Jump to content

New Tiger Moths and Hurricanes IIc in 1/72 by AZ model


Jan Polc

Recommended Posts

That Tiger is at least 25 years old and the later version with the separate tank was so much better. There is not one accurate line in the Airfix Tiger Moth. It was made to drawings in AFP Vol one. I cannot help hearing this news without a buzzing in my head which sounds like pantograph. I must be getting old.

John

I hope it will be an almost complete remastering! With so many Tiger Moths around and documentation readily available I can't understand how Pavla could do such a bad job. The lower wing has the same dihedral of the upper one, lacks representation of the ribs and false ribs in the leading edge of the lower wing, both wings are too thin and with incorrect airfoil, ridiculous "inspection panels" on the wings and tail surfaces, too deep nose, incorrect taper of the back of the fuselage in plan view... Apart from the nice representation of the fuel deposit I can't find many good points on the kit. - forget, it's too short... Missing other docs and pics, a scaled down Matchbox/Revell would suit me.

Don't get me wrong! AZ has one of the most interesting catalogues and I have many of their kits. Presently I'm in the middle of a Trener Master, and I'll get the new Moranes as well. I only wish a correct Tiger Moth, not only one more Tiger Moth.

Carlos

Edited by John Aero
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter,

Any word on when the Pilatus PC-9 in 1/48 scale will be released?

Regards,

Joe

quote name='Peter AZmodel/Admiral' date='Mar 7 2012, 04:29 PM' post='983920']

For Occa: Thank you very much for drawing attention to an error with the cone of Hurricane LK-A. We will promptly correct. Great thank you.

The GO Modeling in Vienna this weekend we will stand with our sales AZmodel / Admiral / Legato

. We present news and Gotha GV and Heinkel He-70 in 1/48.

Very glad to welcome you and personally greet.

To: Paul J: Yes, I know about a problem with Hurricane Mk.1 of our old products. This model is a repackaged old model from Sword and today it is this quality is inadequate. Sending an apology for the problems with sticking.

The new wing will Mk.1 fabric of our brand new kits and hopefully without any problems.

To John Thompson.: Maybe you soon. We are considering in the future Jak-1b in 1/72. Already preparing documentation. But wait, it us slowly.

For Carlos. DH-82A, while the base is made ​​of Paul, but it really will be completely redesigned as we did with Ki-30 Ann. When the master is ready, we show here photo.

Cessna Models 150, 152, 180 and 185 are close to completion of the master. I ask John Polc, here next week to show photo masters.

The sale of these models should be about halfway through this year.

Peter AZ

www.azmodel.cz

www.modelarovo.cz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are pictures of Hurricane Mk. IIc parts...

hurriiic_vylisky2.jpg

hurriiic_vylisky.jpg

For: Occa. Yes, I know the differences, thank you very much for the warning. Believe that we will be trying not to make unnecessary mistakes as other manufacturers. We process all documentation for the whole family Hurricane and cheer whether we will succeed.

Apology to all for my English, it translates the PC.

Musician Peter AZ

Co-incidentally I just posted this on the thread regarding the Italeri VS Hasegawa 1/48th kits. From the sprue pics it looks like you have made the same removable fabric panel error that Hasegawa made [and has then been copied on...]

...I'm going to quote myself.

apart from the ridiculous removeable fabric fuselage panels which are bloody awful and are right pain to correct. THis is on top of the underside fabric break, and IMHO a bigger eyesore.

Everyone knows about the break in the underfuselage fabric, at least you usually can't see that. Since this blodyy eyesore does not get the promimence it deserves, here's what I mean.

The first fabric covered access panel is bigger pain, [and the 2 on the starboard side....] well shown here

Hurricane_Mk1_build08.jpg

compare, note the Hase kit has 'bands' at the edges of the panel and where it joins the rear fuselage. The real thing does not, the line of the stringers are unbroken.

Also gives you a good idea about the Hase fabric representation. And there should not be a panel line behind the cockpit, this is a strip of fabric reinforcement, where the fabric covered plywood 'dog kennel' ends and the stringers begin. Annoyingly Classic Airframes also copies this error. Not an easy fix.

lewis3.jpg

lewis1.jpg

and a restored one. Very carefully restored by Hawker Restorations.

7.jpg

I hope this is of use.

