Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Jon Kunac-Tabinor

Airfix P-40B Tomahawk 1/48th - It's Arrived!!!!!

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, BS_w said:

Curious, the leading edge of rudder is wavy as if it was in fabric on ribs. 
On the riht side, at the top there was no hinge, no slot.

 

Yes I'm not quite sure what they were thinking when they did the leading edge of the rudder, but thankfully they haven't done the same on the elevators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I re-scribed the missing trim tab this morning - took about 5 mins. So it's annoying but not fatal. Removing the hinge took about 30 seconds.....

 

I spent a "wee"  bit of time last night and this morning looking at mixes for that much discussed colour DuPont 72-021 Sky Gray, and have arrived at  a mix of tamiya XF-23 light blue, X-2 white and  XF-55 deck tan to give a pale blue with hint of green. i.e.  rather like RAF Sky Type S but not as "green" nor as saturated - so if you will a "sky-grey" LOL

 

For those interested I'd say it was about 5:5:2  Sky Blue: Deck tan: White, but as with a lot of acrylic mixes they tend to darken when totally dry so this may be changed once i inspect the sample I brush dout.

 

My model is now primed - so painting will begin soon.

 

Jonners

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, HBBates said:

 

P36%20early%20P40%20rudder_zpsniiw5yn7.j

 

 

the two small rectangle were not holes but reinforcing fabric. The different colour seems that was large holes.

The first patch was 5x7 and second 2x3.

In these patches there was a little slot for the links, at the right the slot was 1/2" lower than at left

patch_10.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jon Kunac-Tabinor said:

I re-scribed the missing trim tab this morning - took about 5 mins. So it's annoying but not fatal. Removing the hinge took about 30 seconds.....

 

 

You'd think differently if you were a City lawyer with a 500 quid hourly rate :P

 

Is the "unpolished" surface Airfix's attempt at a depiction of fabric ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, tempestfan said:

 

Is the "unpolished" surface Airfix's attempt at a depiction of fabric ?

 

 

No. The fuselage and wings are noticeable polished including the ailerons but as well as the rudder and elevators the tailplanes, gear doors, radiator flaps, prop, spinner, drop tank, gun panels, WTB fairings, wheels and the tyres (one side of the tyres is very rough) are not polished.

Edited by Tbolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got mine today and had a brief look at it and the instructions.  I can't understand Airfix's (and other companies) logic sometimes - they give us (what seem to be) positionable rudder and elevator parts, or at least they are separate, but the ailerons/flaps are all moulded into the wing sections!!

 

Trumpeter's kit from over 10 years ago has positionable ailerons and flaps (from the looks of it), they are at least separate, so why is it Airfix seem unable to do that?

 

Edited by Raven Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Raven Morpheus said:

Got mine today and had a brief look at it and the instructions.  I can't understand Airfix's (and other companies) logic sometimes - they give us (what seem to be) positionable rudder and elevator parts, or at least they are separate, but the ailerons/flaps are all moulded into the wing sections!!

 

Trumpeter's kit from over 10 years ago has positionable ailerons and flaps (from the looks of it), they are at least separate, so why is it Airfix seem unable to do that?

 

I'm wondering if I should have saved the wait and bought one of Trumpeter's P-40s!

Seems hard to believe that fixed ailerons/flaps should be a deal-breaker when the Airfix kit is put up against the many significant inaccuracies of the Trumpeter. I won't go into whether it's even appropriate to drop the flaps on a parked aircraft (I know some modelers prefer to pose them down regardless), but I should think one could use a fine-toothed saw to cut the side edges of the ailerons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading this thread there seems to be quite a few inaccuracies on this new Airfix kit.

 

It's not a deal breaker as such, but we're talking about a kit, in the same scale, for a comparable price, made 12 years ago, having more options than a brand new kit!

