Jump to content

1/72 De Havilland Mosquito by Airfix - released


Bjorn

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, stevehnz said:

That doesn't look too scarey, maybe take to the tyre tread with some wet & dry to tone them down a bit but nothing there to bother me from this far away. ;) better than the butt join on the cross pieces of the old Airfix Mosquito F Mk II, VI & XIII. Thanks for posting those @Swamp Donkey

Steve.

I’ve literally just had to deal with the undercarriage on the old Airfix Mossie. Not one of life’s more enjoyable tasks, it has to be said! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Swamp Donkey said:

By the looks of it, the main gear could be left until the end of all other construction

Thanks for posting your objective assessment  @Swamp Donkey . 

 

Yep. From his comentary on designing this kit that is precisely what Paramjit Sembhi, the Airfix product designer, was providing for in its construction. The complex Mossie undercart, by its inherent  design, is always going to be fragile and complicated to build when reduced in scale and using the wing location points as a jig, to ensure perfect alignment during its construction and protect it from damage during the build.  Leaving fitting safely to the end of the build is inspired. As is providing plastic masks to clip on & off the wheel wells to protect them whilst the undersides are painted. All very helpful in my opinion. Its then up to the skill/dexterity/eyesight of the indiviual modeller to dock the assembly into the appropriate holes when the time comes (with a strong level of confidence in fit already). Or alternatively just stick 'em straight in!

 

:goodjob:

 

Rich

 

     

Edited by RichG
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So just picked up my boxing. 

The plastic looks really nice but for some unknown reason Airfix decided not to put the instructions or decals in the box.

big thanks to @Swamp Donkeyfor sending me some photos so I can get started over the week while I wait for Airfix to send me everything

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thepureness said:

The plastic looks really nice but for some unknown reason Airfix decided not to put the instructions or decals in the box.

Ironically I had the exact same problem with an Airfix 1/48 scale Mosquito I bought a few years back! I hope you have more luck getting replacements, I'm still waiting for Airfix to send me mine....

 

Keith

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/21/2021 at 5:19 PM, The wooksta V2.0 said:

 

 

And that errant hatch I mentioned yesterday is shown in the instructions.  Having went looking for reference photos in case it was another case of a museum aircraft being not standard, this link may be of some interest for those wanting to do a TT.35

https://abpic.co.uk/pictures/model/De Havilland DH.98 Mosquito TT35/?

 

 

 

The hatch is there, right where it is on the instructions. It's just been done so finely, the opposite of Airfix's historic tramlines, that it can only just be seen in good light, and can be felt by running your fingertips over it. It will disappear completely under a coat of paint.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/22/2021 at 11:11 AM, The wooksta V2.0 said:

You can fit it through the complete engine assembly later but it's not that easy to line it all up (see also the Tamiya kit).  I had to trim the back attachment points and it still isn't a good fit.

Really can't understand the problem here - having tried this on my build of the kit yesterday, my experience differs. I actually tried to not fit it to check the problem but each time the undercarriage  just slipped straight in :rolleyes:.  Having assembled and checked the parts and tested their fit multiple times on the jig, then once the engine nacelles were in place I just put the legs into their main locating holes (slightly bigger than required presumably to avoid absolute precsion in aligning with them) and the back supports simply slid into their respective slots for a firm fitting - basically they have no where else to go. Perhaps your kit had some fault or its a build up of paint etc :hmmm:    

 

Interested to hear others experience with this issue

 

Rich

Edited by RichG
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 6:20 PM, The wooksta V2.0 said:

I merely offered the separate fuselages together and they seemed to match. Offering the Airfix rudder to the Tamiya, the latter is indeed about a mm taller.

 

@Dave Fleming just to note that the original observation on the comparison of the new Airfix kit with the old Tamiya kit in particular their respective fins (or was it rudders) was subsequently corrected by the OP as above to say there was in fact a difference between the two of "about a mm".

 

3.5 inches = 1.2 mm in 1/72. Which I suggest makes the Airfix kit about spot-on for those that are worried about such things :hmmm: 

 

Having visited this thread a few times I have to say it can be difficult to tell which of the "errors" cited here are objective in nature and based on fact and which are merely subjective views. But it is on this sort of thing that myths develop... 

 

Rich

 

     

Edited by RichG
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Summing up, then, what we have here is an accurately dimensioned kit that has a few niggling errors that ideally shouldn't be there but are easily corrected? And Freightdog (and doubtless other AM producers) are already in the process of producing correction and modification sets to enable a more accurate model to be built by those who want it.

 

Cheers,

Mark

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 2996 Victor said:

Summing up, then, what we have here is an accurately dimensioned kit that has a few niggling errors that ideally shouldn't be there but are easily corrected? And Freightdog (and doubtless other AM producers) are already in the process of producing correction and modification sets to enable a more accurate model to be built by those who want it.

 

Cheers,

Mark

 

Sounds like most of Airfix's releases over the last few years - enjoyable builds with a few things to fix.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Tbolt said:

 

Sounds like most of Airfix's releases over the last few years - enjoyable builds with a few things to fix.