T

Edited by Troy Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all, there are new British subjects by AZ model from Czech Republic, DH-82A Tiger Moth in two boxes . British and international service. Base is the Pavla kit, but fully remastered and with new decals...

in_raf1-700x475.jpg

As I pointed out in the Malta group build therad to deafing silence.....I see again repeated mistakes... eg OK-2 is a IIC etc....like the diecast

aa35502hurricane.jpg

I have seen a pic of Park's Malta Hurricane online somewhere. ....quick google...

here.http://rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=Modelling&thread=6667&page=2#52470

OK2NormanFranks0001.jpg

This is an IWM photograph copied from Norman Franks excellent book 'Hurricane at War:2'

Which I doubt is a IIc as I cannot see cannon bulges and you can just see the shape of the gun bay panel, what vaguely look like an arrow on the wing where the gun bay is...[cannon armed regtangular panel, machine gun, trapezoidal panel]

I better copy of the photo would probably reveal more. Ask the IWM. No visible serial either.

I'd suggest he had a IIA, as this was an 8 gun plane, they were supplied to Malta and the cannons made the IIC sluggish, the IIA having the same armament as the MkI but with the more powerful Merlin XX.

if you were the boss why have a sluggish 4 cannon dumptruck when you could have the zip of the 8gun IIA? [the fastest Hurricane? should be]

Regarding colours, also note different 2nd engine panel, presumably a replacement, and a dulled down roundel, or just the entire centre as red? No white visible.

Also some kind of rack underwing.

You can just his white flight helmet too.

HTH

T

PS - why has MW367 got black lower rear fuselage? Is there picture showing this?

The only pic I have seen of Air Despatch Letter Service Hurricane is of MW339, later i 1944 so minus AEAF stripes, but without cannon. Another point to check.

Edited by Troy Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw the spinner of the IIc night Fighter coded LK-A should be yellow not red, the same mistake has been done on every earlier release from all other manufacturers.

How I know this?

There is a color photo of that aircraft on page 62 in Freeman's The R. A. F. of WW 2 in Color.

Occa,

this one ? BE500, LK-A of 87 sq? The spinner is NOT yellow, compare to the fuselage roundel outer ring which is yellow. Spinner looks to be dull red,which is orangey-red. compare with roundel centre spot. May even be Orange, but that's not a RAF colour. Other's here may know more.

There is a B/W pic of BE500 which clearly shows a bright roundel yellow and a dark spinner.

Hurricane_IIC_87_Sqn_RAF_in_flight_1942.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

… Believe that we will be trying not to make unnecessary mistakes as other manufacturers.

Musician Peter AZ

Dear Peter,

I hope that you mean that there have been dramatic improvements in the respect for accuracy after the terrible hash that AZ made of the SAAB J 29 in 1:48. And your Pitts in 1:48 is simply too awful even to consider starting to correct – it would amount to a virtual scratch build. Just a few samples: the airfoil isn't symmetric and the interplane struts bear no likness whatsoever to the original.

I'm sorry for the harsh comments but they are accurate (unlike the kits) and my respect for AZ is close to zero after those two bungled opportunities. In your place, I'd be a wee bit careful with accusing "other manufacturers" of "unneccessary mistakes". ;-)

I do hope that you will make a creditable DH 82 – the world needs a good Tiger Moth in 1:72 and also in 1:48, for that matter.

Kind regards,

Joachim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When is the substantial correction kit for the 1/48 Vengeance coming out!

That's the one that corrects all the faults.

Don't get me wrong - Danni and I have stood up for this kit against dumb and ill-informed criticism but we'd like to see another go at it!

I have to agree with JohnAero - comparing the Airfix Tiger Moth to a real one makes you laugh. The Aeroclub one is old but still better than any other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to hear the Hurricanes will be better tooled. I have a built Pavla DH82 and it wasn't bad but still a lot, lot better than any other like the Airfix one! Look forward to seeing these very much. And what about the Chipmunks?

Paul, the Chipmunks are working now. Will probably be on sale in May. While we show pictures and camo. Thank you for your interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I pointed out in the Malta group build therad to deafing silence.....I see again repeated mistakes... eg OK-2 is a IIC etc....like the diecast

aa35502hurricane.jpg

I have seen a pic of Park's Malta Hurricane online somewhere. ....quick google...

here.http://rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=Modelling&thread=6667&page=2#52470

OK2NormanFranks0001.jpg

Which I doubt is a IIc as I cannot see cannon bulges and you can just see the shape of the gun bay panel, what vaguely look like an arrow on the wing where the gun bay is...[cannon armed regtangular panel, machine gun, trapezoidal panel]

I better copy of the photo would probably reveal more. Ask the IWM. No visible serial either.

