1/72 Hawker Tempest Mk. V by Airfix - release Autumn 2021

[Wez]

15 hours ago, Denford said:

One could call the P-47 a failure: all the complicated turbosupercharger equipment that was rarely 'needed' as it's forte was ground attack!

 

Not quite correct, the Thunderbolt's forte was actually at altitude, it's what it was designed for hence the turbosupercharger.  That it got used for ground attack was due to it having a radial engine and therefore didn't suffer from the likelihood of small arms fire taking out the cooling system.  Plus it could carry a bucket load of weapons!

 

5 hours ago, Magua87 said:

The Academy kit also has anhedral on the inboard sections of the wings. Not a difficult fix, but a problem regardless. 

 

Good point, forgotten about that.

[Truro Model Builder]

I built the Academy Tempest as a Mk.II with a resin conversion (sorry, cannot remember who from) that was a single piece comprising of the nose and the forward edge radiators. The same company also produced a Mk.VI conversion as well. It was a very simple job to do and I am sure equivalent conversions could be created for the Airfix kit.

 

The biggest problem I found about the Academy kit was just how flimsy the undercarriage legs were. Wobble wobble.

[Beard]

46 minutes ago, Truro Model Builder said:

The biggest problem I found about the Academy kit was just how flimsy the undercarriage legs were. Wobble wobble.

That's a really problem and something I hope Airfix avoid.

[Work In Progress]

It's pretty much inherent in the design of the full size aircraft, unfortunately. Especially in small 1/72 scale, with injection-moulded polystyrene as the material, if you make them anything close to scale, then they are going to be fairly fragile. As someone noted above, the Heller kit has the same problem.

 

The only solutions available seem to be

- make them much beefier than scale, which everyone would complain about

- make them integral with the undercarriage doors, 1960 kit style, with a beefy non-scale mounting point, which everyone would also complain about, 

- make some bronze ones, as Eduard sell as an optional extra for their 1/48 kit, but that would send the price of the kit sky-high

 

Even in 1/32 I notice that Special Hobby has had to bring out some specially hardened resin ones, which I wish I had bought before the current trade situation arose

https://www.specialhobby.eu/en/our-own-production/cmk-kits/detail-sets/tempest-main-undercarriage-strengthened-legs-for-special-hobby-kit.html

Edited January 9, 2021 by Work In Progress

[Andre B]

2 hours ago, Beard said:

That's a really problem and something I hope Airfix avoid.

 

Wonder with the soft plastic used by Airfix. Still got problems with the P-51D Mustang. Bet it is an golden oportunity for the aftermarket. Also needed for Academy, Heller...

 

Cheers  / André 

[Chaotic Mike]

1 hour ago, Work In Progress said:

It's pretty much inherent in the design of the full size aircraft, unfortunately. Especially in small 1/72 scale, with injection-moulded polystyrene as the material, if you make them anything close to scale, then they are going to be fairly fragile. As someone noted above, the Heller kit has the same problem.

 

The only solutions available seem to be

- make them much beefier than scale, which everyone would complain about

- make them integral with the undercarriage doors, 1960 kit style, with a beefy non-scale mounting point, which everyone would also complain about, 

- make some bronze ones, as Eduard sell as an optional extra for their 1/48 kit, but that would send the price of the kit sky-high

 

Even in 1/32 I notice that Special Hobby has had to bring out some specially hardened resin ones, which I wish I had bought before the current trade situation arose

https://www.specialhobby.eu/en/our-own-production/cmk-kits/detail-sets/tempest-main-undercarriage-strengthened-legs-for-special-hobby-kit.html

I built the SH Tempest with a heavy resin engine up front and the standard polystyrene landing gear, and it hasn't collapsed yet, 2 years on... 

 

[Meatbox8]

14 hours ago, k5054nz said:

I'm not a mod, but perhaps we should keep this thread on topic?

 

I noticed the two colour profiles don't include the cannon fairings present in the CADs. A mistake?

I think it must be as both aircraft represented had the fairings.  I'm guessing Airfix might have wanted to push this out for their 2021 release announcement and so these are 'roughs'.  I hope the fairings are separate parts so that a Series II can be built without surgery.  On the CAD pictures they are a different colour which suggests they will be.  Still, early days. 

