Jump to content

1/72 - Hawker Tempest Mk.V/VI & Mk.II by Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) - released - P.1027 Tempest conversion by Freightdog Models


Homebee

Recommended Posts

On 14/02/2022 at 08:45, Homebee said:

Released

- ref. KPM0226 - Hawker Tempest F.2 - export - https://www.mn-modelar.com/1-72-tempest-f-2-export-en/

- ref. KPM0227 - Hawker Tempest Mk.II/F.2 - https://www.mn-modelar.com/1-72-tempest-mk-ii-f-2-en/

- ref. KPM0228 - Hawker Tempest F.2 - silver wings - https://www.mn-modelar.com/1-72-tempest-f-2-silver-wings-en/

 

1-72-tempest-f.2-export.jpg 1-72-tempest-mk.ii-f.2.jpg 1-72-tempest-f.2-silver-wings.jpg

 

V.P.

 

Ordered the mk ll boxing today, but there is a slight error in the colour scheme for the SEAC option. PR527 had white identification stripes on the tail plane and under the wings as well. Hard to tell from photos if it had them on the upper surfaces, if pushed I’d say no.. there were some nice photos posted on the RAF in Burma Facebook page last year.

Edited by Dave Fleming
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So I’ve been building a KP Tempest Mk.II alongside a new tool Airfix Mk.V. Both builds have been pleasant but there has been something bothering me about the representation of the Centaurus radial engine in the Mk.II. You get a disk of plastic with the front of the engine in half-relief and there is position notch in the disk but no comparable lug in the fuselage to correctly orient the engine piece. The engine disk is not entirely symmetrical as there is what looks like a magneto between two of the cylinders. So, I went looking for a reference, as one does. 
On finding a helpful image, It took me a minute to realise that the reason the engine face looks wrong is because it has pushrods; the Centaurus is a sleeve valve engine and doesn’t have any. 
It’s not a huge deal. Once the engine is painted black and the prop and spinner is in place only an eagle-eye will be able to spot the error, but there is an opportunity here for the aftermarket to provide something more accurate.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

On finding a helpful image, It took me a minute to realise that the reason the engine face looks wrong is because it has pushrods; the Centaurus is a sleeve valve engine and doesn’t have any. 
It’s not a huge deal. Once the engine is painted black and the prop and spinner is in place only an eagle-eye will be able to spot the error, but there is an opportunity here for the aftermarket to provide something more accurate.

 

That's funny! Looks like they have used something similar to a PW 1830!

 

On the real thing, the gap between the spinner and the cowl is so small you can hardly see what's behind it

adde81c2419540c2b6ef461985d7e64b.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s one other thing I noticed: the hole in the engine disc for the prop shaft is not centered. If you glue the gear case fairing to the engine before installing the engine in the fuselage and you line up the holes in the engine and gear case then the gear case will be seriously off-center in the cowl opening. I glued the gear case to the engine after the nose was all assembled so that the alignment is good.

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

8 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

There’s one other thing I noticed: the hole in the engine disc for the prop shaft is not centered. If you glue the gear case fairing to the engine before installing the engine in the fuselage and you line up the holes in the engine and gear case then the gear case will be seriously off-center in the cowl opening. I glued the gear case to the engine after the nose was all assembled so that the alignment is good.

Now you mention it it is a bit off! I keep looking at that engine thinking 'I've seen bit that before' - not sure what kit though!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dave Fleming said:

Now you mention it it is a bit off! I keep looking at that engine thinking 'I've seen bit that before' - not sure what kit though!

I know what you mean. It has the correct 9 cylinders for the front row of the Centaurus, which means it’s also correct for the Wright Cyclone - which has pushrods.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

There’s one other thing I noticed: the hole in the engine disc for the prop shaft is not centered. 

 

This is,  sadly, the sort of thing I've come to expect from KP's limited-run offerings. Remember their MB5, which had the horizontal stabilizers at different heights? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got the KP Tempest V up to the end of major assembly then lost interest.  The nose joint was a pita to clean up, and the angle from cockpit to spinner looked a bit excessive to my eye.

 

That may have been due to my poor assembly skills, of course!  Has anyone compared the kit (and the Airfix one) to plans?

 

Rgds

 

Martin

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mike romeo said:

I got the KP Tempest V up to the end of major assembly then lost interest.  The nose joint was a pita to clean up, and the angle from cockpit to spinner looked a bit excessive to my eye.

 

That may have been due to my poor assembly skills, of course!  Has anyone compared the kit (and the Airfix one) to plans?

 

Rgds

 

Martin

Oh, and also the decals were nothing to write home about.  Both the blue and red of the roundels were too bright.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, mike romeo said:

I got the KP Tempest V up to the end of major assembly then lost interest.

I've been toiling away at the Mk II. A pity as I had paused my Special Hobby build some time ago in the expectation this would be a significantly better starting point. It is - but I did have to check. The engine-face issue is frustrating, but as you say Martin the radiator gap around the spinner is tiny enough to be able to get away with it. The wheel bays/undercarriage are much better than Special Hobby, and the cockpit is OK for the scale. The fact that it's mostly black down there helps. A pity that the grilles on top of the nose are to be represented by a decal - Special Hobby has a bit of etch for that, though I'm not convinced it's fully accurate. Finally I had a go at getting the gills either side of the engine to look a bit better. Once that was done and all the filling/sanding was more or less complete, and mindful that I'm currently separated from my airbrush, it took its rightful place in the paint queue (aka shelf of doom)...

