chrismac60 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I'll stick with the A2Z ones thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 The Nosewheel door seems to be wrong, tucked in under the nose rather than in front of it (see pictures of real aircraft above) Selwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Jones Posted October 16, 2012 Author Share Posted October 16, 2012 The Nosewheel door seems to be wrong, tucked in under the nose rather than in front of it (see pictures of real aircraft above) Selwyn Yes, and it's the same on the photo of the A2Z model. Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Yes, and it's the same on the photo of the A2Z model. Andrew Yes your right! I had not looked at the A2Z model. Selwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali62 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Hi Guys See the pictures to this link below, re the nose wheel door, it can be positioned on the Alley Cat kit to where you want it to go to, and looks fine in this build. http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=234923209&hl=%2Balley+%2Bcat+%2Bvampire Although I must say that Chris has done an excellent job on the 4 sqn aircraft that he has just built, even though we have a small error with the tail bullet colours on the instructions which will be fixed, sorry for the error, we have the red and black the wrong way round on the instructions. I am glad I have seen these pictures of the Trumpeter kit now, as I now know that I prefer the shape and proportions of my Alley Cat kit in comparison (ok I am biased), but as always I need to respect every model that is produced. cheers Ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidelvy Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I wonder if the nose on the Trumpeter kit would look a little better if the nosewheel door had been fitted so that ithe top lay outside the fuselage and not tucked into the wheel well? I'm happy to wait until someone has the finished kit to review and hope that Trumpeter have done a good job. Everyone loves the Alley Cat kit and I am certain you get what you pay for, but I'm in the market for something at a lower price point so if Trumpeter come up with the goods I could be tempted. Mind you, they would not be the first manufacturer to have difficulty with the shape of the nose on a DeHaviland jet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Aero Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) If I had to make one comment on first impressions (on the Trumpeter one) I'd say that the tip of the nose is too high (like that of the Hobbycrap one) and too curved on the underside. The back end looks fair. That is not a 9 as there is no Air Con unit fairing on the fuselage at the intake . John Edited October 16, 2012 by John Aero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenMG Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 If I had to make one comment on first impressions (on the Trumpeter one) I'd say that the tip of the nose is too high (like that of the Hobbycrap one) and too curved on the underside. The back end looks fair. That is not a 9 as there is no Air Con unit fairing on the fuselage at the intake . John You're absolutely right John. From the photo the nose looks like the sweetheart-child of an RAF FB.5 and a Swiss, pinocchio-nosed, FB.6! The rear fuse looks a little long to me, although we only have this one photo to go on at the moment so I'll keep an open mind for now. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don McIntyre Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 It does look a bit "different" than my Hobbycraft kit… I'm not knowledgeable (or observant) enough, I guess to spot the corrections over the earlier kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Aero Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) I was being facitious about the hobbycrap one but here is the nose leg for real. The diagonal line by the way is the canopy cover forwards securing strap. John Edited October 17, 2012 by John Aero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venomvixen Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Is it me or is the front of the drop tank a bit blunt?. Theres half dozen of them hanging from the roof at the museum and I recall them being more pointy. Not that I'd ever comment on a photo of a kit cause I'd have to go to the naughty corner again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAL Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Your observation re the rather blunt end of the drop tank is spot one, Danni: http://www.focalplanes.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/62_12-Aussie-Vampire-T11-A79-667-with-scratched-Day-Glo-on-nose-S172A.jpg http://www.focalplanes.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/62_12-Vampire-T11-A79-667-S171A.jpg Cheers Roger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 This picture shows longish noses that look fairly close to what's in the plastic. What I'm concerned about is there doesn't seem to be the extended fairing on the starboard wing root which many FB.9s had to accomodate the air conditioning. Perhaps that's an alternative part and this display model wasn't built with it? Of course, not every aircraft had the fairing so it's still accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venomvixen Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Your observation re the rather blunt end of the drop tank is spot one, Danni: http://www.focalplan...