1/72 Fairey IIIF family by Kora models

[Sabrejet]

4 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

are you aware of this  ? 
 

 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235077986-148-fairey-iiif-kits-for-sale/&do=getNewComment

 

Dennis

No - thanks for the link.

[Patrik]

My order was updated to "posted". Now, I am in the exciting phase of anticipation.

Hopefully not followed by the much less exciting phase of disappointment in a day or so ...

[Patrik]

Packet arrived yesterday, I had a quick look in the evening. First impression upon opening the (huge) boxes - wow! Worth the money? For me, yes. Does it replace the Contrail vacforms? Definitely.

 

Now some more details for the potential buyer. The plastic is identical in both boxings, with alternative parts for the two-/three-seater and decals (three options each). Resin radiator, transparent (resin?) windshield, PE parts. The FAA kit should have been correctly labeled Mk.IIIB & Mk.IIIM. The fuselage setup indicates that later we can easily expect the DC variants or the alternative 3-seater cockpit (with separate openings for the observer and the gunner), or at least such alternatives can be quite easily scratchbuilt. I am almost sure we are going to get the floatplanes sooner or later. The quality of the plastic resembles the earlier AZ kits, from the times they produced "real" shortruns, from original masters, with resin and PE parts, before they switched over to their recent KP hodgepodge.

 

The dimensions look convincing enough to me. Fast measurement shows wingspan of 45+ ft. - so probably slightly shorter, and length of 36+ ft. - so probably too long, nevertheless the length of the Fairey IIIF is a disputable issue and careful evaluation is needed before pronouncing some kind of final judgment. The absence of reliable drawings is not going to help here either

 

I will post more detailed review with photos over the weekend. I am sure I am going to sober up a bit after inspecting the kit in detail, but for now I am happy. By the way - the PE parts have been labelled Fairey IIIF/Gordon/Seal.😀

 

[stevehnz]

Sounds promising so far, I'll be looking out for updates.

Steve.

[JWM]

13 hours ago, Patrik said:

The fuselage setup indicates that later we can easily expect the DC variants or the alternative 3-seater cockpit (with separate openings for the observer and the gunner), or at least such alternatives can be quite easily scratchbuilt. I am almost sure we are going to get the floatplanes sooner or later. The quality of the plastic resembles the earlier AZ kits, from the times they produced "real" shortruns, from original masters, with resin and PE parts, before they switched over to their recent KP hodgepodge.

Fom what you.ve seen in box do you think that Seal and Gordon are also in pipeline? 

Regards

j-W
 

[Patrik]

@JWM Except the PE parts label and a few words in the type history in the instructions, I am sorry to say no, there is no direct hint to Gordon and Seal in the parts. But then you need "just" new fuselage and the late type of fin and rudder, the rest of the parts can be shared easily. The engine would be most probably resin anyway.

However, the longer I fondle with the kit, the more I like it. It has all signs of thorough work.

[Neil Lambess]

13 hours ago, Patrik said:

@JWM Except the PE parts label and a few words in the type history in the instructions, I am sorry to say no, there is no direct hint to Gordon and Seal in the parts. But then you need "just" new fuselage and the late type of fin and rudder, the rest of the parts can be shared easily. The engine would be most probably resin anyway.

However, the longer I fondle with the kit, the more I like it. It has all signs of thorough work.

Pictures or its not real lol

[occa]

Yeah you know the saying 'any claim is worthless without pics' :)

[Patrik]

Now guys, I understand you are impatient, and I apologize for teasing you that long. But then any of you could have come to my place and helped me gather the plums for slivovitz today, so that you could admire your desired pictures sooner😀.

 

OK, so what do we get. Big boxes (two in my case) with not exactly exciting box arts. The book is there for you to asses the size of the boxes.

 

 

Inside first the instructions and the decals, As written above, three decal options in each box, and as written above too, the FAA kit should have been correctly labeled Mk.IIIB & Mk.IIIM, as the right half of the second picture below proofs without doubt.

 

 

 

Resin radiator and transparent windshield.

