relief, typical Hasegawa. The kit consists of 14 pieces trees (including transparencies and duplicate pieces) totaling 113 parts (12 alternatives), which generally have very good fit. Along with the tree where come the 2 half fuselages is a special piece of rib-shaped 'H', which goes inside on both sides of the plane body and helps sustain firm and easily both wings, a nice and useful touch from Hasegawa. Not only Hasegawa decided to use this practical solution, Tamiya already had built from their kits 1/48. Said stiffener is located next to the semi-fuselages. The entire nose section (where the biggest differences between a type of mosquito and other presents) comes separately, which already makes work easier and simpler version one prefers this legendary Briton twin engine. Hasegawa plus point! The cabin comes with frames in subtle bas-relief, which facilitates differentiate different colored paint only the front frames the rear third, easier than with previous 2 models. But the contour shape of the canopy in both plan and profile we raised doubts about its actual accuracy, which will review below. The interior detail, without being brilliant, is much better than the newly revised previous models. The instructions are clear and precise, although the color theme Hasegawa continues his habit of only giving colors with the key to Gunze Sangyo (normal if we consider that in Japan are readily available), but a little research on-line equivalencies paint brands solve them easily and once this minor inconvenience. The decals are another story: as is almost always something thick and slightly yellowed (still new) and although the record is very good and the stencils are correct, achieved a better alternative. The versions offered are the box-art, 418 TH-M Sqdn of the RCAF in 1944, a curious FB.6 equipped with radar and black belly, plus the UP-E 4th Sqdn RAF in 1949 with the simple livery Medium Sea Grey on Black satin postwar. Separate issue, in 10 different made editions of DH-98 by this famous Japanese home until today, if you. Dear reader is interested in any of them, you should know that apart from the classic first edition 1999 (with 2 versions for Mk.IV, HS-F with dark green and gray livery ocean with belly in black opaque squad in January '43 109 or 105 GB-E squadron, first RAF unit to use the DH-98), there were also versions SEAC, RAAF and commemorative D-Day and the Mosquito particularly developed for the Coastal Command, the Mk.18 or "Tse-Tse". Attention, this version really only 18 copies were built and another 27 more were converted from standard FB.6 to combat surface ships and U-boats ubiquitous rocket 27 and 60 pounds plus the aforementioned (and cash) of barrel Mollins 57 mm. Three views of the installation of anti-tank gun of 6 pounds (57 mm), such as conta effective adaptation terrifying the German naval units. Box-art view of the FB.18 discontinued Hasegawa kit (still available via Internet shops) and down the special resin and metal parts included to get this anti-ship version. Hasegawa included pieces to curdle special resin version, which qualifies it as 'limited edition', namely solidarity cap that replaces the gates of the bomb bay (which do not apply to anything in the Mk.18) comes in a single integral piece which includes the fairing CORRECT bulbous head of the canyon, in addition to the part that supports the cane gun, which comes in bronze, and full nose with only 2 machine guns of 7.7 mm. The decals include 2 versions, the 248 Sq. (With invasion stripes and a simple letter "O" as an identifier code) and the same apparatus 254 Sq. And visited by Airfix, the QM-D, both of 1944. However, currently the only Mosquito Hasegawa sale comes paired with a Spitfire Mk.7 in a commemorative box of "Operation Overlord" (kit # 02096), which does nothing cheap, however any of the other issues and above they are easy to find in online retail sites with highly variable prices. The fourth and final kit which we were fortunate to have was the now discontinued Mk.4 Tamiya (# 60753), difficult step of obtaining (I got it for management and kindness of my dear sister who lives and works in USA) and is grooved excellent precedent kit in 1/48, but simplified (he has several pieces less than its big brother) for many represents the best available mold to build a Mosquito in 1/72. In fact when examining the 102 pieces of the model is easy to see the beautiful and clean injection of the same experience rapid and inevitable feeling of fascination and enthusiasm (like when you see a beautiful girl). But beyond the high quality, typical of Tamiya, you may notice the strange omission of a couple of pieces that are not lacking in any of the 3 kits and analyzed: the protective grille air intakes of the Merlin engines, which -of course- if contained in Mosquito 1/48 Tamiya, subsanable detail does not undermine the overall high quality of Japanese kit. The other thing that stands out immediately is the wing tips coming separately, is that as shares components with versions of hunting necessarily these pieces must be separate (fighters carry one sidelight per wing, bombers and photographic lead 2). Furthermore, just as the Hasegawa kit, this also includes a piece in "H" to better withstand internal wings. Trees divided in 6 parts, the instructions given start armed by the engine nacelles and only in step 7 the start of construction of the cabin is covered, which extends to step 10. At this point the Mosquito Tamiya and clearly surpasses by far all already reviewed kits, in fact so good inside that made us wonder why the authors are kits improvements in resin for the cabin of this model in particular. Transparency weapon (the side windows with blisters come apart) and installed at the end of the process, and stuck represents grace and fidelity canopy windshield biwatching pointed bomber versions and recognition of the DH-98. However, when measured against