Tiger331

I never read too much into the CAD images but they show a 'break line' towards the forward end of the sponson so maybe they are going to tool the kit with this as a separate item, in order to enable them to box the different (early and late) variants. If not, as you say some good ol' modelling skills should take care of it for those wanting to the an RAF C-130K. I will eagerly await this kit, having spent countless hours on the RAF Fat Albert fleet and others.

There can be little doubt that the loss of Wingnut Wings will be felt by many given their groundbreaking introduction of so many long neglected subjects from the WWI era in large scale. That said, I think the comment made supporting the view that WNW produced a lot of their range at the whim of their principal benefactor and that this could have contributed to their possible demise probably rings true. Personally, I am not a big fan of World War 1 subjects (although I will admit to having two of Wingnut Wings kits in my collection) and I believe (although I could be proved wrong) that this niche is significantly behind WW II and Post-War subjects in terms of overall popularity and interest with the hobby. Although I am reluctant to subscribe to the notion that the kits were expensive to purchase (especially when one considers their quality and what they included in each kitset) this will have been a factor; there are only so many individuals who will have the interest and financial capacity to purchase vast quantities of these kits. The irony of it is that I suspect Wingnut Wings had already recognised this and that was one of the reasons why they were beginning to branch out into producing WWII subjects. I realise the Avro Lancasters 'Dambusters' variant was probably another of Sir Peter's 'whims' given his investment, both personally and financially, in a major film on the subject but the subsequent announcement of a 'standard' B.Mk.I/III too was probably indicative of where the company wanted to go. I would certainly have invested in a high quality 1:32 scale Avro Lancaster that oozed the same quality, craftsmanship and attention to detail that they have put into their WWI subjects and I suspect quite a few others may have done so too. They could have then moved on to a Hawker Hurricane, Hawker Typhoon and Bristol Beaufighter to name but three !. Who knows ?.....maybe we will be able to see the Lancaster in the future although this will be dependent on how far they were along with the project and whether another manufacturer, in the Post COVID-19 economic environment, will take such a bold step. The presence of the Hong Kong Models kit will not help. I guess we will all have to wait and see what happens - I just hope the former, very talented, employees of WNW are able to take up meaningful employment in the future. They certainly deserve this, given their obvious passion and dedication to the production of such high quality kits, all of which will be sadly missed over time.

Well said, that Man It's been a while since I have seen so many 'handbags at Dawn' (normally reserved for those over on Armchair Repetitive Complainers) YOU have nailed it, Mike !

Yep..........I have one of these on my 'to do' list. I bought one of the Eduard Limited Edition 'Silver Arrows' sets since it had the sprues for the PF, PFM and MF. I know its potentially an expensive way to produce a MiG-21FL but until Eduard deem it financially viable to market one its the only way forward. Never understood why they did not since there are some attractive Indian and Middle Eastern colour schemes out there for the FL variant. As for the subject of this thread.....very nice Well Done, Sir !

Ben, Great, great video. It should especially appeal to the kids or newcomers since you combine a bit of the history with the build, don't overly complicate the techniques you have used and deliver a model that is very nice and an inspiration to newcomers without overawing them. After 40+ years modelling even I learnt a new technique from you (4B pencil + cotton bud)....... ..and all done with a 'proper' broadcasting voice....one or two of your fellow modelling youtubers could do with taking a leaf out of your book regarding voice modulation etc (sorry couldn't help that - I spent years growing up in broadcasting environment when my late father worked for BFBS !). Well Done, Sir Oh.....and welcome to BM, of course !

What does this have to do with the Cessna O-2A ?.....any connection ?.

Looking good........I especially like the wear and tear applied to the cabin floor.............very realistic Keep up the great work, Sir !

really Wish some of my 1980s kits looked like this

Hey.....listen.......I'm getting equally tired of the argument against the better qualities of this kit. I'm not a rivet counter but I have background with the subject, having worked in and around them over the years. I'm, personally, very happy with the new kit, understand that it may have shortcomings for those that find shortcomings with everything (and these shortcomings have or will, inevitably, be addressed by the AM companies in due course). If the kit was in the £45+ price bracket then I may have taken issue but having paid 26 Euros plus shipping I don't. Right now, it offers ME, accuracy, ease of construction and great value for money and it also seems that many more share my view. I'm not entering into any more dialogue on this..........life's too short.

My previous comments re sales (above) applies. Quite strange that such a flawed kit should sell out within days......there are obviously a lot of people out there that seem content with the quality, accuracy and value for money offered by Zvedza. I guess we are all wrong ?!