 

 

PE parts with very nice and fine details. Some of the fuselage panels, probably hard to represent in plastic, are provided here too. The instrument panels are combination of plastic back plate, decal and PE front. Looks fabulous when test fitted.

 

 

Two cream coloured plastic sprues, in very acceptable shortrun quality. It is not Special Hobby or Sword, but it is not Merlin either. Below then some more detailed pictures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The wheels are not ideal as on the sprue, probably the main reason for the resin aftermarket replacement offered by Kora right from the start and advertised in the kit's instructions.

 

Regarding the dimensions. After careful measurement, the wingspan of the kit is 45'3", identical on both wings. As the most often quoted wingspan for the IIIF is 45'9", I am fine with it. The fuselage length is 34'6" without the propeller, 35'3" with the propeller and without the spinner, and then 36' from the tip of the spinner to the rudder end. The length of the IIIF is rather disputable issue, with confusing figures quoted in various references, most probably often mixing landplane and floatplane lengths . It seems like the consensus  for the landplanes is around 34'4", but if this is with or without the spinner I have no idea and it needs to be evaluated very carefully. As I am convinced such discussion does not belong to the Rumourmonger section, I am planning to start an extra thread on it in the Interwar section, and you will be cordially invited to make your contributions there. Nevertheless, the overall proportions of the kit seem right to me, and if I had not fixed the plans for my next build already, I would have happily started with one of these immediately.

[Ed Russell]

Our local market would like a IIID but if this summary is correct, there are quite a few differences in the plastic as supplied and a IIID. probably not beyond a capable modeller with good plans but not a commercial proposition. Maybe @wellsprop might do a IIID conversion kit master for us?

 

http://www.adf-serials.com.au/1a10.htm

 

The first major production model was the IIID, which was an improved IIIC, with provision for a third crew member and capable of being fitted with either a floatplane or a conventional wheeled undercarriage and powered by a Rolls-Royce Eagle. Initial production for the Fleet Air Arm, together with aircraft produced for Australia and Portugal retained the Eagle, while later aircraft were powered by the Napier Lion.

Naval variants were three-seaters; pilot, observer and gunner and the wings would could be folded back parallel to the fuselage for storage aboard ship. The IIID had a wooden, fabric-covered fuselage and usually a wooden, two-blade, fixed-pitch propeller.

The Fairey IIIF had a more streamlined engine installation and initially a fuselage of mixed metal and wooden construction, with similar wings to the IIID, although later production aircraft were fitted with an all-metal fuselages and wings.

[Neil Lambess]

Patrik,

If you had asked beforehand I would have flown from New Zealand to assist and fondle those kits for you as you took pictures   ( that sounds dirtier than I intended )

looks superb ! 

many thanks

[Patrik]

I promised comparison to the venerable Contrail kit. Here it is, but I am posting just a few pictures, as the progress in quality is by far too obvious.

 

 

 

 

 

 

We do not get the early tail in the first two boxings of the new Kora kit, though.

 

 

However, I would not recommend placing those two close to each other in the display cabinet eventually, If I use the same measurement method as earlier, the wingspan of the Contrail kit will be fine - 46". Almost spot on the wingspan from the references. But, the lengths will be 30'9" without the propeller, 31'6" with the propeller and without the spinner, and then 32'3" from the tip of the spinner to the rudder end. If we consider the reference length as 34'4", plus the worst case scenario for the Kora kit (36'), then Kora will be 7 mm longer in 1/72 and Contrail then 9 mm shorter. Between each other, they would have 1.6 cm, and this would be too obvious, even on the first sight.

 

@Ed Russell The IIID was a very different airplane. I think the wings would be just about all that can be used from the IIIF. Additionally, we have the Esoteric vacform still available here, and it is - quality-wise - completely different vacform league compared to Contrail.

 

Edited September 6, 2020 by Patrik

[Mr T]

Thanks for that Patrik, very useful pictures and I have kit on order (backorder by now I suspect). Looks a lot less work than the Contrail kit. The fuselage interior is surprisingly well done. 

