BAe Hawk T.1 Red Arrows - 1:72 Revell

[Paul A H]

BAe Hawk T.1 Red Arrows

1:72 Revell

When the RAF began the search for a new fast jet trainer to replace the Folland Gnat, it was originally intended that the role would be fulfilled by the SEPECAT Jaguar. However, the advanced capabilities demanded of the new Anglo-French aircraft meant that it became too complex for use as a trainer As a result, Hawker Siddley Aviation began work on a private venture known as the P.1182. The design team of Gordon Hudson, Gordon Hodson and Ralph Hooper produced a relatively simple, subsonic aircraft with a number of clever features. The fuselage is designed around a large, tandem cockpit, which features a significant difference in height between the seat for student in the front and that for the instructor in the back. This affords the instructor a much better view than in the Gnat. The wings featured double-slotted flaps which gives the Hawk excellent low-speed handling characteristics.

The first of the 176 Hawks ordered by the RAF entered service in 1976, designated the Hawk T.1. 88 T.1s were modified to T.1A standard, which allowed them to carry two AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles for use in the emergency air defence role. The Hawks reputation as an excellent aeroplane has been confirmed by the considerable success it has enjoyed in the export market. Users include the air forces of Australia, Canada, Finland, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates amongst others. A highly modified carrier capable version is in service with the United States Navy, where it is known as the T-45 Goshawk. The most famous role occupied by the Hawk, however, is as the mount of the world-renowned Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team the Red Arrows.

We're not exactly short of kits of the Hawk, and it's easy to see why the diminutive British jet is such an attractive subject for model kit manufacturers. As the chosen mount of one of the world's foremost aerobatic display teams, the Hawk will always be a popular choice amongst the model buying public. Revell's new kit arrives packed into their new style end-opening box and comprises seventy parts spread across three sprues of coloured plastic and a single small clear sprue. Somewhat inevitably, this particular edition is moulded from bright red plastic. While this might be an annoyance for the po-faced, it does lend proceedings a sense of fun. The plastic parts themselves are beautifully moulded and engraved details are fine, crisp and clean. The overall shape looks promising on the sprue, and from what I can tell this kit should be free from any serious shape errors.

In line with the usual model building clichés, construction starts with the cockpit. This prominent feature is made up of a large tandem tub, instrument panels and coamings, control columns and bulkheads. The ejection seats are each made up of three parts and look very good indeed, both in terms of detail and shape. Unlike its rival from Airfix, the cockpit is fully detailed, with instruments and controls picked out on both instrument panels and all of the side consoles. Decals are also provided, but I would be hesitant to cover up all of that lovely detail.

Airfix have provided decals to represent details on the instrument panels and side consoles, as the plastic parts lack any raised detail. Once complete, the whole sub-assembly can be sandwiched between the fuselage halves, along with the jet exhaust pipe, fin fillet and airbrake bay interior (the airbrake itself can be fitted in either the open or closed position).

The wing is moulded as a single lower span with separate port and starboard upper wings. Ailerons are moulded in place, and there are quite chunky sprue attachment points on the leading edges of the wing (and the horizontal tail surfaces too). These shouldn't cause any problems for most modellers , but care will need to be taken when removing these parts from the sprue. The undercarriage occupies six stages of the construction process and is very finely detailed indeed. The gear doors are moulded as solid pieces in order to make the wheels-up configuration a little easier to build, so they must be cut up along the moulded score lines in order to finish the model as it would appear on the ground. The cockpit canopy has been moulded in two pieces, so it can be finished in either the open or closed position. The smaller parts such as the blade aerials are very fine indeed. The parts specific to the Red Arrows variant are all included on one sprue and include a nicely moulded under-fuselage smoke pod, as well as the smoke injectors for the jet exhaust.

As you might have expected, the decal sheet allows you to build a Red Arrows Hawk or more specifically a range of Red Arrows Hawks. The decals are extremely clear and crisp and judging by the serial number on the sheet were printed for Revell by Cartograf.

