Jump to content

1/48 - Supermarine Spitfire F.R. Mk.XIVe by Airfix - released


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Tomas Enerdal said:

The panel lines/gaps around the engine bulges are interesting. I looked at close-ups in walk-arounds and the real bulges protrudes up through corresponding openings in the engine cowlings. There should therefore be a "panel line" or "step" present, but not a normal one as between two parallel skin plates. Without having reached that stage in building yet, and only judging from pics from builds, Airfix have kind of captured this, but a little exaggerated. So don't totally eradicate that line.

An early guess of how to improve this properly may be to raise the bulge slightly from below, with thin styrene shims.

 

Tbolt; you are right in that the rivets/fasteners on the left wing have got too close/merged with the panel lines around the gun covers. If carefully comparing the surface details of the right and left upper wing they are slightly different, on the same sprue! The difference is subtle, but there. Can anyone with insight in producing tools from CAD-drawings explain this?

Thanks. Yes Airfix don't seem to pick these faults up early on and fix them. The P-40 had the same problem with the cowl fasteners, one side was fine and the other the fasteners blended into the panel lines.

 

As for the cowl bulges fairings, are the fairings that low? I was hoping just some correction fluid wiped away would give the idea of a line.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

spacer.pngI think this pic describes the panel line perfectly;

I will try to capture it somehow.

Edit: I just tried to raise it slightly, with 0,1 mm styrene shims around. A little more at the lower edge just in from of the exhaust. Result is that the seam/panel line is less obvious. I think that the correction fluid (or possibly milliput) trick will do the rest. I will also tone down the round fasteners a little and add some detail to the little intake.

To those who will want to add detail to the cockpit; find a Cooper Detail CD4815 Spitfire 22/Seafire 47 cockpit set! It contains everything needed and will fit like a glove.

Edited by Tomas Enerdal
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Tomas Enerdal said:

spacer.pngI think this pic describes the panel line perfectly;

I will try to capture it somehow.

Looking at this photo, Airfix does not seem so far off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and as far as details go, Eduard are having a field day already, including a Löök instrument panel. At the end it will be a s costly as a Tamiya Mk.I, but, then, Eduard is also producing a number of improvements for that kit. And taking about the nose, I was especially thinking of the 'panel lines'. 

Guess it is a museum piece from Belgium.

Edited by NPL
Link to post
Share on other sites

My curiosity got the better of me this afternoon so I decided to snip the fuselage sides of the sprue and see what the the fuel tank looked like on my kit.

After a bit of scraping here and there I arrived at this.

20190616_195952

Not great but certainly better than the 2 YouTube clips.

I'd have preferred a tight fit 😮

But its nothing some plasticard would sort out.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, tank152 said:

My curiosity got the better of me this afternoon so I decided to snip the fuselage sides of the sprue and see what the the fuel tank looked like on my kit.

After a bit of scraping here and there I arrived at this.

20190616_195952

Not great but certainly better than the 2 YouTube clips.

I'd have preferred a tight fit 😮

But its nothing some plasticard would sort out.

I did the same and now think that one corner of the insert is slightly warped thus causing a bit of misalignment overall. While I can fix the gap you show (it was also on my kit) I don't think that it should be there given the ability of other manufacturers to get panels like that to fit.

Edited by Harvs73
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another finished build here

Quote

Well this went straight to the top of the list and has just been finished. Construction wise it's very nice and easy.

SGDig5F.jpg

 

as @Jon Kunac-Tabinor is no slouch as a modeller,  I wonder if he could add in some thoughts regarding fit and flash issues, as described here, as they do not seem to have affected his build?

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It does not matter if it can be fixed, it's a new, 2019 production kit which is clearly a step backward for Airfix.

 

I'll get one, and fix it, but in 2019 I simply should not have to.

 

Cheers,

 

Vedran

Edited by dragonlanceHR
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dragonlanceHR said:

It does not matter if it can be fixed, it's a new, 2019 production kit which is clearly a step backward for Airfix.

 

I'll get one, and fix it, but in 2019 I simply should not have to.

 

Cheers,

 

Vedran

 

 

This was built without filler or any corrections, then sprayed in aluminium.

 

Looks good to me, if I don't say so myself 🙂

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dragonlanceHR said:

It does not matter if it can be fixed, it's a new, 2019 production kit which is clearly a step backward for Airfix.

