Jump to content

1/48 De Havilland Vampire F.3 & FB.5/FB.9 by Airfix - released


Bjorn

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Tail-Dragon said:

Other that squaring the wingtips, are there other changes that are required to make an F.B.5 in Canadian service?  (not counting the can of Labatt's, and the toque on the glare shield?)

 

I’d say it would be perfectly acceptable to square off this kits wingtips and call it a FB.5. To my knowledge (apart from the wingtips) the FB.5 incorporated a ‘stronger’ wing which allowed it to carry underwing stores. I’ll bet money that when the sprues are eventually shown, the base wing parts will be cut at the tips and the squared wingtip parts provided on the clear sprue. Although I’m happy with this initial kit version, fingers crossed we should be able to make an F.3 and FB.5 version straight OOB with this first release. 

Cheers.. Dave 

 

Edit - re-reading the question, I do not know if the Canadian FB.5’s had any other specialities compared to the stock British FB.5. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Rabbit Leader said:

 

I’d say it would be perfectly acceptable to square off this kits wingtips and call it a FB.5. To my knowledge (apart from the wingtips) the FB.5 incorporated a ‘stronger’ wing which allowed it to carry underwing stores. I’ll bet money that when the sprues are eventually shown, the base wing parts will be cut at the tips and the squared wingtip parts provided on the clear sprue. Although I’m happy with this initial kit version, fingers crossed we should be able to make an F.3 and FB.5 version straight OOB with this first release. 

Cheers.. Dave 

 

Edit - re-reading the question, I do not know if the Canadian FB.5’s had any other specialities compared to the stock British FB.5. 

 

The wing may have been strengthened (I'd have to read up on that), but the hardpoint for the bomb rack IIRC, was in the same place as the drop tanks which the F.3 could carry so maybe there was no need?

 

Otherwise, you're right to some extent, square off the wingtips and you've got an FB.5 in the original configuration.  Some FB.5's were fitted with the lengthened fairing on the starboard side for the cold air unit as originally developed for the FB.9, as always, it's a case of checking photos of your subject.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2021 at 5:17 AM, Rabbit Leader said:

 

My observations (which may not be correct) suggest that although the Australian F.30 and FB.31 Vampires still retained the original wing root intakes of the British versions, the engine compartment back from the rear of the cockpit ‘may’ have been slightly more bulbous in appearance and wider and shorter overall at the Nene engined exhaust (similar to the French Mistral). As we know the French modified the wing root intakes, whilst the Australians incorporated the (at first) upper, than lower ‘Elephant ear’ scoops. 

 

I’m still not convinced if I’m just seeing things, however the exhaust aperture is certainly shorter and something that HPH Models advise in their FB.31 Conversion pack. Can someone confirm or deny my thoughts on the more bulbous engine compartment of both the Australian and/or or French Vampires / Mistrals? 

 

Cheers, regards and much looking forward to this exciting kit.. Dave 

 

G'day Dave,

 

The Nene was the same diameter as the Goblin so no need to make major changes to the fuselage. The main problem was that the compressor in this engine was double sided and it was difficult to get air to the rear face of the compressor. Hence the 'elephant ears' on RAAF aircraft and the redesigned intake, main spar and duct to the engine in the Mistral and the one off Australian A78-2.

 

When I built my Vampire Mk.30 and Mk31 models using the old Classic Airframes kits, (I also unfortunately used Aeroclub canopies which are now brown and opaque), I prepared a side elevation drawing using a number photos with good side on views of Vampires. When I laid these over A. Grainger's drawings of the Mk.I, I got very good correlation. The main difference was, where he used nice continuous curves, I had straight lines. Artists like smooth curves but, the engineer in me says avoid compound curves wherever possible: panels with singular curvature are far easier and cheaper to make. The upshot was that I decided, that in elevation, (and probably also in plan as the Vampire cross-sections are based on circular arcs), there was no difference in shape between the Goblin powered aircraft and the Nene powered aircraft, apart from an approx 6" shorter tail cone on the Nene aircraft. This was necessary because the Nene had a shorter, larger diameter jet pipe.

 

Below is my sketch that I prepared for my models. Apologies for the quality, but it was only intended as a modelling aid, not for publicatio. The original was in 1/48 scale - not sure what it will be here - you may have to re-scale it yourself. If you download it and print at image resolution, you may get it at 1/48. I have dotted in the original Goblin exhaust showing how the tail cone was cut back. I have also indicated the size and positioning of the 'elephant ear' intakes on the ventral fuselage. The posyiton when mounted on the dorsal fuselage was the same.

 

3a1d8b30-4794-4775-88cc-7de406e69235.jpg

 

Below is a pic of an instructional airframe. As you can see, apart from one relativel small section in the middle, the profile is a straight line aft of the canopy, and then for the tail cone itself. Same on the under side.

 

0749b5cc-1b68-4ea4-aee5-43bdec72338a.jpg

 

 

Two shots showing the difference in the Goblin tail cone of A78-1 and the Nene tail cone on A79-175,  that used to be a gate guardian outside Point Cook. The shot of the latter also helps to illustrate the point I was making about straight lines rather than smooth curves on the nacelle.

 

403871bf-5b94-47ff-90dc-4a815ffd5f31.jpg

 

7d6dcba3-737c-4bb9-830e-27c25f93ba75.jpg

 

Finally a shot of the ventral panel containing the 'elephant ear' intakes. This gives good plan and profile views of the intakes. May help in the conversion.