and make plans, we were surprised to find that its flow section is cut into 1.9 mm. Emphasising that is just cut the back as the front and middle sections are perfect in length, width and height, is a defect no doubt, but again does not affect the good overall look of the model or the graceful capture forms "Mossie "by Tamiya. For one example: ABOVE: The third option Mk.4 Tamiya recognition apparatus 540 Sqdn. DOWN: the rest of the family molds 1/72 Japanese house if available, the FB.6 + night fighter NF.2 hunting and NF.13 and NF.17 box, which is practically the same but with alternative parts for night hunting with a bulbous nose. These are the trees that define both parts as the NF.13 FB.6. A) the arrows mark the access door and the hole in the alternative nose for any of the 2 editions, a detail that no other 1/72 Mosquito owns and that brings life for a diorama or vignette the bulbous nose the NF.13 / 17 brings the camera-machine gun in place and accurate manner. C) Another fine detail of luxury is the radar screen AI.Mk.8 that goes inside the cabin NF.13. ABOVE: The decals for the FB.6, which include, once again, the famous T-EG of Operation Jericho 1944, which also comes in the 1/32 Tamiya kit. DOWN: Specifications of Mk.4 and the last page of the instructions of the model with the version of PR.4 in PRU Blue. Finally there are the decals, printed and thin much better than those usually provided Tamiya kits in their 80s and 90s. Alternatives decor kit we are three: the legendary J-GB Sqdn 105, F-109 HS Sqdn (liveried night) and a photo-recognition Pr.Mk.IV without identification code (sn. DZ383 ) 540 Sqdn completely painted in PRU Blue. The stencil is complete and correct. Finally consign that although this particular mold is discontinued for some years is not difficult to find in online retail sites, but very high for a 1/72 scale model prices, no matter how good it is. Odious (but necessary) comparisons As we said when we started this multiple analysis we realized that no plane available Mosquito in various publications or the Internet was equal or close to another. The differences in size and proportion ranged from the subtle to the grotesque, so that without being able to know which of all was the most successful, we were obliged to dive tables British historical publications and here was where they went to rescue our Felipe Billault friend, who as a good importer delicatessen maqueteras provided us with an excellent and 100% reliable book on the Mosquito FB.6 with 1/48 scale plans made very accurately. accurate and correct (SAM Publications) we needed as a means of reference and comparison publication. So we do the math was simple and reductions of the case and establish convincingly and beyond doubt, the actual dimensions of the DH-98 in its different versions 1/72 Armed with this knowledge are we launched into the task of comparing 4 kits available to us, here are the results both from a photographic perspective as a visual comparison as against levels: We left! We jump to life, draw from the molds 4 fuselages and magic tape 3M # 810 (low adhesion) the present and begin to assemble the visual comparison. 1) Tamiya 2) Airfix 3) Matchbox 4) Hasegawa. Immediately highlights the contour differently Hasegawa cabin. Which led us to verify the maximum width of each fuselage under the measures referred us to the plans, but all gave rather similar measures. So we rearrange the 4 kits FB.6 leaving the two together in the center, already noticeable at first glance differences in the proportions of both molds, both fuselages and their cabins. Using good literature and Notebook PC with various historical and current photographs of museums in detail, we begin to look at the 4 airframes from different angles to see which best captures the lines and 'personality twin-engine De Havilland Mosquito. To achieve better overall comparison add them immediately booths and the differences are more noticeable. A) Tamiya Airfix, the fkecha marks its longest mariz C) Hasegawa, the arrow indicates a bulkier than other Group D) matchbox cabin. A semi side view rained strengthens us these same impressions, highlighting the different contour of the rear cabin kit Hasegawa and clear the longest nose Airfix mold . We started with the views in various perspectives to see which best embodies the general appearance of Mossie, from this perspective both Tamiya and the Airfix seemed more convincing than the Hasegawa and Matchbox. But just a little visual change to a semi-lateral angle and things change! The Tamiya kit still looks just as good, but not the Airfix, but Hasegawa looks much better from this point of view, even the humble Matchbox looks more convincing than the Airfix ! This illustrates another take changing nose and cabin Matchbox kit to curdle NF.30 night version, which compared to any of the other 3 models looks very low windshield. But aside seen things change! The matchbox kit NF.30 looks very balanced configuration, however the kit Hasegawa highlights the protruding shape of the cab. In both Airfix and Tamiya molds maintain the same pros and cons as reviewed above. For this view rained seek to make a comparative trick: to fit the position of the tails of four fuselages and thus see how as the position of the booths of each is compared. As can be appreciated all well except the kit Hasegawa, which is visibly shorter. Viewed from the side the four fuselages look correct in general terms, being notorious as the two modern kits (Hasegawa and Tamiya) bring open bays unlike his two counterparts of the 70 pumps. However this impression of fairness would be broken by putting fuselages against planes in 1/72. This emphasizes the question of which of the two prows of FB.6 is closer to reality does Airfix or Hasegawa ?, at the bottom takes both kits in discord shoe by the tail show marked differences in the nose area. What is not shown on the drawings