 

I'll get one, and fix it, but in 2019 I simply should not have to.

 

Cheers,

 

Vedran

I'm confused by the positive and negative comments about this kit. My example, supplied directly by Airfix, is as well moulded as any of the other recent 1/48th Airfix kits.

There is no flash: yes the gates are a bit short, but that isn't a real issue. 

The plate over the tank in front of the cockpit should be obvious, it is thicker alloy than the surrounding, to provide a bit more armour. 

 

The example we have seen built, as above, looks about perfect to me. 

 

Could it be that Airfix has more than one company moulding parts and one is cutting corners by taking runners out of the moulds too soon? Or is it a shift supervision issue? Either way the moulding company needs a stir. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Harvs73 said:

I did the same and now think that one corner of the insert is slightly warped thus causing a bit of misalignment overall. While I can fix the gap you show (it was also on my kit) I don't think that it should be there given the ability of other manufacturers to get panels like that to fit.

Weird - mine was a good fit there. I can look at my second kit and see if thats got problems, but I'm currently working on a time limited project so it might have to wait.
I'll watch the Youtube vids too to see whats being said there.  Maybe i was just lucky?

cheers

Jonners

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, 224 Peter said:

I'm confused by the positive and negative comments about this kit. My example, supplied directly by Airfix, is as well moulded as any of the other recent 1/48th Airfix kits.

There is no flash: yes the gates are a bit short, but that isn't a real issue. 

The plate over the tank in front of the cockpit should be obvious, it is thicker alloy than the surrounding, to provide a bit more armour. 

 

The example we have seen built, as above, looks about perfect to me. 

 

Could it be that Airfix has more than one company moulding parts and one is cutting corners by taking runners out of the moulds too soon? Or is it a shift supervision issue? Either way the moulding company needs a stir. 

 

There certainly seems to be some inconsistencies. A guy over on Hyperscale bought 3 kits, two are nicely molded and the other has a very warped wing and several short short parts.

 

Everyone who has a badly moulded parts and/or bad fitting parts should just drop an email to Airfix pointing it out so they can maybe get on top of things though as we know they've had moulding problems for a while, it would be nice if they could switch to another company if they can't sort this out.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I've taped mine together and there is a slight gap which some PPP will sort out without too much hassle. The video reviewer says he can't understand why this is a separate part - I imagine its so the fuel filler and front windscreen dont have a seam down the middle which people would grumble about a-la Eduards IX (which cunningly compels you to get a Brassin replacement).

 

Shouldn't have to do it? Well maybe, but I guess I'm in the minority nowadays raised on Frog & Matchbox stuff, or short run kits where parts have a nodding relationship to each other and the filler needs to be deployed by blunderbuss. That's modelling innit. As gratifying it is to build a lovely Tamiya model where everything fits beautifully, that's at a premium. I guess if you just want to get through the assembly with as little hassle as possible then they're the ones to buy but be prepared to pay for it. Horses for courses... personally I relish the challenge of taming any hiccups and my modelling improves as a result (not by much, granted, most of my models look like they have been assembled by a person without any thumbs)  - gives a sense of satisfaction at the end of the day. 

 

A few years ago the Classic British Kit SIG produced a wonderful little tube map handout of kits to build before you die - and I've managed a fair number. When you see a Williams Brothers C-46 or Matchbox Heyford on a stand and you've built one, there's an unspoken nod of respect to the builder. Its funny, there are those that worship Airfix or Eduard and those that will bash  the former given half a chance. The Eduard Tempest's spinner is all wrong but I haven't heard choruses of disgust about it. You crack on don't you. I love what Airfix stand for, and we all expect perfection - but its 12 people cracking out 'product' and compromises etc will happen. Perhaps we're just in that golden age people speak of where there is so much modelling choice now that anything 100% won't do. It seems like the Spit has been a good seller so Airfix will perhaps continue for another year. I don't know what percentage will actually be made (my Dad who collects old toys, says vintage boxed kits are 'failed toys' as no-one built them when they were new) and what percentage will be stashed.

 

I'll plough me own furrow and try and not get fingerprints on the canopy and deal with any probs in me own cackhanded way. But enjoy the process and not get stressed about it.  Its always a shame though when a new release you wait for gets rubbished, it sort of takes the wind out of your sales with an 'oh right' before the box hits your doorstep.

