Airfix new 1/72 Hurricane - best Hurri of epic fail ?

[gingerbob]

Thank you, that does confirm that the dihedral was measured "on datum". Umm, do your rigging instructions say what the datum in question is? From what I've been able to find, it isn't specified in the Hurricane II manual (as published by RAF Museum).

bob

[AlCZ]

Right, in this case - when i good understand - is ditheral on kit OK ? This isn't error ?

[woody37]

No, dihedral is correct.

[stevej60]

Well as far as I am concerned Airfix can continue these new tool kits right through the back catalogue,they are never going to get it 100%,but I have to agree that

there is a tendency to over criticise everything they do from a very small minority.And the question is for £6 to £8 who is going to give us a WW2 fighter these days

apart from the mainly short run eastern European makers,Trumpeter don,t seem to be interested,as forDragon,Tamiya and Hasegawa it would be cheaper to restore

an actual aircraft!

[occa]

Right, in this case - when i good understand - is ditheral on kit OK ? This isn't error ?

Even the AZ ex Sword kits have the dihedral tho with rounded transitions ...

Airfix is even right with that, they are clean bends not rounded

[chuckb1]

IMHO its a really good value kit. What do you expect for £7.99? Its produced by a manufacturer that has / is going through a huge transition in quality and detail Its not as if it is some resin, brass limited run kit that you had to sell a kidney or your first born child on ebay to purchase.

50p worth

[AlCZ]

In small scale from mainstream- this is truth - is a little problem. Tamiya made excellent Zero-Sen series and gorgeous late production Sturmovik - but both are very expensive. HobbyBoss "sweeties" are in last time not good.Zvezda released nice Bf 109F and FW-190A-4. Eduard released in last year a Bf 110C/D/E/F/G series only (In weekend re-box for good price.)Hasegawa or Italeri didn't released any new tool "dogfighter" from WW II period in last year. I personally like a Airfix new tool kits. Price is very good, and have nice decal sheet from Cartograf. IMHO Typhoon Ib, Gladiator are very nice.(Mustang, Emil and FW-190A have a little problem with mould-flawless details) I found a pair of finished Mk. I Hurricane and i think -it's look as Hurricane. For me is important a shape accuracy (don't forget - is 21.century), sharp details and nice decals and no problem build.

[AndyL]

Don't know if this helps?

[gingerbob]

Ooh, I don't think I've seen that shot before!

bob

[Miggers]

.... I have a one rule - when you build it - a complete model must looks on first look as actual aircraft.

Boy,are you going to struggle with a lot of kits if you're THAT much of a purist then.

99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 % of kits have some

innacuracy,very few are 100 % accurate to the N'th degree.

We can all pick fault with what we percieve to an "inaccuracy",whether we're correct or not is open to

conjecture.

When a new kit of a subject I like is released,I come onto this forum to see what's being said about it.

This forum is stuffed full of experts in their particular fields who are in very good positions to give

their opinions on said kit,they maybe kit designers,they maybe engineers in the aviation industry,

hell,some of 'em are the pilots that have actually flown the type.

Something I have noticed though,the OP stated that Airfix's shiny new rag-wing Hurri was rubbish,

a load of Czech purists said so(are these the same ones that pre and post shade everything to death

because it's "artistic" rather than "realistic"???).

He also states that he thinks Revell's Hurri II series is very good(we know that's inaccurate in a few areas)

But by his last post above,he appears to have changed his tune somewhat.

It proves one thing folks,BM really is the fount of damn good information that we've always suspected it is.

Please don't think I'm a Czech basher or an Airfix lover,I'm neither.

There are some very good Czech modellers out there and as they say on the radio,other

brands of model kits are available.

Edited December 27, 2013 by Miggers

[Heraldcoupe]

Something I have noticed though,the OP stated that Airfix's shiny new rag-wing Hurri was rubbish,

In all fairness, the OP is quoting what he has read elsewhere and asking us where the truth lies.

Cheers,

Bill.

[Miggers]

In all fairness, the OP is quoting what he has read elsewhere and asking us where the truth lies.

Cheers,

Bill.

Let's hope he's learnt to come here first and ask the experts then Bill rather than go on a Czech

forum that think - to quote the OP- we're all "airfix sheeps".