 

Justin

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

On 4/23/2022 at 8:17 AM, Bedders said:

I've been toiling away at the Mk II. A pity as I had paused my Special Hobby build some time ago in the expectation this would be a significantly better starting point. It is - but I did have to check. The engine-face issue is frustrating, but as you say Martin the radiator gap around the spinner is tiny enough to be able to get away with it. The wheel bays/undercarriage are much better than Special Hobby, and the cockpit is OK for the scale. The fact that it's mostly black down there helps. A pity that the grilles on top of the nose are to be represented by a decal - Special Hobby has a bit of etch for that, though I'm not convinced it's fully accurate. Finally I had a go at getting the gills either side of the engine to look a bit better. Once that was done and all the filling/sanding was more or less complete, and mindful that I'm currently separated from my airbrush, it took its rightful place in the paint queue (aka shelf of doom)...

 

Justin

Thanks for the response, but I have to defer to @Dave Fleming for pointing out the small gap dimensions.

 

Rgds

 

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2022 at 12:09 PM, Procopius said:

 

This is,  sadly, the sort of thing I've come to expect from KP's limited-run offerings. Remember their MB5, which had the horizontal stabilizers at different heights? 

Not to mention a cockpit floor/seat twice as wide as the internal space. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 22/04/2022 at 20:34, mike romeo said:

Oh, and also the decals were nothing to write home about.  Both the blue and red of the roundels were too bright.

 

Unfortunately, this is often the case with their decals. I have seen that with their Spitfire boxings as well. The same goes for their sky code letters. They are simply not of the right color and way too greenish. But since I really like their new Spitfires and Tempests I just got used to replacing them from my spares box.

Edited by 112 Squadron
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fwiw, here's my Mk II build, just completed. Basically OOB, though I did a bit of work on the gills. The decals were indeed a slight disappointment: (i) the national markings were the wrong colours and the wrong sizes (I replaced them with an excellent Tecmod set); (ii) the underwing serials were too small and the wrong style (I had no other options so used them anyway); (iii) there was a decent crop of stencils but no instructions on where to place them (I used some from Model Alliance, some of which silvered slightly).

 

776-FD338-1272-4-F54-B64-D-9-C79-C4-F695

 

C6236-A36-E37-A-4-A70-8756-4-DC5102-C7-B

 

4-C645703-BB3-F-483-A-8-C8-A-0-DF2-FF6-E

 

2097-E9-B5-F797-470-D-ADAD-48-AFFFB2-FB1

 

Painting the wing walkways was a slight faff that I could have done without. Other than that it was a reasonably fun build, though I fear the main legs are too long.

 

BBCAE059-D8-C8-44-C2-9-D20-55796-F517-B0

 

I look forward to doing a comparison with the Airfix Mk V soon.

 

Justin

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Bedders said:

Fwiw, here's my Mk II build, just completed. Basically OOB, though I did a bit of work on the gills. The decals were indeed a slight disappointment: (i) the national markings were the wrong colours and the wrong sizes (I replaced them with an excellent Tecmod set); (ii) the underwing serials were too small and the wrong style (I had no other options so used them anyway); (iii) there was a decent crop of stencils but no instructions on where to place them (I used some from Model Alliance, some of which silvered slightly).

 

776-FD338-1272-4-F54-B64-D-9-C79-C4-F695

 

C6236-A36-E37-A-4-A70-8756-4-DC5102-C7-B

 

4-C645703-BB3-F-483-A-8-C8-A-0-DF2-FF6-E

 

2097-E9-B5-F797-470-D-ADAD-48-AFFFB2-FB1

 

Painting the wing walkways was a slight faff that I could have done without. Other than that it was a reasonably fun build, though I fear the main legs are too long.

 

BBCAE059-D8-C8-44-C2-9-D20-55796-F517-B0

 

I look forward to doing a comparison with the Airfix Mk V soon.

 

Justin

Nice!  You made a much better job of the nose joint than I did on my Mk V.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Homebee changed the title to 1/72 - Hawker Tempest Mk.V/VI & Mk.II by Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) - released - P.1027 Tempest conversion by Freightdog Models

Source: https://www.facebook.com/freightdogmodels/posts/pfbid02hj1Yk2dY4SgNXbvNKKo5XsY29PHjXJyhiJXrp27sEUdWnMZ3o78uBAqj4F2oLQxol

 

Quote

Another release planned for Telford in November, a 1/72 scale proposed Rolls Royce Eagle powered Hawker P.1027 Tempest conversion, to fit the Kovozavody Prostejov kit. I have a few other new releases planned, including a brand-new range as a joint venture with Jon Davies and Dave Little (owner of Combat Kits). More details on this to follow nearer to Scale Modelworld. This picture is of the original masters.

 

306775394-512464374219435-47886387603213

 

V.P.

Edited by Homebee
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been building the Mk. II kit and have been pleasantly surprised how well the nose section fitted. I think it is well engineered although careful following of the instructions is a must. Having said that I am left with some gaps to fill at the wing roots but nothing too difficult. 

 

Just one issue I've noticed though is the nose ring which is too blunt. On the real thing it slopes quite pronouncedly towards the prop so it will need to be re-shaped somewhat. On the whole an enjoyable kit and I think the panel lines are much better than the Airfix Mk.V.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2022 at 12:27 AM, Meatbox8 said:

Just one issue I've noticed though is the nose ring which is too blunt.

I agree, and it was another of the disappointments I was hoping not to have with this kit. The Special Hobby kit is a bit better if I remember correctly, but the diameter is different so not swappable unfortunately. I sanded the 'corner' pretty heavily all round on mine but it still isn't quite right. 

Edited by Bedders
  • Like 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...