dragonlanceHR Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 3 hours ago, flarpen said: Fishy? Suspect. It smells 😉 The leading edges look too blunt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flarpen Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 22 minutes ago, dragonlanceHR said: Suspect. It smells 😉 The leading edges look too blunt. I do see what you mean. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flarpen Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Does the Trainers have the same (outer) wing as the single seaters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) I'm really hoping that this is built from a clunky test shot.  The rear fuselage/tailcone area of both the kit and three view drawings is a work of fiction and doesn't follow the actual aircraft at all. I'm wondering if it's a result of what @NAVY870 says with the wing chord appearing to being too great. The wing itself looks too thick, not only at the leading edge but also at the tips (which also looks too rounded) and the trailing edges.  Edited February 26 by 71chally re-posting picture link 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 hour ago, flarpen said: Does the Trainers have the same (outer) wing as the single seaters? Essentially the same as the FB.5 onwards. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
general melchett Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 This emphasises the leading edge depth and shape. Taken form the walkaround section. Â Â Â Â And this, the depth of the wingtip which looks overly thick on the test shots. Â Â And the trailing edge fillet... Â 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 (edited) The walk around link:Â https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/73319-de-havilland-vampire-t11 V.P. Edited February 26 by Homebee 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flarpen Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 2 hours ago, 71chally said: I'm really hoping that this is built from a clunky test shot.  The rear fuselage/tailcone area of both the kit and three view drawings is a work of fiction and doesn't follow the actual aircraft at all. I'm wondering if it's a result of what @NAVY870 says with the wing chord being too great. The wing itself looks too thick, not only at the leading edge but also at the tips (which also looks too rounded) and the trailing edges.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Vampire#/media/File:De_Havilland_DH115_Vampire_banking_with_the_sun_reflecting_off_its_silver_wings_(cropped).jpg It's not a test shot that has been built up, as far as I understand it's the released kit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 6 hours ago, general melchett said: The Vampire T.11 is one of my favourite aircraft so the news of PR doing one in my favourite scale was music to my ears BUT, and I hate to get into speculation before getting hold of the plastic, something does seem a bit off here. Â Vampire T.11 wing trailing edge fillet area. Â Also, the wings on the models shown appear to be quite deep and lack a sharper more defined leading edge. (Aircrew just keeping getting younger!) The 'crease line' of the leading edge should be central and not in line with the top of the intake which would suggest that the chord of this portion of the wing is incorrect. Just my observations from what are admittedly test shots. Must wait and see. Â Vampire T.11 leading edge. Â Â Yes that leading edge doe look suspect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 (edited)  That is a big, fat juicy F for failure.     UPD - thanks general melchett   V.P.  Edited February 28 by Homebee 4 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petetasker Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 I’ve waited so long to be able to do a 1/48 T.11 I’ll happily live with any problems and try to correct as much as I can. I’ll be long gone by the time any bugger else gets round to doing a kit. Might have to try and practice some of that ‘modelling’ we’re always talking about. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad-4N Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Yeah, it is a kit I wanted but, life's too short to deal with this level of inaccuracy. Hard pass. Then again, your mileage may differ.  2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Dot Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 4 hours ago, Homebee said:      V.P.  I like this post. Nice comparison to show the supposed issues.  Well done. Andy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEXANTOMCAT Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Does look a bit chunky- VamPIEr anyone? 2 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karearea Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 Having recently stared at the Airfix T.11 quite a bit, I agree with the above criticisms (I think the Airfix kit is pretty accurate) but would also add that the trailing edge mid-span change in sweep doesn't look pronounced enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomas Enerdal Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 Just curious: -Is the plastic of the wings thick enough to give room for some serious thinning/sharpening of the leading edge? There is very little surface detail that would be lost/has to be restored. Or: -Can the fuselage be grafted to a set of Airfix wings? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ka-Efka Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 4 minutes ago, Tomas Enerdal said: Just curious: -Is the plastic of the wings thick enough to give room for some serious thinning/sharpening of the leading edge? There is very little surface detail that would be lost/has to be restored. Or: -Can the fuselage be grafted to a set of Airfix wings? I would strongly suspect some thinning of the wing halfes (like in the good old days...) should help. And the wing tip shouldn't be an issue to fix as well. But so far I'm waiting for the plastic to arrive to see. The other suspected issues also remain on the 'to be verified' list so far. At least for me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellsprop Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 I'm glad I've got the CA kit...  Will be interested to see some more built up though.  On the plus side, the PR kit could have the forward fuselage mated with the Airfix kit to make a more accurate T11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony.t Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 22 hours ago, petetasker said: I’ve waited so long to be able to do a 1/48 T.11 I’ll happily live with any problems and try to correct as much as I can. I’ll be long gone by the time any bugger else gets round to doing a kit. Might have to try and practice some of that ‘modelling’ we’re always talking about.  8 hours ago, Tomas Enerdal said: Just curious: -Is the plastic of the wings thick enough to give room for some serious thinning/sharpening of the leading edge? There is very little surface detail that would be lost/has to be restored. Or: -Can the fuselage be grafted to a set of Airfix wings?  8 hours ago, Ka-Efka said: I would strongly suspect some thinning of the wing halfes (like in the good old days...) should help. And the wing tip shouldn't be an issue to fix as well. But so far I'm waiting for the plastic to arrive to see. The other suspected issues also remain on the 'to be verified' list so far. At least for me.  This is where we're heading. I wasn't planning on getting the lovely Airfix kit of the fugly variant but am beginning to see this as a, hmm, necessary side-by-side venture.  Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMA131Marine Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 18 hours ago, Ad-4N said: Yeah, it is a kit I wanted but, life's too short to deal with this level of inaccuracy. Hard pass. Then again, your mileage may differ.  These are minor issues really. Nothing like the disaster that is the Trumpeter Vampire. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMA131Marine Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 2 hours ago, wellsprop said: I'm glad I've got the CA kit...  Will be interested to see some more built up though.  On the plus side, the PR kit could have the forward fuselage mated with the Airfix kit to make a more accurate T11. I have that and the Aeroclub kit, which can still be built into a nice replica. The Aeroclub comes with parts for all the single and two seat variants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomas Enerdal Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 Old fashioned thinning of the wing from the "inside" should help. The problem is if the wing profile is off, i.e. if the wing profile is more like a Hawker Typhoon than a Mk.22/24 Spit. Then the  leading edge will look too blunt anyway. And I agree the wing tip shouldn't be a problem. And again, even if the plastic of the wing is not thick enough for heavy sanding, it can be reinforced from the inside with miliput... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 I was thinking about one of these, not so much now  1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
general melchett Posted February 28 Share Posted February 28 (edited) Quote It's not a test shot that has been built up, as far as I understand it's the released kit  If that's the case Johan, just going by these images, then it's quite disappointing. I think I'll hold off a while and see what detailed reviews turn up. I didn't even notice the awful windscreen shape, it seems that the nose area, forward of the windscreen, is way too flat.     Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, link here. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:De_Havilland_D.H.115_Vampire_Trainer_Mk.55_(VT-8)_K-SIM_03.jpg.   I thought something looked off in this CAD view.   Edited February 28 by general melchett 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 (edited) 23 hours ago, general melchett said:  If that's the case Johan, just going by these images, then it's quite disappointing. I think I'll hold off a while and see what detailed reviews turn up. I didn't even notice the awful windscreen shape, it seems that the nose area, forward of the windscreen, is way too flat.  Thanks general. 😥 And all that for 679 SEK, so +/- £51.00 !   V.P. Edited February 29 by Homebee 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now