I'd suggest he had a IIA, as this was an 8 gun plane, they were supplied to Malta and the cannons made the IIC sluggish, the IIA having the same armament as the MkI but with the more powerful Merlin XX.

if you were the boss why have a sluggish 4 cannon dumptruck when you could have the zip of the 8gun IIA? [the fastest Hurricane? should be]

Regarding colours, also note different 2nd engine panel, presumably a replacement, and a dulled down roundel, or just the entire centre as red? No white visible.

Also some kind of rack underwing.

You can just his white flight helmet too.

HTH

T

PS - why has MW367 got black lower rear fuselage? Is there picture showing this?

The only pic I have seen of Air Despatch Letter Service Hurricane is of MW339, later i 1944 so minus AEAF stripes, but without cannon. Another point to check.

Dear Troy, thank you for the photo OK-2. I really do not see a gun bulge. I also agree that it be Mk.IIa.

We now revise the camo and exchanged for another.

The LK-A I viewed by photo, and I think that to be really red cone.

I have all those who try to help us with the preparation of new models to thank.

These discussions reveal many things and errors.

Furthermore, the canvas on removable covers is really all over. I assume the hull for the IIc from our IV.

Already this error to be there and I reveal it.

I try to remake this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I pointed out in the Malta group build therad to deafing silence.....I see again repeated mistakes... eg OK-2 is a IIC etc....like the diecast

aa35502hurricane.jpg

I have seen a pic of Park's Malta Hurricane online somewhere. ....quick google...

here.http://rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=Modelling&thread=6667&page=2#52470

OK2NormanFranks0001.jpg

Which I doubt is a IIc as I cannot see cannon bulges and you can just see the shape of the gun bay panel, what vaguely look like an arrow on the wing where the gun bay is...[cannon armed regtangular panel, machine gun, trapezoidal panel]

I better copy of the photo would probably reveal more. Ask the IWM. No visible serial either.

I'd suggest he had a IIA, as this was an 8 gun plane, they were supplied to Malta and the cannons made the IIC sluggish, the IIA having the same armament as the MkI but with the more powerful Merlin XX.

if you were the boss why have a sluggish 4 cannon dumptruck when you could have the zip of the 8gun IIA? [the fastest Hurricane? should be]

Regarding colours, also note different 2nd engine panel, presumably a replacement, and a dulled down roundel, or just the entire centre as red? No white visible.

Also some kind of rack underwing.

You can just his white flight helmet too.

HTH

T

PS - why has MW367 got black lower rear fuselage? Is there picture showing this?

The only pic I have seen of Air Despatch Letter Service Hurricane is of MW339, later i 1944 so minus AEAF stripes, but without cannon. Another point to check.

Dear Troy, thank you for the photo OK-2. I really do not see a gun bulge. I also agree that it be Mk.IIa.

We now revise the camo and exchanged for another.

The LK-A I viewed by photo, and I think that to be really red cone.

I have all those who try to help us with the preparation of new models to thank.

These discussions reveal many things and errors.

Furthermore, the canvas on removable covers is really all over. I assume the hull for the IIc from our IV.

Already this error to be there and I reveal it.

I try to remake this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the schemes for the Hurricane IIc: will there be an exhaust glare shield supplied in the kit- the night fighters JX-E and LK-A would have had them? Not that this is too much of a problem if they are not included, as a couple of pieces of thin plastic card will be just as good.

For Ben M:

Yes, these labels are in the content. Kit also contains both types of barrel. Greetings.

Peter AZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to the Tiger Moth, if you are reworking the Pavla kit, PLEASE remove the "inspection rings" on the wings!!! They do not appear on very many. I have not seen them anywhere before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Masterfully ignoring posts about the J29 and Vengeance!

To: Ed Russell. Dear Ed, I do not ignore, I fail to write through the translator.

Yes, I know that these sets have some problems. I do not want to talk, we give these kits under the brand, and we have AZmodel

for this responsibility.