 

I may not build it with the flaps down or the ailerons in an off-level position, but at least the option would be there to do so if they were provided as separate parts.  I build my aircraft in the air (mostly), but even so on landings and take-offs flaps are used, and they're also used in combat (for tighter turns) so there's plenty of argument that it's appropriate to have them down - we don't all build parked aircraft.

Edited by Raven Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Raven Morpheus said:

Reading this thread there seems to be quite a few inaccuracies on this new Airfix kit.

 

It's not a deal breaker as such, but we're talking about a kit, in the same scale, for a comparable price, made 12 years ago, having more options than a brand new kit!

 

I may not build it with the flaps down or the ailerons in an off-level position, but at least the option would be there to do so if they were provided as separate parts.  I build my aircraft in the air (mostly), but even so on landings and take-offs flaps are used, and they're also used in combat (for tighter turns) so there's plenty of argument that it's appropriate to have them down - we don't all build parked aircraft.

Well so far we have a missing trim tab panel line, and extra rudder hinge, a misplaced gun cover panel line, and possible some panel lines that shouldn't be there, a few badly place ejector pin marks plus some softness in some of the detail moulding it seems.

Against that there is the fact that this is probably the most accurate long nose P-40 yet shape wise, an excellent full depth cockpit, with two styles of seat, a canopy that's the right shape with both open and closed versions, long and short nose gun blast tube options, and open and closed radiator gills. You also have a proper wheels-up option for modelling the aircraft in flight

 

In other words the "errors" are all easily fixed modelling issues which you could choose to ignore, where as the pro's give you a proper looking P-40 from the box. The ailerons are moulded in with the lower wing - so wouldn't require much to cut and reposition anyway.

 

In relation to flaps down - I'm not totally sure it was "that" common to see aircraft with split flaps parked with them down - IMHO it's more a modellers affectation in many cases ( a symptom of etch sets letting you do it, and thus becoming the accepted reality).

 

Given the choice between the Airfix kit & Trumpeter's one; I know where my money will go, and has gone

 

 

cheers

 

Jonners

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Jonners, I miss the old days of bitching about the separate flaps on Airfix kits, and how they make the trailing edges even fatter, and so on!  Why oh why do these silly companies sometimes listen to their customers?  Sheesh!

Edited by gingerbob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Modellers ( at least the ones that post in forums) are a tough bunch to please.

 

Sometimes it seems you're  damned if you do and damned if you don't. Maybe the way forward is to make a kit with one wing with poseable control surfaces and one fixed. 

 

This then pleases no one and we get general agreement...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me separate ailerons isn't about being able to pose them, it about getting a more realistic look, rather than just a recessed line around them- the Airfix Hurricane and Spit I/V has separate ailerons and they look more realistic than the ailerons on the P-40, so it does feel like a step backwards.

 

As for flaps, it always makes me laugh when people say they shouldn't be down on a model - most of the time they wouldn't be down on a parked aircraft but, that's like saying it's wrong to have a gun bay panel or engine panel off because most of the time they were fitted! Flaps are a nice option to have, but the most important one to have separate for me is the elevators because they are the one I want to pose down while the aircraft is parked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

two styles of seat, a canopy that's the right shape with both open and closed versions, long and short nose gun blast tube options, and open and closed radiator gills. You also have a proper wheels-up option for modelling the aircraft in flight

 

So they've given us all of those options, and yet couldn't give us separate parts for flaps and ailerons?!

 

Doesn't it bother anyone that a kit from 12 years ago, despite it's inaccuracies, still looked, to the non-rivet counter, like a P-40 and at the same time still gave us modellers some nice options to use for displaying the model that a brand new kit does not have?

Edited by Raven Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot speak for anyone else but those issues don't bother me.. Lots of other things do my Yoghurt was a bit thick to mix in my Museli this morning for example. But I'm healthy I'm loved and I live in the best country on the planet IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So ! , hands up ,who would prefer a less accurate kit , but with separate control surfaces ? Perhaps Starfix would oblige.