[Meatbox8]

2 hours ago, Work In Progress said:

It's pretty much inherent in the design of the full size aircraft, unfortunately. Especially in small 1/72 scale, with injection-moulded polystyrene as the material, if you make them anything close to scale, then they are going to be fairly fragile. As someone noted above, the Heller kit has the same problem.

 

The only solutions available seem to be

- make them much beefier than scale, which everyone would complain about

- make them integral with the undercarriage doors, 1960 kit style, with a beefy non-scale mounting point, which everyone would also complain about, 

- make some bronze ones, as Eduard sell as an optional extra for their 1/48 kit, but that would send the price of the kit sky-high

 

Even in 1/32 I notice that Special Hobby has had to bring out some specially hardened resin ones, which I wish I had bought before the current trade situation arose

https://www.specialhobby.eu/en/our-own-production/cmk-kits/detail-sets/tempest-main-undercarriage-strengthened-legs-for-special-hobby-kit.html

Or build them with the wheels up.  Then you can take them for a spin around the modelling den. 

[alt-92]

Hmm.. that was one thing missing in the announcements. 
The stands..

[Andre B]

Concerning the Mk. II...

What I remember Matchbox used the same prop for both variants. But with different spinners. How was it with the real aircrafts?

 

Cheers / André 

 

[Work In Progress]

14 minutes ago, Andre B said:

Matchbox used the same prop for both variants. But with different spinners. How was it with the real aircraft

It's the same direction of rotation but the prop on the Centaurus is a slightly smaller diameter.

There are two different makes of prop on Sabre Tempests, dH and Rotol, both 14' diameter. If I recall correctly there are two different spinners as well, but someone like Chris Thomas will know better than me. The Tempest II prop is 12' 9".

Edited January 9, 2021 by Work In Progress

[XV107]

3 hours ago, Meatbox8 said:

Or build them with the wheels up.  Then you can take them for a spin around the modelling den. 

 

Doesn't everyone do tha.... Oh. So that's why they put the wheels into kits, is it? Every day a school day....

 

1 hour ago, Andre B said:

Concerning the Mk. II...

What I remember Matchbox used the same prop for both variants. But with different spinners

 

You were meant to shave a bit off the end of the prop to get the right length. Oddly enough, aged 8, I thought I'd not bother.... 40 years later, I'd... er.... still not bother, tbh, and just mutter about 'nostalgia' if asked to explain the erroneous prop length by someone who'd noticed.

[Work In Progress]

19 hours ago, Meatbox8 said:

Or build them with the wheels up.  

 

Actually in 1/72  I do that quite a lot, especially on older kits where decent crew figures are supplied, and make my own stands, usually to display them a bit higher off the shelf than the original Airfix / Frog / Matchbox stands would have had them. I think a model of an aircraft in flight looks best at least half a wingspan above the shelf, and having them all at different heights, usually banking and nose-up / nose-down a bit means you can make better use of the shelf space.

[Meatbox8]

1 hour ago, Work In Progress said:

 

Actually in 1/72  I do that quite a lot, especially on older kits where decent crew figures are supplied, and make my own stands, usually to display them a bit higher off the shelf than the original Airfix / Frog / Matchbox stands would have had them. I think a model of an aircraft in flight looks best at least half a wingspan above the shelf, and having them all at different heights, usually banking and nose-up / nose-down a bit means you can make better use of the shelf space.

I can't quite bring myself to build WW2 single-engined fighters with the wheels down.  They are just too appealing with the wheels up.

[Work In Progress]

2 minutes ago, Meatbox8 said:

I can't quite bring myself to build WW2 single-engined fighters with the wheels down.  They are just too appealing with the wheels up.

 

As a generalisation I know where you are coming from but there are some exceptions for me, even in-flight representations. A Corsair with everything dangling, wing down in the last gasp of a curved approach  to a carrier deck, is like a bird of prey pouncing on a vole 

[Meatbox8]

1 minute ago, Work In Progress said:

 

As a generalisation I know where you are coming from but there are some exceptions for me, even in-flight representations. A Corsair with everything dangling, wing down in the last gasp of a curved approach  to a carrier deck, is like a bird of prey pouncing on a vole 

 

I think I would make exceptions too.  If I ever build one of Arma's Wildcats I think I'f have the wheels down as otherwise it would roll around like a Weeble. 