[AlCZ]

Sincelery, with this pre-and after shading (riveting etc...) you have right. I'm very surprised with correctly and very ethic discussion on BM. I think for modelers in BM is scale modeling a hobby. Only hobby ! In czech when was released any kit - quickly is here a "too discussion" (mean flame war) what is bad... Often very very vulgar... You must go with stream - or you are looser I was really very surprised when i read a Sword is better and Airfix is bad (i don't know why - where is achilles hell.) But all aircrafts have typical shapes and for example - look on Bf 109E or Hurricane Mk. IIC from Academy, Bf 109F/G & Mustang I from Italeri or Bf 109G from Airfix, MiG-21 from Academy etc...- this must bash you into eyes - something is wrong ! I can't understand why we must wait for f.e. correct 1/48 Spitfire Mk. IX a twenty years ! Why Hasegawa can't made correct "nine" and Eduard yes... (Where is eduard in 1995, and where is today...) And Compare MiG-21MF from HobbyBoss (Trumpeter), Academy and Eduard - it is kit of the same type and subversion - but every look different ! Eduard is best and Academy and Chinese kit are parody on Fishbed ! When i first saw a photos of Tamiya Mk. IX - i must say: "Oh beloved God, this is truly "nine" !!!! Looks as actual Spitfire on photos from famous czech WW II photographer Ladislav Sitenský... It is here a "pointed", long nosed look - do you remember Mk. IX from Occidental (Now re-box by Italeri and in past by MpM ?) This have wrong nose part and look too bulbous and fat- it isn't a Spitfire Mk. IX ! This i mean when i wrote -Kit must looks as actual aircraft.

[Redboost]

Deleted. The use of personal insults is not welcome on BM

Edited December 29, 2013 by Greg B

[AlCZ]

I'm not troll I'm can only found where is true. I'm don't believe this new Hurricane is horrible parody... as i read on czech model forum...

[Rabbit Leader]

OK chaps... Can we finally put this one to bed now..

If you like it - buy it... if you don't - move on...

Taken from a famous line from the BoB movie ... " SILENCE .... In Polish!!" ...

Cheers... Dave (aka Daviski).

[Miggers]

Sincelery, with this pre-and after shading (riveting etc...) you have right. I'm very surprised with correctly and very ethic discussion on BM. I think for modelers in BM is scale modeling a hobby. Only hobby ! In czech when was released any kit - quickly is here a "too discussion" (mean flame war) what is bad... Often very very vulgar... You must go with stream - or you are looser I was really very surprised when i read a Sword is better and Airfix is bad (i don't know why - where is achilles hell.) But all aircrafts have typical shapes and for example - look on Bf 109E or Hurricane Mk. IIC from Academy, Bf 109F/G & Mustang I from Italeri or Bf 109G from Airfix, MiG-21 from Academy etc...- this must bash you into eyes - something is wrong ! I can't understand why we must wait for f.e. correct 1/48 Spitfire Mk. IX a twenty years ! Why Hasegawa can't made correct "nine" and Eduard yes... (Where is eduard in 1995, and where is today...) And Compare MiG-21MF from HobbyBoss (Trumpeter), Academy and Eduard - it is kit of the same type and subversion - but every look different ! Eduard is best and Academy and Chinese kit are parody on Fishbed ! When i first saw a photos of Tamiya Mk. IX - i must say: "Oh beloved God, this is truly "nine" !!!! Looks as actual Spitfire on photos from famous czech WW II photographer Ladislav Sitenský... It is here a "pointed", long nosed look - do you remember Mk. IX from Occidental (Now re-box by Italeri and in past by MpM ?) This have wrong nose part and look too bulbous and fat- it isn't a Spitfire Mk. IX ! This i mean when i wrote -Kit must looks as actual aircraft.

Thankyou my friend.

As I say come on here and ask the experts first,read through the forums,there many,many knowledgeable

people on here always willing to help and put you on the right path.

RABBIT LEADER,BREAK,BREAK !!!!!

There's a CZECH not POLISH pilot coming down on your tail right now !!!! tak-a-tak-a-takkka :lol: :lol: :lol:

[AlCZ]

And yes, i'm a bit "strange. I'm not too skilled M.M., i'm a "weekend" or "causal" modeler and when i must characterized me - i'm in first place a collector or "model geek" . But i like our hobby. When you mean i'm a "bad guy" you can ignore me. If i offened anyone- i say "Sorry". When i build Hurricane i can give in "on work" a few pictures.

