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

[Meatbox8]

9 hours ago, stevehnz said:

Nah, only about 4" I reckon.   I am in fact wondering if it is an illusion caused by a panel line very close to the wing trailing edge. I'll be interested to see it in the flesh having registered interest in one from a couple of sellers, neither of which have stock as yet.

Steve.

Ony 4? That's alrght then.  I think you might be right Steve, although the invasion stripes do seem to 'change directon' at that point which is what made me wonder.

[Meatbox8]

1 hour ago, 71chally said:

be interesting to see a side by side report, KP have already won me over with the amount of variants.

From what I've seen of built up examples of the KP kit the nose to prop spinner join doesn't look smooth enough.  On the real thing it looks practically like a continuos gentle curve while on the kits there is a quite pronounced step.

[Paul Bradley]

4 hours ago, keithjs said:

On that theory then, shouldn't Beaumonts aircraft in the kit have the fishplates on? That particular aircraft in the Eduard series 1 kit certainly shows them fitted?

 

Yes, it should, and also the wing root bulges. I had to add them to my SH 1/32 model which also didn't feature them. I don't know about the Eduard kit as I haven't seen one. 

 

 

[Richard Humm]

7 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

I'd say that Airfix took an interesting approach in offering a "Series 1" aircraft, to my memory these had not been offered before in 1/72.

There was the Revell kit, though as it's older than I am, I can't blame you for forgetting it.

[Johnson]

More photos of JN766.

 

With all due respect and thanks to @David A Collins, the IWM photo looks a bit sharper and better exposed than the Newark Air Museum copy. Here's the link to the IWM version and another of JN766. Hope this is in the right place mods, happy to have it moved to WW2 section if more appropriate.

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205127012

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205206586

 

2nd photo a good view of port side for those who wish to check accuracy.

[Paul Bradley]

That first one shows well the wing root bulge and, barely discernable (as they should be) the fishplates. 

[IanC]

56 minutes ago, Johnson said:

More photos of JN766.

 

With all due respect and thanks to @David A Collins, the IWM photo looks a bit sharper and better exposed than the Newark Air Museum copy. Here's the link to the IWM version and another of JN766. Hope this is in the right place mods, happy to have it moved to WW2 section if more appropriate.

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205127012

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205206586

 

2nd photo a good view of port side for those who wish to check accuracy.

 

The IWM photos are of course the originals, part of the wartime Ministry of Information official collection. These shots may have been digitised from the negs too. 

[Johnson]

39 minutes ago, IanC said:

These shots may have been digitised from the negs too

Which would be good, far more information (data these days) in the negs.

[ththtttu7]

I for one am looking forward to building this new Tempest. I enjoyed making their new-tool 1/72 scale Hurricane and Typhoon, and this should be a good addition to the Hawker range.

[keithjs]

19 hours ago, Paul Bradley said:

 

Yes, it should, and also the wing root bulges. I had to add them to my SH 1/32 model which also didn't feature them. I don't know about the Eduard kit as I haven't seen one. 

 

 

Thank you. So what do the wing bulges look like?

Edited March 8, 2022 by keithjs

[Paul Bradley]

18 hours ago, Johnson said:

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205127012

 

 

@keithjs What do the bulges look like? Take a look at this photo. A squat, rounded trapezoid is probably the best description. 

[keithjs]

2 hours ago, Paul Bradley said:

 

@keithjs What do the bulges look like? Take a look at this photo. A squat, rounded trapezoid is probably the best description. 

Thanks Paul. Found this photo too showing what I assume is the bulge in question?

 

1434663652614 

[Paul Bradley]

Yep. Like a zit on the wingroot. Nice photo, too, of the first production Tempest V, so it shows all the salient features of a Series 1 Mk.V

[Adam Poultney]

On 07/03/2022 at 09:43, Giorgio N said:

 

They were exactly the ones I was checking to see if those features were present. I can't see the builges in the pics, guess that they went with a later configuration.

 

 

Thanks for the summary, it's good to have all the details in one single post (and of course thanks to Chris for sharing his vast knowledge on the subject).

 

I'd say that Airfix took an interesting approach in offering a "Series 1" aircraft, to my memory these had not been offered before in 1/72. Unfortunately the apparent lack of certain features would make the kit from the box correct for only a small number of aircraft, that do not include either options in the decal sheet.