[Greenshirt]

54 minutes ago, Meatbox8 said:

I can't quite bring myself to build WW2 single-engined fighters with the wheels down.  They are just too appealing with the wheels up.

I have a mental image of a [insert fighter-bomber here] rolling inverted, pulling its nose through the vertical to strike a target that it had just passed over. Pause this and insert the acrylic rod. The model can show off those rockets, bazooka tubes, or bombs to good effect but also show it in its most lethal pose, about to strike. 
 

I haven’t done one yet, but I want one of my Typhoons, Thunderbolts, Fw-190s, etc, in this manner.

 

Tim

[Yes_Man]

Wasn't too fussed about the Tempest before but I didn't realise the Academy kit had so many shape problems. Certainly has made me more interested in nabbing one of these and off-loading the 2 Academy kits in my stash. I'm very much looking forward to seeing the Tempest judging on the quality of the recent Airfix Spitfire Vc. Airfix seem to finally be getting close to where 1/72 new tool stuff should be. Not that anyone is expecting them to be close to Eduard or Tamiya, however definitely trading blows with Revell and Italeri.

[Meatbox8]

1 hour ago, Greenshirt said:

I have a mental image of a [insert fighter-bomber here] rolling inverted, pulling its nose through the vertical to strike a target that it had just passed over. Pause this and insert the acrylic rod. The model can show off those rockets, bazooka tubes, or bombs to good effect but also show it in its most lethal pose, about to strike. 
 

I haven’t done one yet, but I want one of my Typhoons, Thunderbolts, Fw-190s, etc, in this manner.

 

Tim

Sounds good.

[Denford]

On 1/7/2021 at 2:57 PM, Meatbox8 said:

So the big question is who's am I going to build? Mackie, Fairbanks, Beamont, Schrader, Payton, Ness or Berry?  Most of them probably!

N'oubliez pas Closterman.

Mine will be Fairbanks alongside a victim (yet to be built) Ar234B.

Tempest website is good source of information.

[Meatbox8]

7 minutes ago, Denford said:

N'oubliez pas Closterman.

Mine will be Fairbanks alongside a victim (yet to be built) Ar234B.

Tempest website is good source of information.

Already done Closterman with the Academy kit.  I vaguely remember building the ancient Revell offering as his sometime in the 70s.  Lots of rivets, I seem to remember.

[VMA131Marine]

On 1/8/2021 at 7:05 AM, sroubos said:

Some really nice new kits from Airfix; both the Mosquito and Tempest need easily available kits as the competition is difficult or expensive to get a hold off.

The only competition for a 1/72 Mosquito with two-stage Merlins is the Matchbox kit. That is, until the Special Hobby kits get released. But if they focus on the fighter versions then there won’t be any overlap.

[Britman]

TT 5 for me.

Keith

[Thomas V.]

Somehow have mixed feelings about this one, still remember 1989 release of Heller kit in the Aircraft Of The Aces series and complete sellout in half an hour of putting boxes on the shelves,while being first new Tempest in 1/72 to be released in two decades undoubtedly will prove to be a success, in 2021 to see CAD and such thick trailing edges, beyond belief, both Eduard and ICM, come to think of it even Italeri and Revell have stepped up the game in last 10-15 years in 72nd scale, not to mention others,Airfix truly does deserve better owner.

 

 

Edited January 10, 2021 by Thomas V.

[Truro Model Builder]

38 minutes ago, Thomas V. said:

Somehow have mixed feelings about this one, still remember 1989 release of Heller kit in the Aircraft Of The Aces series and complete sellout in half an hour of putting boxes on the shelves,while being first new Tempest in 1/72 to be released in two decades undoubtedly will prove to be a success, in 2021 to see CAD and such thick trailing edges, beyond belief, both Eduard and ICM, come to think of it even Italeri and Revell have stepped up the game in last 10-15 years in 72nd scale, not to mention others,Airfix truly does deserve better owner.

 

 

 

You do realise that CAD artwork is not indicative of a finished product?