Conclusion

While there are a few Hawks available in this scale, in my view Revell's effort has surpassed the models already on the market, making it the go-to option for those wishing to build a model of the type. Hopefully a further boxing with extra parts to make some non-Red Arrows versions will follow in a year or two's time. In the meantime, let's enjoy this well-detailed little kit for what it is and build some Hawks! Recommended.

Revell model kits are available from all good toy and model retailers. For further information visit or

[charlie_c67]

May have missed it but is there a pilot provided?

[modelldoc]

Since some years, Revell has no longer pilots in there kits.

modelldoc

[rs2man]

I picked one up the other day . It looks a nice-enough kit though it seems to have only the early short fin fillet supplied , which is inappropriate for a current aircraft . In the 1/32 kit they told you to fit the early one , but at least in that they gave you both alternatives .

[HOUSTON]

Great review.

Thank you.

[Dave Fleming]

I picked one up the other day . It looks a nice-enough kit though it seems to have only the early short fin fillet supplied , which is inappropriate for a current aircraft . In the 1/32 kit they told you to fit the early one , but at least in that they gave you both alternatives .

It's not just the fillet, it's the whole shape of the upper back end of the fuselage. The early ones had a curving slope on the upper rear fuselage, later ones had a straight line and a larger area above the jet pipe. In contrast, the seats are the late (Current) style, so you'd need aftermarket early seats to do an early aircraft.

So the options are (i) ignore it (ii) amend the upper rear fuselage to correct for a current aircraft as per the box or (iii) source early seats and decals to do a pre-81 aircraft

Edited January 6, 2016 by Dave Fleming

[Giorgio N]

The rear fuselage error is annoying but even with this I'd say that this kit is now the one to use to build a 1/72 Hawk model. The detail is so much better than the Airfix and Italeri kits and finally someone seems to have made instrument panels and coamings of the right shape. As soon as my usual dealers get their first shippings I'll buy a couple

[Julien]

It is a shame they did not fix the tail issues, was this not also an issue with their 1.32 kit?

[Seahawk]

So the options are (i) ignore it (ii) amend the upper rear fuselage to correct for a current aircraft as per the box or (iii) source early seats and decals to do a pre-81 aircraft

I don't suppose you would have handy any comparative before and after upper rear fuselage photos for those of us reluctant to ignore the difference?

[Harry Lime]

It is a shame they did not fix the tail issues, was this not also an issue with their 1.32 kit?

Yes.

[Dave Fleming]

I don't suppose you would have handy any comparative before and after upper rear fuselage photos for those of us reluctant to ignore the difference?

I have, see if I can find it - there are actually 3 styles

This is the early style, note the short fin fillet and the curved shape to the upper fuselage - this is what Revell have modelled. For Red Arrows aircraft, this changed in 1981

http://www.abpic.co.uk/popup.php?q=1075284

http://www.abpic.co.uk/popup.php?q=1391275

Stil around in 1983 on some:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/49492308@N08/7949017786/

This shot shows the post-early 80s style - note the line of the upper fusleage is straight, and there is quite a large vertical area at the rear

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/uncletommo/Beemer328I/Beemer328I/Hawktails.jpg

At a later date, a panel was added at the back - trying to find out what for!

http://data6.primeportal.net/hangar/jean_thomas_rembert/hawk_t1a_xx335/images/hawk_t1a_xx335_26_of_40.jpg

Edited January 8, 2016 by Dave Fleming

[Seahawk]

Many thanks. That nails it for me.

[AaCee26]

I have, see if I can find it - there are actually 3 styles

This is the early style, note the short fin fillet and the curved shape to the upper fuselage - this is what Revell have modelled. For Red Arrows aircraft, this changed in 1981

http://www.abpic.co.uk/popup.php?q=1075284

http://www.abpic.co.uk/popup.php?q=1391275

Stil around in 1983 on some:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/49492308@N08/7949017786/

This shot shows the post-early 80s style - note the line of the upper fusleage is straight, and there is quite a large vertical area at the rear

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/uncletommo/Beemer328I/Beemer328I/Hawktails.jpg