So I guess this is why my three favoured kit suppliers sold out of the Zvezda Mil Mi-24 kit within days...?! I tried to conduct a repeat order. Hannants will have imported a sizeable order, which sold out within days (granted some of their stock probably goes to trade) but the other two dealers are standard shops and they are also now sold out, so I would respectfully suggest that most are happy with the quality, accuracy and value for money provided by Zvedza. If you have the kit, then the plastic quality in your kit is clearly quite different from mine !.....the parts in my kit are all perfectly formed.....

Do you actually have a copy of the Zvedza kit yet ? I do and, now that I have had time to handle and examine the contents, it's pretty good from my perspective. Sure, there are one or two minor omissions (quite apart from the lack of cockpit and rivet detail, which have already been discussed) but name me a kit that does not have some omissions which, good forbid, any good modeller might like to tackle anyway. This kit is certainly as good as any of the Kittyhawk and Italeri releases I have previously acquired and provides a very sound basis for a fairly simple build out of the box or as a great canvas for those who wish to go a step further. Is it good value for money ?. Again, from my perspective "yes" but then I do live in the Baltics with easy access to keenly priced Russian and Ukrainian kits. Even if one were to pay the full UK RRP, it is only marginally more than the Kittyhawk UH-1D/H and considerably less than the same company's UH-1N, both of which I also have, and which offer very little extra in terms of accuracy, ease of assembly etc. I stand by my previous comments regarding the forthcoming Kittyhawk kit but I also stand to be corrected too, should they surprise me !

I'm not sure how far KH are into their development programme for the Mil Mi-24 Hind family but it will need to be something special to surpass the new Zvedza kit, notwithstanding the minor issues with the lack of cockpit and rivet detail (both of which are now being addressed by AM companies). I have just received, and done a preview, on the Zvedza kit and it will be hard to beat, both in terms of accuracy, ease of assembly and value for money. Sure, the purists will want to further invest in the inevitable AM that will follow before they make a start but it's going to be great out of the box too. I don't need to be reminded (again) about that hoary old chestnut "But the XXX (Kit) by YYY (Company) doesn't make any money for (ZZZ) (Company No.2)". If I was KH I would now concentrate on what could be real money spinners like their planned release of a decent kit of the Mi-8/17 Hip family and Su-25 Frogfoot, to which they could add the Sukhoi Su-7/9 to name but three Cold-War Soviet/Russian subjects. They could even turn their attention to a SA.330 Puma or SA.341 Gazelle if they want to maintain their focus, growing reputation and smart investment in rotary wing subjects.

I would tend to agree with regard to the UH-1D/H which is markedly superior to other offerings but others (such as the Seasprite and Dauphin) have proved to me more of a challenge.

I was already aware of this but had discounted the Kittyhawk offering based on my previous experience with their kits - some great subjects but woefully over engineered and complicated, average fit and accuracy issues with some too. My reference above was related to those manufacturers that I would, personally, rate as being equal to Zvedza in terms of quality, detail, ease of assembly and value for money and therefore up to the challenge of producing a kit to rival the Russian manufacturer. I don't see Kittyhawk doing that but I can always be proved wrong since they may have upped their game by then !.

OK.............I've read and heard enough............and now I have the added benefit of holding the kit in my hands.....direct from Russia for circa 35 Euros. I have also spent more than enough time working with and flying in Hinds to know the subject and that I like this new kit. Sure, it comes in a box that is probably 1/3 bigger than it needs to be, the fuselage could do with the odd rivet or two and one or two modellers would probably like a little bit more detail in the cockpit but, personally, I think it's a great kit and great value for money. I have little doubt that the 'usual suspects' among the aftermarket fraternity will join Quinta (who have very quick off the mark) and produce some very nice resin and photo-etched goodies in the fullness of time for those with AMS but for the rest, you can buy with confidence !. For my money, the only companies that could surpass the level of detail and overall quality of this kit would be Avantgarde, Great Wall Hobby, Kinetic or Tamiya and I doubt that any of these will tackle this subject anytime soon given that Zvedza have now released their kit. Well Done, Zvedza !