I just want to write that these models ... J-29, Vengeance, Spiteful (CMR), Pitts (CMR), Bucker 181 were produced externally for our company, and these models are not really the first quality.

New models of PC-9, SA Bulldog, Orao, Spitfire VIII and others are working in our AZmodel and I think that the quality really be better.

We now handle even the old masters and now we have more control of work delivered.

Greetings.

Peter AZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to the Tiger Moth, if you are reworking the Pavla kit, PLEASE remove the "inspection rings" on the wings!!! They do not appear on very many. I have not seen them anywhere before.

I don't know if it's a Canadian thing or only related to modern restorations - I tend to think the latter.

tigermoth_ph1.jpg

In any case they are hardly noticed in the real aircraft... contrary to the kit.

I would like to thank Peter and Jan Polc for sharing the photos and for discussing the problems with us. Unlike the Let L-200 (also in my builds list) the Hurricane and the Tiger Moth are very popular subjects and you may be sure that every mm2 will be scrutinized by legions of modelers with knowledge of the subjects.

Edited by CarLos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Are you really surprised? B.) He has just arrived on the forum giving access to master shots and future releases and you C) have had a go at his older products, I'd probably ignore it too.

a) No

B) Past performance is a legitimate guide to furure quality

c) As someone who 1. Supplied information on the Vengeance to A-Z, 2. Retailed A-Z products 3. Deflected some of the less informed criticism of his products I reckon I have the right to comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Occa,

this one ? BE500, LK-A of 87 sq? The spinner is NOT yellow, compare to the fuselage roundel outer ring which is yellow. Spinner looks to be dull red,which is orangey-red. compare with roundel centre spot. May even be Orange, but that's not a RAF colour. Other's here may know more.

There is a B/W pic of BE500 which clearly shows a bright roundel yellow and a dark spinner.

Hurricane_IIC_87_Sqn_RAF_in_flight_1942.jpg

Thanks for pointing to this Troy

I think it's a darker (orange) yellow indeed, it looks different from the roundel yellow to me too but if I compare it with the fin flash it's certainly not roundel red.

It's somewhere in between the red and the yellow ...

Now back to the test shots of the Hurricane, what is obvious is that fabric effect on the fuselage doesn't look like it is depicted there, it doesn't sag into the frame in that rounded fashion.

I think Airfix has showed how it should look on their Swordfish fuselage and the photos some folks posted here show that too.

The fabric just makes flat individual planes between the stringers with the latter having fairly sharp edges.

That is my only gripe with the parts so far ... the nose contours for example appear very good to me, one has to wait to see it in real tho to be sure.

Edited by occa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a darker (orange) yellow indeed, it looks different from the roundel yellow to me too but if I compare it with the fin flash it's certainly not roundel red.

It's somewhere in between the red and the yellow ...

One should never trust the WWII period (and even contemporary!) photos in relation to the exact shade of the colours. Definitely! Depiction of colour on the colour photo depends on light, photographic material used, processing and also colour filters used by the photographer.

Also many of the WWII "colour" photos are in fact black&white, later coloured ones - and so the colour representation is debatable.

About the spinner on this particular photo we may say that it is most probably in the same colour, as inner disc (probably red) in the fuselage roundel and different colour that outer ring (probably yellow) of that roundel. Fin flash is rather in shadow (compare black surface on the fin and rudder with those on the rest of the fuselage).

Edited by GrzeM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One should never trust the WWII period (and even contemporary!) photos in relation to the exact shade of the colours. Definitely! Depiction of colour on the colour photo depends on light, photographic material used, processing and also colour filters used by the photographer.

Also many of the WWII "colour" photos are in fact black&white, later coloured ones - and so the colour representation is debatable.

About the spinner on this particular photo we may say that it is most probably in the same colour, as inner disc (probably red) in the fuselage roundel and different colour that outer ring (probably yellow) of that roundel. Fin flash is rather in shadow (compare black surface on the fin and rudder with those on the rest of the fuselage).

To me the red dot in the roundel and the red stripe of the fin flash are clearly of the same color, the spinner certainly is not ...

The leading edge area of the fin is as light as the fuselage side on the height of the roundel.

Everyone can paint it as they wish tho, I'll stick to a dark 'orangish' yellow ... unless it turns out the photo is colorized and someone has other evidence

Edited by occa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...