kits nuestran seen from the front even more different look! First is the shape of the fuselage, in the depressed looks Airfix sides (without losing roundness), while the Hasegawa is more rounded and smooth. The vertical reinforcing rib fuselage is best achieved in the Airfix in both the Hasegawa is one exaggerated and bulbous rest. The nose of both kits is the most distinct and dissimilar feature dimensions, but also windshields cabin both molds are quite different beyond if you are raised or incised, being Hasegawa best achieved in shape and the dimensions Airfix. At this point the comparison against planes favors -in general terms favoring the Airfix kit on Hasegawa being both a representation of the same version FB.6. Let's see what happens to the fuselages of the other two remaining molds. If we look at the four fuselages mold Tamiya clearly stands out as the best and most accurate of the four. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses, but the Japanese kit is the best achieved so far. We turn now to the analysis of the respective booths and some more in 1/48 as a comparison of shapes and dimensions. We start by comparing profile booths Airfix and Hasegawa clearly show differences in shape. As for dimensions now we know that of Hasefawa is short. The set of four cabins profile views and rained view. A) Airfix matchbox C) Hasegawa D) Tamiya. Quality and lower their intrinsically distorisión transparencies are evident in the 2 most modern cabins. Now the three versions hunting cabins, E) Airfix F) and G matchbox) Hasegawa compared against transparency FB.6 kit Airfix 1/48 (ranging OK against planes) to see similarities in form and first instance the most similar (Boundary) is the Hasegawa. DOWN: For the same dossier (the lower contour of transparency) we hcimos a first test of fit using the Matchbox cabin on the fuselage Hasegawa, good overall result, but was a little short on the back end. As against sample and control element we use the Airfix 1/48 kit that performed very well against the plans. ABOVE: As comes from an original edition of a FB.6 Hunting, said Airfix kit that brings the cab version and also their new versions of Bomber and Reconnaissance . DOWN: The canopies Airfix 1/48 compared against its peers in 1/72, the bombers / recce A) versus D) versions Tamiya, very well both. Only in the game (both Airfix B and C) is the 1/72 edition looks in detail and forms lower against its wide 1/48. Canopies that no planes were compared against the Mk.4 Tamiya and Mk.9 similar to Matchbox, both divided windshield, due to not having a reliable hand plane. But we made the following quiz to transparency bow of both kits: Like any good twin engine (P-38, Bf-110, B-25, Ki-46, A-20, JU.88, etc.) one of the aspects that reviews and evaluates all modeler is the shape, size and proportions of the engine nacelles, as a significant part of the "personality" of the finished model is that of the plane that is correct, if not it will sozo or indefinite and without that essential touch that makes our favorite. The DH-98 does not escape this logic and, as already mentioned were misguided before- the dimensions of their nacelles which left out the Mosquito Frog / Novo of this comparative review, see for nacelles faced: Nacelles faced. This item was less difference in size and proportions. A) Tamiya *) Hi-Tech Resin Matchbox C) and Airfix D) Hasegawa. Each with their canopies. In this view the lower section add wing Hasegawa (A) for better comparison with the rest of the nacelle. Tamiya, which is a bit short back. C) Matchbox D) Airfix and E) Hi-Tech French resin set designed for Airfix kit in the '90s. Very detailed (and discontinued) nacelle Hi-Tech (*) compared against that aims to replace of Matchbox is the engine Merlin 66 (double stage) onwards and the Merlin 25 © represented by Airfix . Looking at the kits back into contention, the nacelle of Hasegawa looks less robust and rounded than Airfix bit. Also the total length of the air intake is less in the Japanese kit. The canopies are only as a means of comparison presciendiendo of fuselages 1) forms Airfix 2) Hasegawa · 3) Matchbox NF.30 4) Tamiya. At this particular point the old beats the new: the dimensions of the Airfix necela are better against planes that Tamiya, although we must recognize that is something minor and not serious for the Japanese mold. Molding separately from the front section of the nacelle has made me think and speculate that Hasegawa venture with engine versions Merlin dual stage as Kit Matchbox (see nacelle above), but so far nothing like that has happened. And wings? The shape and dimensions of the wing surfaces are half the equation in any model airplane, no matter what scale is being edited. So of course we took on the task of comparing them with each other and against planes where we find new surprises and details to consider when choosing a kit or other of the DH-98. Seen all the main elements of each detail and quality, the end result is quite predictable: the best DH Mosquitoes available in 1/72 are those published by Tamiya. Just fix that little omission of the (very simple to make with or without after-market products) and will have a 99.9% Mosquito perfect! Protective grills air intakes Only its high price and relative unavailability in nearby shops can be regarded as real defects. BUT second place was a real surprise, because ultimately the Hasegawa kit is contemporary in edition to Tamiya, however, as we have seen-beyond the prestige of Hasegawa- is a mold with multiple errors and inaccuracies of shape, proportion and dimensions, which ultimately put the mold more than 40 years of Airfix in a justiciera 2nd position, above its modern rival. Even third place is problematic to define, because although the Matchbox kit is very simple and even coarse details regarding the Hasegawa was so disappointing that we should more carefully weigh the decision.