[Edgar]

Never lose sight of the fact that a manufacturer is only as good as the source of their information.

We now know that Hasegawa got their IX dimensions from an outwardly impeccable-looking published source, which was flawed; Eduard came later, with access to the real thing, and a desire to ask questions from others more able to get at historical documents.

History is littered with similar "faults" (the Airfix Spitfire XII resulted from a defective drawing,) and there's no end in sight; even the 1/24 Typhoon is attracting criticism months before we see it, yet we know that Chris Thomas and Arthur Bentley are involved.

Edgar

[AlCZ]

But this is good, no ? When "public opinion" found a errors before is model relased, a producer can fix it - and final product is probably better. Last time was this way used in Zokuei-Mura He-219 and bad shaped canopy was remolded... This is for producer and for customer good... Pity that i haven't Sword Hurricane for compare with Airfix. I found Hasegawa (relative expensive) Mk. I "metal Wing". When i compared new Airfix kit with drawings in czech edition of Hurricane Aces 1939-1940 (original: Tony Holmes, Osprey 1998) is here a problem - Airfix N.T. Mk I. is too long-however 95% details on model is OK ! I don't know - was is false ? Kit of drawings ? And it is a only one drawing... But - overall shapes of fuselage looks good ! Can you compared with another drawings ?

[occa]

Edited

Edited December 28, 2013 by occa

[AlCZ]

I build it (really OOB - without color and puttying) I can say - it looks as Hurricane... I compared it with drawings in Tony Holmes "Hurricane Aces 1939-1940" (Osprey 1998) and on drawings is a bit longer (part before tail)but height of fuselage looks OK and when i may see on the details a 95% it's here... ) Fitting is relative good and it's here a pair of clever tools (you can't glue false exhausts or light, too assembely of main carriage is very comfortable... This is a "quinea pig", next Hurricane may be in color

Edited December 28, 2013 by AlCZ

[Troy Smith]

When i compared new Airfix kit with drawings in czech edition of Hurricane Aces 1939-1940 (original: Tony Holmes, Osprey 1998) is here a problem - Airfix N.T. Mk I. is too long-however 95% details on model is OK ! I don't know - was is false ? Kit of drawings ? And it is a only one drawing... But - overall shapes of fuselage looks good ! Can you compared with another drawings ?

What are regarded as THE Hurricane drawings are by Arthur Bentley. WHY?

Here's the background [from Scale Models October 1980, when originally published]

The problems in the Italeri Hurricane for example are probably the result of using Caruana drawings.

As Arthur Bentley has been credited with helping on the new 1/24th Typhoon, and I beleive the 1/48th Spitfire PRXIX, I'd be surprised that he wasn't consulted on the new Hurricane.

NOTE - his drawings do not mention or show the 5 spoke wheel.

From the sprue shots, the omission of those and a minor problem with fabric covered access hatches, the kit looks very good.

ACIZ

Oh, here's a link to a scan of the Bentley drawings of the prototype, http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234930159-172-hurricane-prototype/#entry1181311

Note, there is a side view of an early production plane for comparison as well, which you can use to check the length.

You might to want to find on the Czech forums WHAT drawings they are using!! If they are not Bentley..don't trust them!!!

HTH

T

[AlCZ]

OK, thank you. This is best reference drawings for early Hurricane, yes ?

[Troy Smith]

OK, thank you. This is best reference drawings for early Hurricane, yes ?

Best reference for any Hurricane.

As the only real changes to MkII is longer nose, deeper radiator and different armament, so different access panels, the drawings are good for most of the airframe for any Hurricane.

Drawings also have the C cannon wing shown, plus all 4 spinners fitted to UK built planes, and Sea hurricane hook, and MkI Vokes filter. There are drawings here of the longer MkII nose with trop filter and deeper radiator.

Add these to Bentley drawings and this covers most details of most variants.

the only things not covered are outer wing guns on IIB, and different access panels on IID and MkIV, [based on C wing though] and MkIV armoured radiator. Drawings of these are available.

can post links later, as these are all posted here.

T