-nose-S172A.jpg http://www.focalplan...9-667-S171A.jpg Cheers Roger Thought so. Still going to buy one or ten though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan B Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Not that I'd ever comment on a photo of a kit cause I'd have to go to the naughty corner again. Naughty, naughty commenting negatively on a kit before you have it! I'm sure I got pelters for that earlier in the thread but at least you waited until you had seen 3 photos of it before sticking the boot in . There is no emoticon for "tongue in cheek" comments so feel free to insert one here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venomvixen Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Making comment based on first hand experience with the component in question is not "sticking the boot in" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Aero Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) This picture shows longish noses that look fairly close to what's in the plastic. What I'm concerned about is there doesn't seem to be the extended fairing on the starboard wing root which many FB.9s had to accomodate the air conditioning. Perhaps that's an alternative part and this display model wasn't built with it? Of course, not every aircraft had the fairing so it's still accurate. It's not the length of the nose but the datum that been brought to question. I did point out the lack of the Air Con fairing in an earlier post. FB.9s were tropicalised a/c and as such were built with the air con fairing. Some FB.5's were retrofitted with the Air con unit and the new single skin canopy. If you look closely at what is obviously a restoration job you will see that the fairing is simply missing or has been omitted from the restoration. In fact it is an FB.9 which came from South Africa, ex Zimbabwe and the only FB.9's the RAAF used were RAF a/c in Malta. so it's probably been done up to represent an indiginous Mk.31 (Aussie built 5's) John Edited October 18, 2012 by John Aero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAL Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 John is correct. "A79-417" is a bogus RAAF serial and was never applied to a RAAF DHA Vampire. The Vampire in the image is one of several ex-Zimbabwe Airforce Vampires imported into to Australia by the well-known local aviation identity, Judy Pay. This particular airframe (Serial R1382) was restored at Wangaratta for the Moorabbin Air Museum (VIC) and has been painted as a RAAF F.30 complete with false serial. Australia operated one imported FB.5 (A78-3). The locally built machines were designated F.30 and FB.31. Roger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robvulcan Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 looks like a vampire enough to me. cant wait Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 For us modellers where accuracy is a bit more important than 'looks' (rivet couners rool ok!) , my impression on this kit is that the canopy and windscreen is too small and a bit too far back maybe? That could be making the nose shape look off. Its difficult assessing these faults by the photo's, but the nose shape (and tanks - and they weren't always used ) can be easily changed - the biggest issue will be the wing plan and booms! Lets hope Trumpy make a good job of it eh? Or for those of you where looks are paramount lets hope Trumpy just issue it! ;-) For us rivet bashers - Ali's kit's are superb!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Jones Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Well we won't have long to wait until it's released ,hopefully, and then we can examine the plastic and make a more informed descision, with any luck it will be better than the other 1/48 injectin moulded Vampires currently on issue. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col. Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Perhaps they made the nose longer to compensate for the latest Cyberhobby kits of stubby-nosed Seakings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger331 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Well we won't have long to wait until it's released ,hopefully, and then we can examine the plastic and make a more informed descision, with any luck it will be better than the other 1/48 injectin moulded Vampires currently on issue. Quite........I just love all these 'informed opinions' based on ONE photo of the kit mock up from a show. Of course, there will always be those that 'knock' Trumpeter regardless of how good or bad their kits are.....It's quite laughable now reading the US-based websites and forums and all the ranting about Trumpeter kits and their many apparent 'issues' months before they actually release the kit. I was hoping BM would resist the urge to follow suit. Let's just see what the final product looks like before we all launch at Trumpeter. I fully agree with the comments regarding the superb Vampires that A2zee produces and I am fortunate enough to own several of these exemplary kits....others are less fortunate than I and simply cannot afford these kits so the opportunity to acquire an injection moulded kit for less should be applauded....lest we forget, these are hard economic times for many modellers. As long as the basics are there, it should form the basis of a good replica and there does not appear to be much that a little bit of plastic fettling could put right but the proof will be in the pudding, on release. I do agree about the drop tanks though....they do look a little 'inflated'. Bottom line....let's applaud Trumpeter for, yet again, producing a kit that is unlikely to be top of any other manufacturers 'to do' list and let's think back to what they have produced (accurately or otherwise) over the last 5-10 years......no one (with the possible exception of Tamiya in recent times) always gets it right and the aviation modeling world would be a far poorer place without the likes of the 'new boys' like Trumpeter, Hobby Boss and now Great Wall Hobbies and Kittyhawk. Tiger331 Y t 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) Its taken a little more than a bit of "fettling" to correct the monstrous mistakes on the Trumpeter Lightnings!! Sorry, but I'm not applauding Trumpeter for issuing error-ridden kits! Edited October 21, 2012 by Bill Clark 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Jones Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Its taken a little more than a bit of "fettling" to correct the monstrous mistakes on the Trumpeter Lightnings!! Sorry, but I'm not applauding Trumpeter for issuing error-ridden kits! It's hardly fair to any kit maker to claim that because a previous model was flawed, that it's next release is bound to be " fatally flawed ". Let's all wait and see what this Vampire kit is like in the plastic before condemning it. Andrew 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