Thanks a lot for all the comments! Anyone knows about a good set of scale drawings of this bird? Regards., Javier

Hi Tempestfan, sadly we don't had the Matchbox kit for comparisons... But the greatest dissapointment were - in our view and in relation to Osprey drawings - the Hobbycraft and Fujimi Kits. Even The Heller kit, with the right surgery, would be a more accurate representation of the real thing. But is only IMHO. I forget to mention about the hobbyboss kit in our studies the Hobbyboss F-30... Sadly the fuselage is short 4 mm or more on the tail, and the wings are slightly underscaled. Regards., Javier

Here in Chile we have a Honduran Canadair Sabre Mk 4 with 6-3 "hard" wings in our aviation museum. With my friends of local IPMS, we're measuring wings and fuselage to make sure that the drawings that we're using here are correct (we have of the Osprey book ones, i dont know if they are correct) Before the measure corrections of drawings, the preliminary comparisons with some existing kits are below: Heller F-86F-30: wing sweep is off but span and chord is ok for 6-3, but it's slatted. Researching, we think that french guys were trying to represent the rare Sabre 6 wing: a 6-3 short slatted one (not long span like F-40). Fuselage 2-3 mm large. Airfix F-86E (M)/ F-30/Mk4 : The best against drawings, nose a little narrow, wings ok for 6-3 (hard), fuselage length almost spot - on Fujimi F-86F-40 / Hobbycraft F-30: wing chord somewhat more larger than 6-3, fuselage slightly more higher than drawings, more longer too. Tail too tall. We're analyzing Sabre Dog (F-86D) wings, and Airfix and Hasegawa ones are almost spot on: narrow chord and slatted. Comments are welcome! Regards, Javier

I All, sorry for my questions about old models, but newer an better ones are scarce in my country. I have a little doubt of the wings position to the fuselage in this Italeri kit, the Fujimi kit are different, more ahead than the Italeri one. Who's right? Have you ever measured both kits against drawings? Regards, Javier

I want to revive this post because i have a little doubt of the wings position to the fuselajen in the Italeri kit, the Fujimi kit are different, more ahead than the Italeri one. Who's right? Regards, Javier

Thanks a lot Wez, i think that the canopy are ok too. About Dana Bell's drawings, i have to say (sorry for the off topic) that we analized 1/72 F-104 ones with another friend and i think that are somewhat short... The Esci and Hasegawa airframe kits looks more longer that the drawings. Who's lying? Haha Regards from Santiago, Chile., Javier

Thanks a lot to all. Julien, have you seen hasegawa's rendition against drawings? Andhave you seen A-7? Thank you in advance and greetings from cold (we're in Winter, lol) Chile. Javier