Absolutely! As long as its fundamentally correct in its dimensions, detail errors are correctable if the builder so wants. And if all kits were practically perfect in every way, folks like Freightdog, HPM and Alleycat would soon go out of business!

 

Cheers,

Mark

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 2996 Victor said:

Summing up, then, what we have here is an accurately dimensioned kit that has a few niggling errors that ideally shouldn't be there but are easily corrected? And Freightdog (and doubtless other AM producers) are already in the process of producing correction and modification sets to enable a more accurate model to be built by those who want it.

 

Cheers,

Mark

Personally I don't think the bomb bay doors, rear bomb bay fairing, tail wheel and the rediculously overstated wing spars are just niggling errors.  The spars in particular will take a lot of careful sanding to make them even remotely to scale. If they were as big as portrayed on the kit in real life they would have caused considerable drag and possibly even upset the airflow over the wings.  In my view, when buying a brand-new kit, after-market corrections should be a luxury, not a necessity.   I'll  build the one I received, no doubt, and hopefully the other one I ordered which was supposed to arrive with it but didn't, but for future Merlin 60 variants I'll be going along the Tamiya and after-market route. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that sums up Airfix's quality control in general, some kits such as their Victor and Buccaneer seem to be spot on and on a par with Japanese rivals, whereas others kits don't come out that way.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 71chally said:

Buccaneer seem to be spot on

Only if you accept the fact it is for a specific airframe in a specific time period ;)


 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2021 at 11:55 AM, The wooksta V2.0 said:

I'm building one I got from eBay and truthfully, I'm increasingly disappointed with it.

 

The errors spotted aside, it feels underscale. Some bits are frankly clunky. The fit of the exhausts is clever, but you have to fit them before and not later, leading to difficulties painting.  The fit of the undercarriage...  the use of the wing as a jig is clever, but the fit is fiddly beyond belief and all butt joints, no pins or axles. More worryingly, it looks way too small. Fitting it through the nacelle assembly is tricky and frustrating. The wheels are too narrow, the wheel tread is crude and the hubs look crude too.

 

The props are too small and the trailing edges are way too thick. Why, when Airfix got really thin ones in the Beaufighter, are they the scale equivalent of railway sleepers here?  The cockpit detail is nice but again feels clunky, especially the pilot's seat. He sat on his parachute AFAIK, not a cushion. 

 

Overall, the fit is good, the optional supercharger intakes are a good move and the fact it has the leading edge landing light makes building post war aircraft easier.  I really like the canopy and it fits the Tamiya kit almost perfectly. Hopefully the reverse is the case.

 

The further I get with the build, the more disillusioned I feel. I've been wanting this kit for a good decade or more and I just feel let down. Sorry, Airfix, you could have done so much better.

 

Edit: the prop compares in size with the equivalent Tamiya, but the comment re thickness stands.  I've several spare, so they'll make good substitutes.

Edit 2: the undercarriage length compares with the Tamiya although the complete Airfix assembly is too narrow compared to the Tamiya and the latter is more delicate, the Airfix one looks crude and clunky by comparison. The wheel is a good 1-2mm thinner than the equivalent Tamiya. 

So, less accurate and less delicately moulded than the 21-year-old Tamiya kit, yet 15% more expensive (Hannants prices, 24/8)?  I will pass on this one - and happily take on the chin any accusations of cutting off my nose to spite my face.

 

Sometimes Airfix really do get it right (eg Buccaneer, Beaufort) but too regularly for my taste they have this habit of charging up to the goal-mouth, with the crowd roaring them on, only to shoot wide at point-blank range,  It's just so sad and unnecessary.  And then there are times when they just seem to be extracting the urine (don't get me going on that Sherman Firefly): even the Spitfire Vc, which I rather like, has details (eg pitot head, wheels, nav lights) which are vastly inferior to those on the 1975 (ie 46-year-old) Spitfire Vb.  In the meantime Airfix's competitors, even the small guys like Arma and Zvezda, are continually raising the bar.  I wonder where Airfix see themselves in the spectrum of model manufacturers.  I'd like to think they do have some ambition.

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/08/2021 at 15:26, 71chally said:

And that sums up Airfix's quality control in general,

 

But it's not really a QC issue is it - that's more to do with their equally bad record with short shots, cracked and flawed clear parts (I never did get a properly useable Lightning canopy off them) etc. Surely the problems that @Meatbox8 lists are design issues - down either to the designer of whoever signed off on the design not utilising the resources available to them? 

 

Keith

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/24/2021 at 4:19 PM, Meatbox8 said:

Personally I don't think the bomb bay doors, rear bomb bay fairing, tail wheel and the rediculously overstated wing spars are just niggling errors.  The spars in particular will take a lot of careful sanding to make them even remotely to scale. If they were as big as portrayed on the kit in real life they would have caused considerable drag and possibly even upset the airflow over the wings.  In my view, when buying a brand-new kit, after-market corrections should be a luxury, not a necessity.   I'll  build the one I received, no doubt, and hopefully the other one I ordered which was supposed to arrive with it but didn't, but for future Merlin 60 variants I'll be going along the Tamiya and after-market route. 