The well reported VPAF use of captured VNAF A-37 Dragonflies towards the end of the Spring Offensive would seem to bear out the notion that the VPAF did not possess offensive weapons (i.e. bombs) for their MiG-21 force. The morale sapping surprise air raid on Tan Son Nhut on or about 28 April was reportedly conducted by the A-37s and I have seen nothing in writing (so far) to indicate that indigenous VPAF air assets were used in the ground attack role against the ARVN or VNAF, except perhaps for the odd strafing pass with a cannon. Further, I would imagine it could take some time to link up a US standard piece of ordnance with the wiring mechanism of a MiG-21MF so the aforementioned photo may have been for PR/Propaganda purposes only or, indeed, related to a later operation during the skirmishes and conflicts with Vietnam's neighbours that post dates the North/South War that culminated in April 1975..

As a previous co-respondent has already stated, there is a F.24 oblique camera included in the relatively new 1:48 scale Airfix FR.XIVe kit. The slightly older Airfix Spitfire PR.XIX also contains a similar F.24 oblique camera, mounted in its frame as well as two vertical F.24 cameras. The aftermarket specialist Barracuda do a resin F.24 camera set (BCR48028) which includes one oblique F.24 and two vertical F.24 cameras which are designed for the aforementioned PR.XIX kit but can be adapted (according to the manufacturer) for use in other Airfix Spitfires that have a reconnaissance fit. The resin parts are obviously a little more refined that the original kit parts with the all-important camera lens portion (the most visible part on the completed model) being particularly nice. HTH

There are no obvious references in the Boniface book to any photos taken during the Spring 1975 offensive and a cursory check this morning suggests to me that the majority of photos were taken prior to the 1974 period. That said, there is one intriguing photograph on Page 97 of what appears to be a bare metal MiG-21MF (the aircraft code is obscured but is definitely in the 51** series) loaded with what look like US standard 250 or 500lb bombs on the wing pylons. If these are, indeed, US style bombs they were most probably acquired from the northern bases as the Viet Cong swept south in early 1975 which would date this photo around the time period.

Andre, Personally, I would although it depends what you are looking for. I bought it mainly for the photographs and the Colour Side Profiles (notwithstanding the fact that much of the captioning is plain wrong - I have enough knowledge to know what is and what isn't accurate though). Some of the photos are familiar and have been published elsewhere but I found quite a few new ones. I also found the text fascinating in parts since it provides an alternative perspective on the air war over Vietnam. Inevitably this particular aspect has not gone down well with some reviewers, particularly in the US, since they counter the US claims in certain respects. There are some obvious errors in the text but not too many to ruin it. I particularly liked the section where the author interviews some of the VPAF veterans about their experiences. I can probably dig out my original full review for you, if you PM me. If not required, then you can rely on the standard Hikoki quality publication in hardback, with nice paper and excellent photographic reproduction etc. HTH Mark

You are correct - I am familiar with the book by Istvan Toperczer and the photo to which you refer. I would also agree that the Osprey/Toperczer book and, indeed, any of Toperczer's other work on the subject of VPAF MiGs, provides much more accuracy when it comes to the research and captioning of photos and CSPs but it may not be 100% correct and I still have my 'suspicions' about the 'MiG-21MF' photo on Page 80 of the aforementioned book. The aircraft in the photo, without doubt, sports some form of camouflage on the upper surfaces and the pitot probe does appear to be offset which would likely indicate an MF variant but the angle of the photo is not absolute (i.e. head on) so it could be an illusion. I'm also concerned that there does not appear to be any clear photographic evidence anywhere else of camouflaged VPAF Mig-21MFs during the Vietnam conflict. Given both Boniface's and Toperczer's clear access to both VPAF official sources and Veterans, I find it strange that neither source can come up with any photos but like you say, I will continue in my quest to help you find one, if I can !. HTH Mark

Troy, I'm quite keen to do the Indian Air Force NH848 from the old Academy re-issue of their Spitfire FR Mk.XIVe (AC12211 Special Edition) in the overall silver (bare metal ?) colour scheme. I'm a bit cautious about the accuracy of the 'Chakra' roundels on the decal sheet....I have other versions of the Chakra from other sheets (Model Alliance, for example) and see there is quite a bit of debate about the design and colours used as outlined in the topic you kindly forwarded. It looks like clipped wings is the way forward though. Thanks again Mark Troy/Dennis, Thanks for your collective input.......Looks like I may be doing one of each at this rate !