 

 

Andrew

Edited by Andrew Jones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Raven Morpheus said:

 

So they've given us all of those options, and yet couldn't give us separate parts for flaps and ailerons?!

 

Doesn't it bother anyone that a kit from 12 years ago, despite it's inaccuracies, still looked, to the non-rivet counter, like a P-40 and at the same time still gave us modellers some nice options to use for displaying the model that a brand new kit does not have?

 

No, it doesn't bother me.  Separate ailerons, if they fit well, I'd be happy to have.  Separate flaps I don't care about, because if I want them down I can manage that (and photo-etch will be a far more realistic flap anyway.)  As I sarcastically suggested above, separate flaps tend to just make the trailing edge fatter, introduce some annoying fit problems, and I don't want to put 'em down anyway UNLESS it is a type that very typically does have flaps down at rest, such as Merlin-engined Mustangs.  And Corsairs- even if flaps down is "wrong" (or more often wrong) they just look so cool!  But I've also run afoul of a Corsair kit that gives you separate flaps, and I've yet to figure out how to make them be up without major pain and suffering.

 

I'd far rather have a somewhat simplified (if that's even the case) but accurately shaped kit than one of these "build it just like the real thing!" messes with a full engine that should be concealed under a cowling, faux-structural detail (that isn't accurate anyway), etc etc, especially when said kit fails in basic accuracy.  I also don't need pock-marks all over it to fill with stark black.

 

Edited by gingerbob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see we've got the Airfix fanboys in.

 

The point I'm trying to make here is that Airfix have not moved the hobby forward by producing a kit that is lacking in what should these days be considered basic options.

 

And just what is wrong with having, and expecting to have, those options present?  Or is expecting to have such options to be derided in the same way as painting on the sprue?

 

It's like their decision to produce a new P-51 - how many of those have we got already, and what will Airfix bring to the table to better what's out there already - nothing is my bet if this P-40 is anything to go by.

Edited by Raven Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey RM,

 

I tend to find for every 'fanboy' there are an equal number of folk who put the 'knife in' needlessly.

 

Argueably Airfix have moved the Hobby forward by offering the most Accurate version of this Aircraft yet produced 1/48. 

 

Should it have poseable control surfaces? That's a debatable point. There is no right if wrong answer just opinion.

 

Plasto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Raven Morpheus said:

 

 

It's like their decision to produce a new P-51 - how many of those have we got already, and what will Airfix bring to the table to better what's out there already - nothing is my bet if this P-40 is anything to go by.

 

Once again you entirely miss the point , the one thing a new Airfix P51 will guarantee to bring to the table is increased revenue for Airfix , something that the Hasegawa/Tamiya/etc P51's will never do. You must realise by now that Airfix and other model companies are in business to produce profits not models, the models are only a means to an end.

 

Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Plasto said:

Hey RM,

 

I tend to find for every 'fanboy' there are an equal number of folk who put the 'knife in' needlessly.

 

Argueably Airfix have moved the Hobby forward by offering the most Accurate version of this Aircraft yet produced 1/48. 

 

Should it have poseable control surfaces? That's a debatable point. There is no right if wrong answer just opinion.

 

Plasto

 

And yet at the same time it's not as accurate, detailed, feature packed (whatever term you want to use) as a kit made 12 years ago because you can't pose all the control surfaces.

 

And at the end of the day, to the non-rivet counter, which I'd argue is most of the people who make models, both kits look like a P-40.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Andrew Jones said:

 

Once again you entirely miss the point , the one thing a new Airfix P51 will guarantee to bring to the table is increased revenue for Airfix , something that the Hasegawa/Tamiya/etc P51's will never do. You must realise by now that Airfix and other model companies are in business to produce profits not models, the models are only a means to an end.

 

Andrew

 

 

They'd be making even more if they produced kits to the standard the likes of Hasegawa and Tamiya do.  There is no reason they cannot.  And there is no reason why we, when we see a new tool kit, shouldn't be expecting them to do so.

