Jump to content

Airfix new tool Spitfires


RichofSmith

Recommended Posts

Hi, could anyone tell me which spitfires from Airfix are the new tooling?

Also which manufacturers are best for each of the marks?

Many thanks.

Rich.

New tool

1:72

1a

1a/IIa (also does a Va from the box)

IX (lousy cockpit, otherwise good)

XIX

22

1:48

XII

XIX

22/24 & Seafire 46/47 (90's tooling, very, very good so I'm putting it in this column despit it not actually being new)

Seafire XVII

Old tool but available:

1/72:

Vb (excellent shape, lousy cockpit, very fine raised panel lines)

1/48:

1a (similar to the 22/24 & 46/47 in age, good kit but not awesome like the 22/24. Well worth buying)

Vc/Seafire III (Has the old Vb in the box, includes extra sprues which are a Vc/Seafire III conversion, can do a Seafire II as well. Vb bits are good but have raised panel lines, new bits are good in shape but need a lot of TLC to produce something good due to thick trailing edges & semi-crude detail. Dropped flaps which are a PITA)

IX (pretty comparable to the new bits in the Vc kit, pretty decent shape but lots of TLC needed to produce something good looking. Dropped flaps).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget the XVI they did in 1/48th for the Airfix Club kit.

Not brilliant,but can be worked on.

Not as good as the ICM XVI,but easier to build.

Low-back fuselage in that one? Never seen it but I'd assume it's at most a new fuselage plus the rest of the IX kit. Definitely not an easier build than the ICM, since all the build issues with Airfix's IX are in the wing (thinning the trailing edges, getting those flaps to even vaguely fit). Overall I consider it about the same or slightly behind the ICM XVI in terms of buildability and the ICM is definitely less work for a good looking build.

The 1/48 IX is marketed as an IX/XVI and is buildable that way as it has both the early IX cowl and the late IX/XVI cowl top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Low-back fuselage in that one? Never seen it but I'd assume it's at most a new fuselage plus the rest of the IX kit. Definitely not an easier build than the ICM, since all the build issues with Airfix's IX are in the wing (thinning the trailing edges, getting those flaps to even vaguely fit). Overall I consider it about the same or slightly behind the ICM XVI in terms of buildability and the ICM is definitely less work for a good looking build.

The 1/48 IX is marketed as an IX/XVI and is buildable that way as it has both the early IX cowl and the late IX/XVI cowl top.

This one Adam:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/MODEL-KIT-SPITFIRE-MKXVLE-CLUB-EDITION-BY-AIRFIX-1-48-/111153003119

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Low-back fuselage in that one? Never seen it but I'd assume it's at most a new fuselage plus the rest of the IX kit.

The 1/48 IX is marketed as an IX/XVI and is buildable that way as it has both the early IX cowl and the late IX/XVI cowl top.

I've built both the club XVIe and the standard edition IX / XVIe kits and yes they are the same tooling with more or less the same instructions barring the shape of the fuselage and the cockpit shape.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, all,

In 48th scale:

The 22/24 // Seafire 46/47 are very good kits, worth buying. They need interior, canopy and some small detail.

The new ones:

- The Mk. I/IIa/Va are good kits. They are VERY crude on details (a lot of which shares with the IX), but in some key aspects, the most accurate of the single-stage Merlins. Worth buying. Needs interior and possibly canopy hood to display open. And a lot of work.

- The Mk. IX family: VERY crude overall. There are MUCH better options.

- The Mk. XIX: a very good kit. Definitely worth buying. Needs interior.

FErnando

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, all,

In 48th scale:

The 22/24 // Seafire 46/47 are very good kits, worth buying. They need interior, canopy and some small detail.

The new ones:

- The Mk. I/IIa/Va are good kits. They are VERY crude on details (a lot of which shares with the IX), but in some key aspects, the most accurate of the single-stage Merlins. Worth buying. Needs interior and possibly canopy hood to display open. And a lot of work.

- The Mk. IX family: VERY crude overall. There are MUCH better options.

- The Mk. XIX: a very good kit. Definitely worth buying. Needs interior.