I'm sure most modellers will not bother with the differences, those who want an accurate configuration however will have to decide what detail to add according to the desired choice of markings.

Did you really have to post that now im going to have to learn all those differences before even thinking about buying this kit! Oh well, I already rivet count my vulcans and i enjoy that, might as well start doing it to everything i build 🙂

[keithjs]

I would imagine the bulge should be fairly simple to add but if your particular aircraft needs the fishplates, they are going to be tiny.....They're small enough in the 148th Eduard kit...🔍 I can't even really see them on that photo....

Edited March 8, 2022 by keithjs

[Johnson]

So if I understand this correctly, to make it as a correct Series 1 Tempest V with kit markings, I'll need;

• Smaller main u/c wheels
• The bulges at the wing root
• Fishplates (debatable at 1/72?)

Anything else?

[ththtttu7]

2 hours ago, keithjs said:

Thanks Paul. Found this photo too showing what I assume is the bulge in question?

 

1434663652614 

 

Test Pilot Bill Humble?

 

Kate Humbles grandfather!

[keithjs]

Really? Interesting to see the lack of any kind of flying helmet.

[ththtttu7]

14 minutes ago, keithjs said:

Really? Interesting to see the lack of any kind of flying helmet.

 

Yes, really.

[71chally]

2 hours ago, keithjs said:

Interesting to see the lack of any kind of flying helmet.

Not uncommon for the era,

 

https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/de-havilland-hornet

 

 

https://static.thisdayinaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/tdia/2014/09/1034x365xScreen-Shot-2014-09-26-at-19.19.12.png.pagespeed.ic_.t8Vpx6QCzJ.jpg

 

And yes, that is Bill Humble in the Tempest.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YhGsknrK8Io/SmWex0KCLaI/AAAAAAAAGGI/N5p_fg6bmdI/s1600-h/Tempest+bill+humble.jpg

[john224]

3 hours ago, keithjs said:

Really? Interesting to see the lack of any kind of flying helmet.

Roly Falk was known for doing test flights in a pin stripe suit and tie. Different time!

[Wez]

On 08/03/2022 at 17:02, Johnson said:

So if I understand this correctly, to make it as a correct Series 1 Tempest V with kit markings, I'll need;

• Smaller main u/c wheels
• The bulges at the wing root
• Fishplates (debatable at 1/72?)

Anything else?

 

Depends, check the serial number of your chosen subject against Paul's post below:

 

On 06/03/2022 at 13:15, Paul Bradley said:

 

Here are some notes I made based on @ChrisThomas' research which can be found elsewhere on BM. 

 

The Tempest V came in two basic flavours – Series 1, which is generally reckoned to be the first 100 or so airframes (JN729-773, JN792-822, JN854-877), and Series 2 that encompassed the remaining production of the type. However, within those two basic configurations there were some subtle differences that make it a difficult task to pin down the exact specs of a specific airframe at a specific time.  Without going into great detail, here’s a quick summary of the features:

 

Long-barrelled cannon – Denoting the use of the Hispano Mk.II 20mm cannon, at least the first 39 Tempest Vs, up to JN767, had cannon fairings protruding from the wing leading edge. 

Wing root blister – The first 50 Tempests, up to JN796, used Typhoon centre-sections. As the Tempest wing was thinner at the root, part of the steel tubing that made up this structure had to be covered by a small blister. 

Fishplates – These small structural strengtheners were found up to at least the 85th airframe, JN862. 

Cuckoo door dust filters – Not required for Series 1 aircraft.

Main wheels – Early Tempests had Typhoon main wheel hubs with 5 spokes and Dunlop EX 11.25-12 tyres. Sometime in the JN-series, this changed to a new 4-spoke design, but the exact cut off is not known. 

Under wing stores – long-range tank capability was not fitted until JN797, bomb carriage from 151st airframe and rocket projectiles from the 251st airframe.

 

On 05/03/2022 at 16:38, theplasticsurgeon said:

Parts look great - apart from some distortion around the Stbd undercarriage root,

Panel lines look OK to me.  Different prop spinners for each version.

Four and 5 spoke wheels, thought instructions only use 5 spokes - so maybe more options next year.

 

Has anybody else got this distortion?

Should I return this kit?

 

Edited Tuesday 08 March:  This kit was returned to the retailer yesterday.