 

I found the thread on One Man Models 3D printed HP42 and SARO Princess fascinating...the poor chap has spent ages designing and producing something no mainstream company would consider then his work is taken apart. It must be pretty soul-destroying. I wonder if it was the same back in the 80's when Aeroclub and Contrail were kicking out esoteric stuff? I dont remember the magazines (for that's all there was then) tearing into stuff, more often suggesting improvements - modellers being hugely grateful to have the Scroggs Wunderplane they were after. Perhaps, like society, there's more entitlement nowadays or maybe just more information or ways to express one's views. 

 

Perhaps the solution to worry-worts is to build a short run kit, then a mainstream, problems wont seem so huge then I guess.

 

But then I do still use a brush (which I appreciate is the same as coming out as a serial killer on BM) so proper modellists are probably best off ignoring the above!

 

Happy modelling!

 

TT

 

 

 

 

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jon Kunac-Tabinor said:

Weird - mine was a good fit there. I can look at my second kit and see if thats got problems, but I'm currently working on a time limited project so it might have to wait.
I'll watch the Youtube vids too to see whats being said there.  Maybe i was just lucky?

cheers

Jonners

I have two kits with varying amounts of flash of which neither are as bad as the kit on the video. I have found this with previous Airfix kits that have varying levels of flash, sink marks and being short shot when comparing multiples of the same kit.

 

The problems can generally be easily overcome but a modern new release kit should not have these issues. Perfect detail is not expected due to the price  but the plastic being correct and not suffering these problems is.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

I agree, I've taped mine together and there is a slight gap which some PPP will sort out without too much hassle. The video reviewer says he can't understand why this is a separate part - I imagine its so the fuel filler and front windscreen dont have a seam down the middle which people would grumble about a-la Eduards IX (which cunningly compels you to get a Brassin replacement).

 

Shouldn't have to do it? Well maybe, but I guess I'm in the minority nowadays raised on Frog & Matchbox stuff, or short run kits where parts have a nodding relationship to each other and the filler needs to be deployed by blunderbuss. That's modelling innit. As gratifying it is to build a lovely Tamiya model where everything fits beautifully, that's at a premium. I guess if you just want to get through the assembly with as little hassle as possible then they're the ones to buy but be prepared to pay for it. Horses for courses... personally I relish the challenge of taming any hiccups and my modelling improves as a result (not by much, granted, most of my models look like they have been assembled by a person without any thumbs)  - gives a sense of satisfaction at the end of the day. 

 

Perhaps the solution to worry-worts is to build a short run kit, then a mainstream, problems wont seem so huge then I guess.

 

But then I do still use a brush (which I appreciate is the same as coming out as a serial killer on BM) so proper modellists are probably best off ignoring the above!

 

Happy modelling!

 

TT

 

 

 

 

I think most people complained about the Eduard cowl because of the rivets and sanding it down removes these. Wouldn't be much of a problem here.

 

I guess it's about expectations. Airfix, a mainstream manufacturer, producing a Spitfire. When you by a limited run kit you expect to have to do extra work.

 

Most of use who hang out here are perfectly capable of fixing these issue, but some of the bigger issues could make a frustrating built to the casual modeller, which doesn't help future sales.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Harvs73 said:

I have two kits with varying amounts of flash of which neither are as bad as the kit on the video. I have found this with previous Airfix kits that have varying levels of flash, sink marks and being short shot when comparing multiples of the same kit.

 

The problems can generally be easily overcome but a modern new release kit should not have these issues. Perfect detail is not expected due to the price  but the plastic being correct and not suffering these problems is.

I just checked "flash" on my second kit, and its there but no where as much as in Paul Budzik's video. It probably on a par with my first kit form memory. As you mention- its easy to fix, but why it's there is a question I think Aunty A needs to address.
The fit of the fuel tank cover on my kit was good - nowhere near as awful as in the video. The only filler I used on my model was some mr Surface 1000 brushed into few places where I felt things could be subdues a little  i.e around the rocker covers. it's not a bad fit there at all- but it's just a bit obvious.

It's puzzling as to why this variation is occurring though ? Airfix need to ensure consistency, and you shouldn't really expect this on a 2019 new tool kit. A modeller encountering a badly moulded or fitting model in the box, when reviews are positive will be left wondering if he was told the truth, rather than questioning his plastic parts. That's bad for reputation, but its also bad for the modellers confidence in his own abilities.