 


Given that this kit is a new tool kit, given that their "new tool" Spitfire and Hurricane kits come with poseable ailerons, this kit, as Tbolt said, feels like a step backwards.

 

That's all I was getting at.  If you're perfectly happy with it then fine, I'm not because I think Airfix could have gone that one or two steps further with it.

Edited by Raven Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Raven Morpheus said:

 

And yet at the same time it's not as accurate, detailed, feature packed (whatever term you want to use) as a kit made 12 years ago because you can't pose all the control surfaces.

And at the end of the day, to the non-rivet counter, which I'd argue is most of the people who make models, both kits look like a P-40.

 

They'd be making even more if they produced kits to the standard the likes of Hasegawa and Tamiya do.  There is no reason they cannot.

Given that this kit is a new tool kit, given that their "new tool" Spitfire and Hurricane kit come with poseable ailerons. this kit, as Tbolt said, feels like a step backwards.

 

NOT AS ACCURATE?????  please - as the Trumpeter Kit? Possible the funniest thing I've read for a while.  Not as detailed? have you seen the cockpit in the Trumpeter kit?


Your argument revolves around the fact that the ailerons aren't posable, and it doesnt have separate flaps - therefore it's a worse model than one from 12 years ago. Well , as you are calling people fanboys; a term I loathe, but as you used it..... , here's the fanboy reply: "Go build the Trumpeter one" - you admit you aren't bothered by accuracy of shape - so that kit will do, as it provides all the features you want in your model.

 

Just build the model you want to build. I'm building the model i want to build - and enjoying it.

 

Jonners, Pifco admirer it seems...

 

BTW I just looked through about 50 period photos of P-40s on the ground: Flaps down at all?. Nope. Not One.  And flaps using for combat manoeuvring on a P-40? The flaps couldn't be lowered at speeds in excess of about 140 mph anyway. The only WW2 aircraft I can think of with such flaps were the Japanese Ki-43 & 84 with their "butterfly" flaps.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Airfix have given us a kit that doesn't have options their other more recent new tool kits have, let alone a competitors kit that was made 12 years ago, and people start deriding and mocking me for having an opinion about that - what do you expect me to call such people?!

 

And please - show me where I have explicitly said or implied it is a worse kit?  Actually don't bother, you won't be able to, because I haven't.

 

I have said however that it lacks features a kit made 12 years ago gave us and that their own recent new tool kits have, and that to the non-rivet counter both kits look like a P-40 when built.

 

 

And are you seriously going to sit there and tell me that a kit that doesn't have the features a kit 12 years ago had, that previous new kits in the last 5 years by the same company had, is progress?  Seriously?  Really?

 

You're telling me the Trumpeter kit lacks a good cockpit, well the Airfix kit lacks positionable ailerons and flaps.

 

As for building the model I want to build - I can't really, because the model I would love to build in 1/48 of a P-40B doesn't exist yet.

 

And as I said, I don't build planes in a parked on the ground state.

 

And I guess you've never seen a P-40B take off, if you did you'd see (although not always) the flaps down, on the run down the runway - oh wait a minute, that's on the ground isn't it!  They're also used in landings.

 

Again - we don't all build planes as though they're parked on the ground.

 

 

Sheesh, you make 1 comment about a couple of things you find unsatisfactory with a kit and the fanboys come out to rip you to pieces.

 

I could just as easily point out that none of what you lot have mentioned, getting out your scale drawings and all, matters, because the kit is so accurate, and deride and mock you all for pointing out the issues you have...

Edited by Raven Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Raven Morpheus said:

When Airfix have given us a kit that doesn't have options their other more recent new tool kits have, let alone a competitors kit that was made 12 years ago, and people start deriding and mocking me for having an opinion about that - what do you expect me to call such people?!