Much as I'd been looking forward to it since being announced in Jan 2021 - I'm not paying top-whack for a sub-standard article.

Although refunded, the shop are getting me another - hopefully by the weekend.

 

 

Thanks for showing this, it was the first thing I checked on my three kits which arrived today, fortunately all were fine in this area, looks like it was extracted from the mould too soon.  You were right to return the kit.

 

I agree about the parts and the panel lines, I think Airfix have done a great job with this kit.

 

You can definitely make a Series 2 Tempest from this kit.

 

With regards to the spinners, it's not a case of the longer spinner was fitted to the Series 2 and the shorter to the Series 1, many, many Series 2 had the shorter spinner fitted, check your photos.  A while back I had some correspondence with @Chris Thomas, this included some photos of TT.5's, I was surprised to see one of them had a longer spinner which I normally associated with the Mk.VI and commented on this to Chris, he confirmed that some did indeed have the longer spinner fitted but at that time, he couldn't align it with any particular production batch, it seemed the aircraft got whatever was available.

 

Does anyone know whether the surviving Series 1's were overhauled to Series 2 standard?  I know at least two were converted to TT.5 standard as the prototypes.

 

This kit's gone to the top of my pile, I'll be starting mine this week.

[Chris Thomas]

56 minutes ago, Wez said:

 

Depends, check the serial number of your chosen subject against Paul's post below:

 

 

 

Thanks for showing this, it was the first thing I checked on my three kits which arrived today, fortunately all were fine in this area, looks like it was extracted from the mould too soon.  You were right to return the kit.

 

I agree about the parts and the panel lines, I think Airfix have done a great job with this kit.

 

You can definitely make a Series 2 Tempest from this kit.

 

With regards to the spinners, it's not a case of the longer spinner was fitted to the Series 2 and the shorter to the Series 1, many, many Series 2 had the shorter spinner fitted, check your photos.  A while back I had some correspondence with @Chris Thomas, this included some photos of TT.5's, I was surprised to see one of them had a longer spinner which I normally associated with the Mk.VI and commented on this to Chris, he confirmed that some did indeed have the longer spinner fitted but at that time, he couldn't align it with any particular production batch, it seemed the aircraft got whatever was available.

 

Does anyone know whether the surviving Series 1's were overhauled to Series 2 standard?  I know at least two were converted to TT.5 standard as the prototypes.

 

This kit's gone to the top of my pile, I'll be starting mine this week.

Hi Wes, I'm away from home and records at present but I can say none of the Series 1 Tempests were upgraded. The survivors were returned to Hawker for refurbishment but were not upgraded - they would have required new wings and major work on the fuselage. They were reissued   To 278 Sqn, an AA cooperation unit and continued in use into 1946. I do not recall any being converted to TT5.

 

the spinners in the kit are to represent the DeH and   Rotol prop/spinners.  Most Tempest Vs, including all the series 1s had DeH; the Rotols appeared c March 45 and were mostly fitted to the SN serialled aircraft.

[Wez]

4 minutes ago, Chris Thomas said:

Hi Wes, I'm away from home and records at present but I can say none of the Series 1 Tempests were upgraded. The survivors were returned to Hawker for refurbishment but were not upgraded - they would have required new wings and major work on the fuselage. They were reissued   To 278 Sqn, an AA cooperation unit and continued in use into 1946. I do not recall any being converted to TT5.

 

the spinners in the kit are to represent the DeH and   Rotol prop/spinners.  Most Tempest Vs, including all the series 1s had DeH; the Rotols appeared c March 45 and were mostly fitted to the SN serialled aircraft.

 

Thanks for that Chris, the Franks book (Airframe & Miniature No.4), states that Mk.5 Srs 1 ser no JN807 and JN781 were converted to TT.5 standard (not as prototypes, my mistake), but I'd have to see evidence of that before I take it as gospel. 

 

Most of those, but not all that I can make out as having the longer spinner have been SN serialled aircraft but I've also seen pictures of SN aircraft with the shorter spinner associated with the DH prop, I guess they just got what was available, strange that the ministry didn't standardise on the Rotol prop and spinner fit in post war service.

[Chris Thomas]

The two serials you quote were, I believe, Series 2.  JN serialled Tempests, started as series 1.but drifted into series 2 midway through the contract.  More on that when I return in about 10 days.