FErnando

Why does the Mk. XIX need an interior? Is there an accuracy problem with the kit one? Nothing wrong with it detail wise especially if you're closing the canopy, if you want the canopy open it doesn't need much extra work to make it look very nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does the Mk. XIX need an interior? Is there an accuracy problem with the kit one? Nothing wrong with it detail wise especially if you're closing the canopy, if you want the canopy open it doesn't need much extra work to make it look very nice.

Hi, Tbolt,

It needs an interior (some scratchbuilt detail will do, but some PE or resin would be better) because what you have, though essentially correct, is not nearly enough or detailed enough. Of course, if you are to keep the hood closed, it will be much less noticeable, and, if you paint the clear parts in Black, much less! But setting aside the irony, and going to the detail, let's see:

- The sidewall detail lacks definition.

- The multiple electrical panel on the left sidewall is missing (it is represented by a barely visible relief) That's where the camera controls are, and a focal point in the cockpit.

- The instrument panel is "old style", and you are not offered even a decal with the instruments.

- The throttle cuadrant is very toylike, like a leftover from the Mk.IX;

- The "lower only bulkhead" is a bad idea;

- The rudder pedals are just slabs of plastic (again, like the Mk.IX and I). Even the infamous Academy Spit XIV has proper "staircase" pedals, and Tamiya kits have them (though incorrectly shaped) for 20 years now.

- The head armour is molded into the headrest. I bet many post war examples have it removed, and both decal options are post-war machines; similarly, the way the backrest armour is designed makes it integral to the seat/bulkhead assembly, requiring some ingenuity to glue the seat without the armor if need be.

- The undercarriage retraction quadrant is as toylike as the throttle (that is very common in Spit kits)

- There is no "floor" under the hollow footrests (Hasegawa kits have resolved this brilliantly).

- The trim wheel is missing, as is the small one to its back, and I am sure many other small fittings are missing also.

- The seat bulkhead is solid, you have to perforate many strenghtening holes.

- The seat itself is very good!

Well, that's it. Don't think you cannot see much inside the open cockpit, even without a side door. You only have to peep inside!

FErnando

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Tbolt,

It needs an interior (some scratchbuilt detail will do, but some PE or resin would be better) because what you have, though essentially correct, is not nearly enough or detailed enough. Of course, if you are to keep the hood closed, it will be much less noticeable, and, if you paint the clear parts in Black, much less! But setting aside the irony, and going to the detail, let's see:

- The sidewall detail lacks definition.

- The multiple electrical panel on the left sidewall is missing (it is represented by a barely visible relief) That's where the camera controls are, and a focal point in the cockpit.

- The instrument panel is "old style", and you are not offered even a decal with the instruments.

- The throttle cuadrant is very toylike, like a leftover from the Mk.IX;

- The "lower only bulkhead" is a bad idea;

- The rudder pedals are just slabs of plastic (again, like the Mk.IX and I). Even the infamous Academy Spit XIV has proper "staircase" pedals, and Tamiya kits have them (though incorrectly shaped) for 20 years now.

- The head armour is molded into the headrest. I bet many post war examples have it removed, and both decal options are post-war machines; similarly, the way the backrest armour is designed makes it integral to the seat/bulkhead assembly, requiring some ingenuity to glue the seat without the armor if need be.

- The undercarriage retraction quadrant is as toylike as the throttle (that is very common in Spit kits)

- There is no "floor" under the hollow footrests (Hasegawa kits have resolved this brilliantly).

- The trim wheel is missing, as is the small one to its back, and I am sure many other small fittings are missing also.

- The seat bulkhead is solid, you have to perforate many strenghtening holes.

- The seat itself is very good!

Well, that's it. Don't think you cannot see much inside the open cockpit, even without a side door. You only have to peep inside!

FErnando

Thanks, I haven't looked into it accuracy wise yet which is why I asked the question ( got some other Spits to build first), but I will take these points into consideration.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I added the Pavla set to my XIX and it is a quantum leap in terms of detail when compared to the Airfix supplied parts. Admittedly, it was my first shot with resin and I do have fists of ham at the best of times....but it turned out pretty damned well IMHO :yahoo: I now wish I had added the Pavla camera set to that order :banghead:

DC

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...