It's a shame as I really really liked this model. It built well with just a little cleaning up- as I've said. I'm actually sorry others seem to be having a bad time with it.

Cheers

Jonners

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jon Kunac-Tabinor said:

It's puzzling as to why this variation is occurring though ?

 

Simple - inconsistent process at the molders.  That could be down to any number of reasons - from the molder tweaking cycle time to try and get more parts per unit time.  Too much pack pressure, Inadequate control over the press. Cooling.  There's literally hundreds of reasons, but it all boils down to one thing - an inconsistent process 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hendie said:

 

Simple - inconsistent process at the molders.  That could be down to any number of reasons - from the molder tweaking cycle time to try and get more parts per unit time.  Too much pack pressure, Inadequate control over the press. Cooling.  There's literally hundreds of reasons, but it all boils down to one thing - an inconsistent process 

It's puzzling why it's happening, not how it's happening. The fact that a company can let poor quality leave their factory and the fact that Airfix let them get away with it. It just seems some companies will output low quality stuff if they can get away with it, it's obviously up to Airfix to improve their QC to stop this happening so much.

 

I had a canopy in the Lightning kit that had a cold shut down the side, so Airfix send me a new one - this replacement one had a cold shut so bad there was a hole in it! It's just sloppy work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

Perhaps, like society, there's more entitlement nowadays or maybe just more information or ways to express one's views. 

 

it's easier to express ones views,  back in the day, that meant writing a physical letter, and posting it.   Not something the average keyboard warrior would do. 

Also, lack of perspective, and so easy to be rude if not to someone's face,  one aspect that makes this place an oddity on the net, people are polite,  and rudeness is not tolerated. 

There is more information, but also less filters.   In the case here, the Champion Scale Modelling review

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7EUm8w3xg8

 

The chap confesses to not knowing much about Spitfires, or much interest in the subject,   relevant inasmuch that a lot is being written about the separate fuel tank piece, poor moulding problems aside,  it seems that many do not realise the tank does stand a little proud as it has thin sheet of armour. 

this should take you to the relevant part

https://youtu.be/J7EUm8w3xg8?t=517

while the light is slightly exaggerating the effect,  this shows the tank armour and the seam round the rocker cover bulges, and the perils of not knowing the subject... it would be very easy to assume this should be flush... (I've seen similar comments re the Airfix Vb kit)

2245.jpg&key=2c36c35c504e89bba484387daba

 

and, this chap has problems with the UC fixing

https://youtu.be/J7EUm8w3xg8?t=649

 

while @Jon Kunac-Tabinor  mentions his build, how it works very well. 

also, some good points on the nature of online reviews, and the perils of the macro lens...

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235056860-airfix-supermarine-spitfire-mk-xiv-148th-scale/&do=findComment&comment=3374007

 

I really must  be bothered to do and document the fixes needed for the other low back Spitfire XIV...the Academy one,  do able,  but making that into an accurate model is like doing a vacform or limited run kit.... lots of work!

 

6 hours ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

But then I do still use a brush (which I appreciate is the same as coming out as a serial killer on BM) so proper modellists are probably best off ignoring the above!

there are plenty of brush users here,  if it gets the results you want,  it matters not a jot.   

The very prolific and frequent writer for model magazines @tonyot use brushes and the odd rattle can...

 

cheers

T

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tbolt said:

The fact that a company can let poor quality leave their factory and the fact that Airfix let them get away with it.

I hope my two Spitfires Mk.22/24 are cases of good quality. I'll find out this Thursday when I go to Hannants London.

Now, keep talking about the Spit XIVe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what we are seeing is inconsistency in the kit moulding. The fact that mine assembled fine as did David Collins, yet the online chaps one didnt, suggests that something is amiss.

I'm struggling to work out how he gets his UC to wobble around like that though - the fit of mine was good- I admit its not a standard way to install a UC leg, but his are just wobbly as anything. It should be pointed out that Airfix have you apply the UC door to the leg first though - which does help locate the sit properly, as the door locates onto the upper end of the bay cutout just enough to hold things, but even so the legs on mine were a better fit than his regardless.

The video guy also says on his Trumpeter P40F review "we can deal with accuracy issues, mostly; but if the thing doesn't fit in the first place...  I think this chap likes to have well fitting kits as a sine qua non benchmark.  My view differs. Neither is right, but then my Youtube review of the Spitfire would be different too.

cheers - I've wittered on too much - a bed beckons.
Jonners
 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

From the many comments on the mould quality, sounds to me that what we have here is a "good old new Airfix kit"...