 

2b1e39d4-bda6-4e3f-87aa-5523933c3fa6.jpg

 

Cheers,

Peter M

 

 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the excellent description and documentation Peter. That really does answer my query and puts to bed any thoughts I previously had that the Nene rear fuselage was bulkier. 
Cheers and regards.. Dave 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 months later...

Soon by Xtradecal - ref. X48220 - de Havilland Vampire F.3/FB.5 Collection Pt. 1

  • de Havilland Vampire FB.5 VZ230 ‘X’ of 73 Squadron, Royal Air Force, Near East Air Force, based at RAF Takali, Malta, 1950.
  • de Havilland Vampire F.3 VT783 ‘G’ of 601 (County of London) Squadron, Royal Auxillary Air Force, based at RAF North Weald, UK, 1952.
  • de Havilland Vampire FB.5 VV632 ‘E’ of 613 (City of Manchester) Squadron, Royal Auxillary Air Force, based at RAF Ringway, UK, 1955.
  • de Havilland Vampire F.3 VT799 of 614 (County of Glamorgan) Squadron, Royal Auxillary Air Force, based at RAF Llandow, UK, 1951.
  • de Havilland Vampire FB.5 WE841 ‘D.L’ of 98 Squadron, during ‘Operation Coronet’ Royal Air Force, based at RAF Fassberg, Germany, July, 1953.
  • de Havilland Vampire FB.5 WA106 ‘V’ of 145 Squadron, Royal Air Force, based at RAF Celle, Germany, 1952.
  • de Havilland Vampire FB.5 VV617 ‘A’ of 607 (County of Durham) Squadron, Royal Auxillary Air Force, based at RAF Ouston, UK, 1956.
  • de Havilland Vampire FB.5 WA163, ‘G.L’ flown by Commanding Officer Squadron Leader Hardy of 71 (Eagle) Squadron, Royal Air Force, based at RAF Gutersloh, Germany, August, 1951.

Source: https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/X48220

 

X48220.jpg
X48220-2.jpg
X48220-4.jpg
X48220-1.jpg
X48220-3.jpg
 

V.P.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

First sprue shots have been made available on the Airfix workbench blog (click link and scroll down). I quite like the one upper and lower piece wing / fuselage parts, that should help align these bits correctly. I’ve also noticed squared off wing tips, however the clear parts for the rounded wingtips are not shown. Three engine intake pieces shows hints of an FB.9, although I cannot confirm this looking at the images on my phone. Looks good from what I can tell.


https://uk.airfix.com/community/blog-and-news/workbench/b-17-centurion-artwork-and-new-vampire-exclusives

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wingtip correction from above post.. 

Seperate plastic parts are provided to model either round or squared off wing tips. If thats an extended FB.9 intake, you should be able to model any of the round fin singles seaters (F.3, FB.5, FB.9) OOB with this first release kit. The three piece underwing tanks are an interesting concept too? I’m also hoping those wheels are just one piece items, if so both early and late wheel hubs are included. 

Cheers… Dave

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/06/2021 at 22:24, Rabbit Leader said:

First sprue shots have been made available on the Airfix workbench blog (click link and scroll down). I quite like the one upper and lower piece wing / fuselage parts, that should help align these bits correctly. I’ve also noticed squared off wing tips, however the clear parts for the rounded wingtips are not shown. Three engine intake pieces shows hints of an FB.9, although I cannot confirm this looking at the images on my phone. Looks good from what I can tell.


https://uk.airfix.com/community/blog-and-news/workbench/b-17-centurion-artwork-and-new-vampire-exclusives

 

 

71881.jpg


71882.jpg

71883.jpg

 

V.P.

Edited by Homebee
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Vampire was not on my wishlist but seeing the news and now the sprues I began drooling... Bizarre, isn't it.

Thanks a lot, and please make us happy in 2022 too. You've got the choice if you want to part me from my money a Lysander, a Battle, a Hampden, a Fairey Fox ....... ANY scale.

❤️ you Airfix.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
6 hours ago, Eivind Lunde said:

Very happy for this as well. Norway had some F.III's, I'm sure we'll get some decals for them soon. :penguin:

Airfix went to Flysamlingen, Gardermoen to measure up the F.III there - so the kit should match a Norwegian machine.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're looking forward to finally having a nice Vampire injected
Do you think that Mk.5 versions will also be planned?
versions with ejector seats like the Swiss versions, and why not with the Pinnochio nose?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very concerned the wrong model is being issued.  This should be a 1/48 Airfix Sea Venom.  I'm pretty sure I made that clear.  I don't know why I am being ignored and this has gone sideways.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No no no, we are all quite clear: single-seat Venom with choice of vertical tails and noses 😉

 

I have to admit I don't have room in my life for a Vampire F.3 but it's still an exciting project to follow - especially when one sees certain parts coloured differently in the CAD imagery. Recent experience with the little T.11 has left me wanting moulded noseweight to be included, though...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those thinking of doing the FB.31 you'll need to modify the rear cockpit bulkhead to fit the bang seat in.

These was a quite large cut out added to jam the seat in.

The shape of the canopy is slightly different as well.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ad-4N said:

What am I supposed to do with these seven Hobbycraft Vampires?  

 

Build a wall to conceal the 7 new Airfix ones from the Missuz sight, perhaps?

 

Inadequate, tactless, scrapped but ......

 

you still could gift them to people you don't like (as it's a beast of a kit, I heard).

 

Why, I'm bad, I know.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
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...