I have only just picked up on this thread and should say right from the start that the topic is a maze to navigate through. For one reason or another I have, in recent times, conducted a fair bit of research into VPAF MiG-21 operations, particularly those during the Vietnam conflict and with an emphasis on the colour schemes and markings applied to them. As part of this research, I was also invited to complete a review of Roger Boniface's book 'MiGs over North Vietnam' for our newsletter. As has been reported elsewhere, this is an excellent book which sheds new light on a topic that had previously been dominated by evidence from one side only. There is, however, one major problem with the book and that is with regard to the captioning of quite a few of the photographs and Colour Side Profiles (CSPs), which is totally wrong !. So, the statement from one of the co-respondents above about taking CSP captioning with a quote "huge grain of salt" unquote is sound advice. The reference to 'MiG-21F' for a MiG-17 caption is pretty obvious but some of the MiG-21F-13 captions make reference to MiG-21PF, the 'MiG-21PF' profile on Page 62 is labelled at MiG-21PFM yet lacks the prominent brake parachute housing found on the latter and the same mistake is repeated on Page 94, where the profile shows a 'MiG-21PF Red '5020' sans brake parachute housing yet a photo of the same aircraft immediately above the CSP clearly shows said parachute housing. The 'MiG-21MF Red 5040' shown on Page 111 is, in fact, a MiG-21PFM with camouflage optimised for night interception duties. When checking photographs and/or profiles, a useful rule of thumb is to look at the four digit code to determine the variant but, as always, there may be anomalies. 4*** series for MiG-21F-13 & some -PFLs 50** for MiG-21PFM 61** for MiG-21PFM 51** for MiG-21MF 52** for MiG-21bis 53** for MiG-21bis To my knowledge, none of the MiG-21MF variants received camouflage during the Vietnam War but some aircraft, of all variants, may have been delivered in camouflage. There is evidence to suggest that MiG-21PFM 'Red 6122' was operated in a three tone upper surface camouflage scheme with light blue lower surfaces, having been rapidly supplied by the Soviet Air Force as an attrition replacement. It would appear that the majority of camouflaged types (both locally, such as '5040') or as described above were MiG-21PFMs, which would make sense since this was the most numerically common variant in VPAF Service during the war. As you will have seen more contemporary (i.e. Post-War) Vietnamese Air Force MiG-21s have been observed in several colour schemes including overall light grey and a three-tone camouflage scheme. The subject is further complicated by the fact that quite a few of the large variety of references associated with both kit and aftermarket decal sheets also contradict each other, particularly with regard to the presence (or otherwise) of national insignia on the upper and lower surfaces of the wings. My research so far indicates that the application of VPAF insignia to the upper and lower wing surfaces during the war was not an exact science and may have been dictated by time and local circumstances. Some aircraft probably received a full set of national insignia while others, rushed into service almost immediately after delivery, probably only received the VPAF insignia on the fuselage sides. I would recommend that constant referencing and cross-referencing through printed media and the internet will be the only way to determine whether a particular airframe received the 'full set' or not. Care should definitely be taken in making comparisons between wartime markings and those applied Post-War. With the luxury of time and, quite possibly, a legal requirement under international aviation law to properly mark combat aircraft, the Vietnamese will have set out to apply markings to the upper or lower surfaces (or both) of their aircraft but I do not imagine this was foremost in their minds when they were combating the might of the USAF, USN, USMC and US Army during the dark days of the Vietnam War. My research has not gone to waste....here is the first of my own VPAF projects Eduard 1:48 Mikoyan MiG-21PFM 'Red 5040' with LF Models decals. I have a few more VPAF MiG-21 projects pending and I hope you find the above information useful. HTH

I believe the SEAC/FEAF Spitfire XIVs were all finished in the Grey/Green (rather than Dark Green/Dark Earth) scheme. IT is also my understanding that the FR variant of the XIV was only ever fitted with one F24 camera for oblique low-level photography through the panel on the Port side of the fuselage, similar to that found on the PR.XIX. The standard panel on the starboard side was the access panel to facilitate the handling of the camera. OK........an afternote........it looks like the camera window could be swopped over since I have now seen images with the aperture on the opposite side of the fuselage....I guess the topic will require further research.

I know this topic is bordering WWII and is more like 'Post-War' (but not necessarily 'Cold War') but, in essence, I would like to know if anyone can provide reliable advice on the Spitfire FR.XIVs (or indeed Mk.XIVs) that were supplied to the Indian and Thai Air Forces in the 1940s ?. Did they all have clipped wings etc ?. I want to do the new Airfix 1/48 scale kit in one of these schemes but the aftermarket decal sheet references I have all provide conflicting information on the wing set up in particular. Thanks