[Neil Lambess]

Thanks for the comparison pics .I've never been a fan of the nose contours of the contrail and the Kora looks much more "right" to my eyes ( the Merlin kit is much more close to the Kora IMHO but Kora  still the winner here )

The real aircrafts length may always remain an enigma sadly ....but so far it's looking like a iiif !

[JWM]

Today I simply asked owner of LF on their join Kora-LF web page about their plans for further variants of Fairey F III family - the Greek WWII floatplane IIIF, Gordon and Latvian Seal, for example. And his answer is - yes, they are going to do all of them!...  

I think this is a great news indeed.

Regards

J-W

 

[occa]

It's looking very good !!!

The only gripe I have (and this is by far not the only kit where this applies to) is that manufacturers don't get the concept of fabric covered wings.
It is very obvious especially at the wing ends, they are by far too thick on this kit as the photo proves:

 

The new tool Airfix Tiger Moth kits show the way how it should be done.

[Roger Holden]

10 hours ago, occa said:

The only gripe I have (and this is by far not the only kit where this applies to) is that manufacturers don't get the concept of fabric covered wings.
It is very obvious especially at the wing ends, they are by far too thick on this kit as the photo proves:

 

The new tool Airfix Tiger Moth kits show the way how it should be done.

Absolutely agree. The recent Airfix Tiger Moth is one of very few to get the correct 'chisel' shape at the wing tips correct. Usually we get wings that look like thick planks with the edges rounded off...

[occa]

12 hours ago, Roger Holden said:

Absolutely agree. The recent Airfix Tiger Moth is one of very few to get the correct 'chisel' shape at the wing tips correct. Usually we get wings that look like thick planks with the edges rounded off...

Thanks RH !!! 

 

Glad that I am not the only one.

I really wondering that so many builders appear to overlook such blatant (< to me) errors.
A single look at any good photo would tell in a second or two.
And first and foremost the manufacturers should take notice.

 

Cheers

Martin

[Patrik]

Got an email from Jan Matejny of Kora yesterday. He warned me, there was one mistake left in their kit. The rear interplane struts should have been placed about 1 mm backward, more or less on the aileron hinge line. I did not notice it before. But he is right, so I am forwarding his warning here with thanks.

 

Re wingtips. I think it is harder for small producers and their shortrun technology to model them, than it is for the mainstream guys and their milled moulds. However, I think they look quite nice on the IIIF (left), don't they? Especially when compared e.g. to the AZ Swedish Hart (right), I am starting now.

 

 

[occa]

On 9/28/2020 at 5:17 PM, Patrik said:

Got an email from Jan Matejny of Kora yesterday. He warned me, there was one mistake left in their kit. The rear interplane struts should have been placed about 1 mm backward, more or less on the aileron hinge line. I did not notice it before. But he is right, so I am forwarding his warning here with thanks.

 

Re wingtips. I think it is harder for small producers and their shortrun technology to model them, than it is for the mainstream guys and their milled moulds. However, I think they look quite nice on the IIIF (left), don't they? Especially when compared e.g. to the AZ Swedish Hart (right), I am starting now.

 

......

 

Can you post a view of the wing tip taken straight from the front ?

[Patrik]

Yes, of course. But not before weekend, I am sorry.

[Patrik]

Weekend is here, it is modelling time. After it was gardening time in the elapsed part of the day.

The wingtips are in my opinion very acceptable when compared with the photos of the real thing. Of course taking into account the shortrun nature of the kit.

 

[occa]

1 hour ago, Patrik said:

Weekend is here, it is modelling time. After it was gardening time in the elapsed part of the day.

The wingtips are in my opinion very acceptable when compared with the photos of the real thing. Of course taking into account the shortrun nature of the kit.

 

 

OK that doesn't by far look that bad as I feared I must admit.

Thanks for posting that picture Patrik !

 

Cheers
Martin

[AMB]

The only issue I have is the eye-watering price!   £44.60 from Hannants and with postage that will be around £50. How many modellers can justify £50 for a 1/72 kit I wonder? 

[Branky]

Strange, In Holland they go for euro 37,95  But still not cheapo for a 1/72 single engined biplane