At a later date, a panel was added at the back - trying to find out what for!

http://data6.primeportal.net/hangar/jean_thomas_rembert/hawk_t1a_xx335/images/hawk_t1a_xx335_26_of_40.jpg

Hello all,

In addition to that since the beginning export Hawks had taller and slightly longer rear part of the fuselage. IIRC some operator had a break shute there.

http://www.aeroaustraliamag.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/HawkMk66pari.jpg

A couple of other issue with the kit are too short intakes after the canopy. Maybe because of wrong panel line around the back of the fuselage? And there are also too curvy wing tips as seen here in msg #864 and confirmed from photos: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234978355-a-pair-of-airfix-hawks-in-172/page-44

IMHO Revell is still winner in the overall quality of the kit Airfix having an edge in accuracy. But getting it into same level of detailing would need so much more work than correcting the Revell at least on my book.

Cheers,

AaCee

[Fifer54]

I'm just finishing a Revell 1/32 "Red Arrows" Hawk, and looking at the sprue shots above, this is very much a scale-down of that kit. Bit like their 1/32, 1/72 and 1/144 Tonkas, really . . .

[Paul J]

Well at least the main undercarriage doors are the right size and shape compared to the Airfix retool! For me that is a winner. Not too bothered about the fillet issues.

[Dave Fleming]

Hello all,

In addition to that since the beginning export Hawks had taller and slightly longer rear part of the fuselage. IIRC some operator had a break shute there.

http://www.aeroaustraliamag.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/HawkMk66pari.jpg

That one is carried on some RAF aircraft as well (Red Arrows non-smoking 'tin ships' for example)

[Plastic Bonsai]

I agree this is the best in 1/72 and I picked mine up for the same price as the AIrfix one so no contest.

It has the same issues as the 1/32 model and still no drooped flap option which hopefully someone will be remedying shortly.

The extended tail shape changes on the export models were to accommodate brake chutes in the main but it also cured a problem with the aircraft wanting to go sideways at 0.8 Mach. The abrupt curtailing of the fuselage causes asymmetric vortex shedding for the slightest imperfection which interacts with the fin and makes the aircraft act as though the pilot has put in rudder inputs. I wasn't aware that the RAF machines were modified for this though I daresay the Red Arrows would try and improve this area as they were adding the smoke modifications anyway.

Hopefully Revell will follow this up with a general service TMk1 with both inner and outer pylons and drop tanks, the latter 2 are not fitted to RAF machines but are useful for export versions.

[Giorgio N]

Hello all,

In addition to that since the beginning export Hawks had taller and slightly longer rear part of the fuselage. IIRC some operator had a break shute there.

http://www.aeroaustraliamag.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/HawkMk66pari.jpg

A couple of other issue with the kit are too short intakes after the canopy. Maybe because of wrong panel line around the back of the fuselage? And there are also too curvy wing tips as seen here in msg #864 and confirmed from photos: http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234978355-a-pair-of-airfix-hawks-in-172/page-44

IMHO Revell is still winner in the overall quality of the kit Airfix having an edge in accuracy. But getting it into same level of detailing would need so much more work than correcting the Revell at least on my book.

Cheers,

AaCee

Great picture of the Mk.66s that Finland bought from Switzerland ! An interesting touch is that the original multilingual Swiss stencils are still present

[Dave Fleming]

The extended tail shape changes on the export models were to accommodate brake chutes in the main but it also cured a problem with the aircraft wanting to go sideways at 0.8 Mach. The abrupt curtailing of the fuselage causes asymmetric vortex shedding for the slightest imperfection which interacts with the fin and makes the aircraft act as though the pilot has put in rudder inputs. I wasn't aware that the RAF machines were modified for this though I daresay the Red Arrows would try and improve this area as they were adding the smoke modifications anyway.

The amended upper rear fuselage was added after the smoke installations - early RA aircraft had the early style fuselage and the three smoke pipes

[AaCee26]

I agree this is the best in 1/72 and I picked mine up for the same price as the AIrfix one so no contest.