 

Even more so when such aftermarket parts have to be used to build what the manufacturer states the kit to represent ! If I'm buying a kit of a Mosquito Mk.XVI, I have to find inside the box all the parts needed for this aircraft, not something different. I can understand having to buy resin parts to add better details, I may even begrudgingly accept having to buy resin parts to improve on the shape of the original parts, but I can't accept having to buy extra parts only to get the basic features of the variant the kit is supposed to represent.

I wonder what the reactions would have been had this kit come from Trumpeter....

Edited by Giorgio N
  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After calling Airfix customer services and speaking to a very nice lady I have now received the second of the two Mosquitos I ordered which was missing from the package.  Fair play to Airfix customer services, at least.  Whether I will build it or not is another matter, mind you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Giorgio N said:

 

Even more so when such aftermarket parts have to be used to build what the manufacturer states the kit to represent ! If I'm buying a kit of a Mosquito Mk.XVI, I have to find inside the box all the parts needed for this aircraft, not something different. I can understand having to buy resin parts to add better details, I may even begrudgingly accept having to buy resin parts to improve on the shape of the original parts, but I can't accept having to buy extra parts only to get the basic features of the variant the kit is supposed to represent.

I wonder what the reactions would have been had this kit come from Trumpeter....

Exactly.  The irony is that, had Airfix got this kit right, the aftermarket boys would probably have released a set to convert it to a TT.35!

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2021 at 11:42 AM, Rabbit Leader said:


Without wanting to sound like a total prat, I think you’re missing the essence of the discussion here Rich. No one is saying that we are disappointed in having a great new tool Two Stage Mossie, its just that it’s a shame that after all the effort that’s gone into it, small errors like this have crept in. I’m sure the kit designer(s) take lots of pride in their hard work and if that was me, I’d be kicking myself to the moon and back to let this one slip. I would like to see Airfix correct this by moulding a new rear fairing and anti shimmy tail wheel and possibly including these parts into a subsequent production batch. I also know that the chances of this happening are arguably next to zero! 
 

Cheers and regards.. Dave. 

If only they'd gone to the De Havilland Museum instead of Cosford.  Or possibly just looked at some photos of a B.XVI.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 2:48 AM, Troy Smith said:

Airfix already do this, what they need to do now is get their consultants in when the main design research has been done to give it a lookover and error check it.  This does mean trusting their consultants with commercial material though, which maybe the stumbling block on this.  

Example, they used @Sabrejet on their 1/48 Sabre,  if they shown him the CAD work, he'd have spotted the oleo locks and lifting jacks on museum example LIDARed, and pointed out the cockpit was black, not grey.

Airfix  do read BM as well.   

Nothing a confidentiality clause couldn't sort out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

I wonder what the reactions would have been had this kit come from Trumpeter....

 

I think people would be surprised how accurate it is for Trumpeter. But when it comes from Airfix, doing a British subject of which there is plenty of info around and they got the main things wrong with this kit correct on their previous 1/48th scale kit, you expect more.

 

But I've looked around on s few other forums and no one seem to be complaining about all the accuracy issues brought up here, so I just think you are all a bunch of obsessed river counters 😉😂

  • Like 3
  • Haha 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tbolt said:

 

But I've looked around on s few other forums and no one seem to be complaining about all the accuracy issues brought up here, so I just think you are all a bunch of obsessed river counters 😉😂

I think you mean FRUSTRATED rivet counters!?

There aren't that many rivets to count on a Mosquito so, I guess they need to find other minutiae and trivia to complain about. 🤔😉😂

Meanwhile, I'll just get on with building mine. 😊

 

John.

Edited by Beermonster1958
  • Like 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2021 at 11:23 PM, The wooksta V2.0 said:

Undercarriage is too skinny, wire guards crude. Wheels have over heavy block detail.

Assembly of said undercarriage is fiddly and lacks fitment pins.

Tailwheel ditto

Props too thick and lacking in aerofoil section

Control column is crude.

Fit of the closed bomb door is a bit sloppy, leaving a step.

Those are due to moulding limitations mostly. Recurring item, and Paramjit has indicated it as such in his presentation talks as the type of trade-offs they need to make because of the material use. 

Should they ever decide to re-locate the injection moulding elsewhere (the Victor BS Mk.2 was made in UK) that might open opportunities to tackle that limitation. 

Quote

(tailwheel) not the Marstrand twin contact type

Pilot's seat has cushion when the pilot sat in a bucket seat on his parachute.

Bomb doors incorrect for B.16, having the pockets for drogues of TT.35

Rear fairing has cutouts for drogues.

Those are detail errors that might have been avoided, as mentioned above by @Troy Smith by getting extra research opportunities. 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
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...