This because I've read all the typical features that I've found in all "Hornby era" Airfix kits I've bought before: inconsistencies between supposedly identical kits, varying degree of fit between two kits, small parts hard to separate, inconsistent surface detail...

Personally it's nothing that will prevent me from buying the kit but then I'm not a pro-Airfix or anti-Airfix taliban, simply I've learnt to expect certain things from Airfix. Among these is the fact that Airfix moulding quality is not on par with what done by Japanese or Korean companies (yes, someone said that this kit is on par with the Tamiya Mk.I.. a kit that is over 25 year old). Not a problem for me, it's something I expect and can live with it.

Another thing I've come to expect is that I may be lucky or unlucky with things like fit or flash. I know it, I just keep my fingers crossed when opening the box.

On the pros side I've come to expect are very well researched and printed decals, and from what I've seen the kit gives these.

I've come to expect some unusual and interesting design feature to simplify assembly or allow better detail, and again the kit seems to satisfy this.

Last but not least, I've come to expect a good accuracy in the basic shapes, and again this kit seems to tick these boxes.

Keeping all these things in mind, I can decide if it's worth buying a new Airfix kit. I'll buy this one because I feel that the positives outweigh the negative and the competition is much poorer. Following the same logic however, I've not bought other recent Airfix kits as I concluded that others offered more.

 

Of course here the name Airfix evokes strong emotions, maybe I'm lucky not to be encumbered by these...

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

From the many comments on the mould quality, sounds to me that what we have here is a "good old new Airfix kit"...

This because I've read all the typical features that I've found in all "Hornby era" Airfix kits I've bought before: inconsistencies between supposedly identical kits, varying degree of fit between two kits, small parts hard to separate, inconsistent surface detail...

Personally it's nothing that will prevent me from buying the kit but then I'm not a pro-Airfix or anti-Airfix taliban, simply I've learnt to expect certain things from Airfix. Among these is the fact that Airfix moulding quality is not on par with what done by Japanese or Korean companies (yes, someone said that this kit is on par with the Tamiya Mk.I.. a kit that is over 25 year old). Not a problem for me, it's something I expect and can live with it.

Another thing I've come to expect is that I may be lucky or unlucky with things like fit or flash. I know it, I just keep my fingers crossed when opening the box.

On the pros side I've come to expect are very well researched and printed decals, and from what I've seen the kit gives these.

I've come to expect some unusual and interesting design feature to simplify assembly or allow better detail, and again the kit seems to satisfy this.

Last but not least, I've come to expect a good accuracy in the basic shapes, and again this kit seems to tick these boxes.

Keeping all these things in mind, I can decide if it's worth buying a new Airfix kit. I'll buy this one because I feel that the positives outweigh the negative and the competition is much poorer. Following the same logic however, I've not bought other recent Airfix kits as I concluded that others offered more.

 

Of course here the name Airfix evokes strong emotions, maybe I'm lucky not to be encumbered by these...

 

It's an age old discussion, at least fifty years old. Of course Tamiya and Hasegawa were considered in a different class from the Airfix and Frog models. I believe that my first AFV model was Tamiya's German Panzer II. A marvelous revelation after scores of technically inferior European kits. But I have never built many Tamiya kits -- perhaps because it is in some way too simple. No challenge at all (maybe the decals, but that is another matter). Now we are speaking Spitfires, Hasegawa never got it. They issued both a Mk.Vb and the VIIIs and IXs including a series of problems as far as dimensions goes. Especially their Mk.IXs were technically superior to anything Airfix produced but nearly impossible to rectify. Tamiya's early series from the 1990s: Same thing including a few odd aspects. Even the new Mk.I has a few peculiarities, such as everything for the early two-blade version, but not two blade propeller, and then the arrangement at the nose with a new 'panel' in order to install a rotating propeller. Airfix Mk.I and Vb are probably dimensionally the best representations of the Spitfire so far, which Edgar's name should guarantee. The same probably can be said about the new Mk.XIV -- again with thanks expressed to Edgar. N ow Eduard has a change to make it perfect in their forthcoming series of early Merlins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Homebee changed the title to 1/48 - Supermarine Spitfire F.R. Mk.XIVe by Airfix - released

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...