 

And please - show me where I have explicitly said or implied it is a worse kit?  Actually don't bother, you won't be able to, because I haven't.

 

"And yet at the same time it's not as accurate, detailed, feature packed (whatever term you want to use) as a kit made 12 years ago because you can't pose all the control surfaces. "

And there you have it in your own words !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Raven Morpheus said:

When Airfix have given us a kit that doesn't have options their other more recent new tool kits have, let alone a competitors kit that was made 12 years ago, and people start deriding and mocking me for having an opinion about that - what do you expect me to call such people?!

 

And please - show me where I have explicitly said or implied it is a worse kit?  Actually don't bother, you won't be able to, because I haven't.

 

I have said however that it lacks features a kit made 12 years ago gave us and that their own recent new tool kits have, and that to the non-rivet counter both kits look like a P-40 when built.

 

 

And are you seriously going to sit there and tell me that a kit that doesn't have the features a kit 12 years ago had, that previous new kits in the last 5 years by the same company had, is progress?  Seriously?  Really?

 

You're telling me the Trumpeter kit lacks a good cockpit, well the Airfix kit lacks positionable ailerons and flaps.

 

As for building the model I want to build - I can't really, because the model I would love to build in 1/48 of a P-40B doesn't exist yet.

 

And as I said, I don't build planes in a parked on the ground state.

 

And I guess you've never seen a P-40B take off, if you did you'd see (although not always) the flaps down, on the run down the runway - oh wait a minute, that's on the ground isn't it!  They're also used in landings.

 

Again - we don't all build planes as though they're parked on the ground.

 

 

Sheesh, you make 1 comment about a couple of things you find unsatisfactory with a kit and the fanboys come out to rip you to pieces.

 

I could just as easily point out that none of what you lot have mentioned, getting out your scale drawings and all, matters, because the kit is so accurate, and deride you all for pointing out the issues you have...

Oh just give it a rest - Christ - you want to build a kit that doesnt exist!!  Everyone - stop modelling now - the hobby is doomed.

 

If nothing will please you then I guess you are destined for a very unhappy modelling life. You want a model that is : A: good enough for the average modeller for whom "any" model of a P-40 looks like a P-40  - which is so condescending towards other modellers it beggars belief - average modellers will accept mis-shapen crap because they know no better?

 

BUT B:  You want it to be buildable in a very specific state - a state that I'm guessing the average modeller probably doesnt.  Actually I don't know what the "average" modeller wants, but I suspect that buildable in the very difficult to pose "taking off" or "landing" state isn't it.

 

Please do feel to deride me - I dont care. It seems to be that you are having the bad day: I'm enjoying building this model.

And if Im a Fanboy then you "must" be a Joyless Modelling Nazi, because I can feel my joy being leeched away by your facile, and ultimately unedifying, twaddle. :) 

 

If you want the flaps down - use a bloody scalpel. You are meant to be a modeller.

 

Out.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Jon Kunac-Tabinor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me give it a rest?  I'm not the one deriding and mocking people for having an opinion.

 

I made 1 single comment, and then a reply expanding on my point, initially, trying to make a perfectly reasonable point, and all of a sudden, you and your buddies here have jumped on my opinion and attacked it.

 

Was there any need to mock my point - considering you've all had your scale drawings out to find fault with the kit also?  And don't tell me that's not what you've all been doing.


Why is my concern over a lack of a few separate key detail parts less valid than your concern over the shape of x y and z parts?

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, Andrew Jones said:

 

"And yet at the same time it's not as accurate, detailed, feature packed (whatever term you want to use) as a kit made 12 years ago because you can't pose all the control surfaces. "

And there you have it in your own words !

 

 

Yeah, I can see it now, it explicitly says I think it's worse.  After all I've used those exact words haven't I...

 

If I wanted to say it's worse I would have.  I haven't.

 

Please do keep arguing with me to the contrary though.

Edited by Raven Morpheus

Share this post


Link to post
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...