It has the same issues as the 1/32 model and still no drooped flap option which hopefully someone will be remedying shortly.

The extended tail shape changes on the export models were to accommodate brake chutes in the main but it also cured a problem with the aircraft wanting to go sideways at 0.8 Mach. The abrupt curtailing of the fuselage causes asymmetric vortex shedding for the slightest imperfection which interacts with the fin and makes the aircraft act as though the pilot has put in rudder inputs. I wasn't aware that the RAF machines were modified for this though I daresay the Red Arrows would try and improve this area as they were adding the smoke modifications anyway.

Hopefully Revell will follow this up with a general service TMk1 with both inner and outer pylons and drop tanks, the latter 2 are not fitted to RAF machines but are useful for export versions.

The more I look this the more I like it. Not so nie memories of handling the Airfix engravings to less visible are still fresh in the memory...

In was just reading this new book about the Finnish AF Hawks: http://koalakustannus.fi/kirjat/kirja.php?id_prd=217There is also discussion about the stability issues rear fuselage and fins beside the air brake development..

Cheers,

AaCee

[jasman71]

Building this at the mo. Having built something like 50+ Hawks, this for me falls into the category of much-improved but still not the definitive kit to have. The rear fuselage shape and inclusion of the wrong rudder fillet (it's a 2-piece separate part, so presumably they have moulded it to cater for both) are niggles, and probably avoidable ones; not like there's a shortage of 1:1 scale versions to check up on. Also some of the sprue gates to the parts, especially the tiny ones, are on the chunky side, so care must be taken when removing these. However, on the plus side the detailing is better than the Airfix releases, the cockpit is better, the undercarriage doors that fit perfectly in the retracted position without any whittling, and even the inclusion of the three injector pipes above the exhaust - slightly large for the scale but at least they're there. (Airfix have tinkered with the moulds for their 2008 Hawk at least 3 times, which is good in that at least they aimed to improve or simplify things) And fair play to Revell for finally improving their instruction sheets, fantastic now!

I'm guessing they'll release many more variations of the base kit over the years, with numerous decal options, which, if they are up to the same standards as those included here, will be top notch! I'll get more of them for sure, and probably relegate their old Italeri reboot to the loft insulation.

[Kevin Callahan]

Having built both now, I feel that the Airfix is the winner for buildability, while Revell scores well on options (early tail, smoke pipes etc) and some detail. Either one is an excellent basis for a Hawk T1.

[sgwestrip]

I am just reaching the end building this and it is a frustrating kit to build for something that, I believe, should be straightforward. For a 'new tool' kit it is poor when compared to, say, Airfix's new tool 1/72 Electric Lightning. The red plastic that Revell have used is quite soft and seems almost greasy. I found that for small parts they were fragile and poorly defined. The main problems I had with this kit were fit issues. Plenty of filler at each wing root (top side), top fuselage seam and particularly the engine intakes where they joined the main kit body. It was the filling that made this kit a pain. Scale up my version and it will need a more powerful jet to get off the ground with all that filler as ballast!!

To me it seems like a missed opportunity. As I said, compare it to other manufacturers 'new tool' kits and this does not stand up too well.

[Cheshiretaurus]

Nose weights

Going through my pre build planning at the moment for this kit, Instructions dont seem to mention anything about nose weights, Is it going to need it and if so how much?

Many thanks

CT

[Borisz]

On 1/4/2016 at 2:08 AM, charlie_c67 said:

May have missed it but is there a pilot provided?

By the way why?

 

On 1/6/2016 at 12:04 PM, Dave Fleming said:

It's not just the fillet, it's the whole shape of the upper back end of the fuselage. The early ones had a curving slope on the upper rear fuselage, later ones had a straight line and a larger area above the jet pipe. In contrast, the seats are the late (Current) style, so you'd need aftermarket early seats to do an early aircraft.

So the options are (i) ignore it (ii) amend the upper rear fuselage to correct for a current aircraft as per the box or (iii) source early seats and decals to do a pre-81 aircraft

How difficult can be the opton II, what dou you think?