Dave Fleming Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 It was originally issued by Hawk many, many years ago.................It represents a prototype David And even then does so very poorly - it has a mix of prototype and production features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 As mentioned earlier I have both Airfix and Frog Javelins, and if anything the Frog kit is slightly broader and generally fatter in the fuselage (very noticeable across the air intakes, and a similar length. The Frog kit has almost equally nice surface detail (more accurately placed panel lines in one or two places), although the vortex generators are much nicer on the Airfix, and the Frog Kit lacks any kind of interior/wheel well detail at all. The main wheel wells aren't even boxed in. I can't comment on weapons/undercarriage/ejector seats as they're all missing from my fragmentary Frog Kit! What's your opinion on which of them is more correct of the two ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Ekedahl Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 What's your opinion on which of them is more correct of the two ? At least the fuselage after the wing trailing edge and the exhausts are much more correct on the Frog kit than on the Airfix. The latter one is way to small in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FZ6 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 There is a Javelin ariticle in this months Model Aircraft Monthly which might be worth looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 this would be an interesting artical to find thanks for the info. Peter Lockhart actually cross kitted the Frog FAW9 and the Heller T3. He used the forward section of the Frog kit grafted onto the rear of the Heller kit. I think he may have retained the T3 nose cone? I reckon that the Heller/Airfix T3 could be converted into an FAW4 or 5 quite reasonably easily - (very) basically remove the forward section up to and behind the cockpit remove a section and then glue it back . You'd need to crash mould or find a suitable canopy section though and remove some plastic aft of the cockpit - and indeed lower it a bit - but I reckon its do-able..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcanicity Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 What's your opinion on which of them is more correct of the two ? My feeling is that the Airfix/Heller is closer to the mark, mainly around the intakes which are considerably fatter and more bulbous on the Frog kit. However, my plans are perhaps not entirely accurate, so it's difficult to be sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theplasticsurgeon Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Here's my Novo copy of the Frog Javelin - with Airfix markings. Don't really know about the accuracy - but I didn't like this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Sten, Vulcanicity, thanks for your input on the Frog/Airfix comparison ! I might build another Javelin one day (did a Novo one years ago), this info will be useful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris57 Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 (edited) I have peters article from SAM 4/4 but no means of copying it, or scanning it unless someone locally has the facility.sorry chris in the article peter makes reference to plans in Aviation News 2/20 and an article in SAM 1/10 Edited November 24, 2011 by chris57 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meatbox8 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 The advantage of the T.3 of course is that every squadron used them and so your choices of markings is wider but on the other hand you could still only make a T.3.If you grafted the front end of the FAW.9 onto the rest of a T.3 you could make a FAW.1/4/5 and if you altered the nose profile you could do a FAW.2/6 (American radar - shorter nose), OR, if you used the pen-nib jet-pipe fairing from the T.3, removed the centre row of vortex generators from the wings you've pretty much got a 1/4/6 (and if you alter the nose...). What the current kit isn't quite is a FAW.9 - it's a bit shallow at the back end but until somebody gets around to producing a new state of the art 1/72nd Javelin its the best horse in town. Now come on Airfix - you know you want to do a decent 1/72nd Javelin, after the 1/72nd Lightnings, Vampires, Venoms, Canberra B.2/6, Hunter T.7, Phantom FG.1/FGR.2, but before you give us the Sea Vixen, JP3/4 and loooooooooooooong before you think about the Swift! Wez Ha ha. Totally agree. Very decent of Airfix produce all those lovely aircraft in state of the art 1/72! Though I'm grateful that Heller produced a Javelin at all I have to say the T3 seems an odd choice. Even odder was that when Airfix altered the tooling they didn't keep the pen nib tailpipes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Fox Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Ha ha. Totally agree. Very decent of Airfix produce all those lovely aircraft in state of the art 1/72! Though I'm grateful that Heller produced a Javelin at all I have to say the T3 seems an odd choice. Even odder was that when Airfix altered the tooling they didn't keep the pen nib tailpipes. I think it was a cost thing, in those days Humbrol had no money. 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