Jump to content

1/48 - de Havilland DH.115 Vampire Trainer T.11/J28C by Pilot Replicas - released


Homebee

Recommended Posts

OK, let's see how 'bad' or 'off' it actually turns out to be, now we can only be guesstimating from a limited number of pics.

Yet I'm surprised if PR has somehow botched shapes up. I'm impressed with their J29 kits, PR have really managed to capture the subtle shapes of the fuselage, especially the complex shapes where the barrel portion of the fuselage merges with the tail. It's in that portion of the fuselage where the difference between the later F and the earlier B can be seen, I believe PR have captured both extremely well. While I'm not particularly interested in neither the J21 nor the Sk60 I've heard no complaints about their accuracy nor shapes.

There are two-seater vampires in Sweden. I don't know if the Swedish Air Force museum owns any two-seaters, but I believe there are privately owned ones in Västerås, ex-Switzerland? So they should somehow be available for general check of shapes and dimensions. But again, I don't know how PR do their research and design.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Piotr Mikolajski said:

 

Yep, one in Västerås: https://www.flygmuseum.com/vampire

Flygvapenmuseet in Linköping has Vampire T.55 (Sk 28C) 15745 and a Venom NF.51 

https://plasticfantastique.com/walk_arounds/walk-around-the-de-havilland-venom/

 

Another T.55 (Sk.28C) in Svedinos museum (between Gothenburg and Malmø)

 

And there are also Vampire two seaters in Norway and Finland, including an airworthy one.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LN-KEH said:

Flygvapenmuseet in Linköping has Vampire T.55 (Sk 28C) 15745 and a Venom NF.51 

https://plasticfantastique.com/walk_arounds/walk-around-the-de-havilland-venom/

 

Another T.55 (Sk.28C) in Svedinos museum (between Gothenburg and Malmø)

 

And there are also Vampire two seaters in Norway and Finland, including an airworthy one.

The Venom, yes.
I have not seen a two seat Vampire in the flygvapenmuseum collection in Linköping. Maybe they own one, but it's not on display in Linköping anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, flarpen said:

The Venom, yes.
I have not seen a two seat Vampire in the flygvapenmuseum collection in Linköping. Maybe they own one, but it's not on display in Linköping anyway.

In storage, I think:

de Havilland DH 115 Vampire T55 J 28C-2 28451 in Flygvapenmuseum Malmen

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. From that angle the wing looks quite thick and the nose less egg shaped. Clearly they may be something off in the PR kit but I think I may wait to actually see the plastic before writing it off, especially as there may well also be builder induced error such as the poor join from windscreen to fuselage in the pictures, almost as if the nose seam was overly sanded. Earlier in this thread, photos of the test shot taken from above showed the bulge at the wing joint looking to be correctly shaped and placed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you look at the model photos, they are clearer taken with a wide angle lens or even a phone. 

 

This distorts the image and makes it appear 'bulged.

 

Try repeating the pictures yourselves with a phone and you will see what I mean.

 

Best to wait before condemning the kit eh?

 

Andy 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Irish 251 said:

In storage, I think:

de Havilland DH 115 Vampire T55 J 28C-2 28451 in Flygvapenmuseum Malmen

 

Thanks
Don't think I noticed it last time I was there, but then again I was focused on other things that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Red Dot said:

When you look at the model photos, they are clearer taken with a wide angle lens or even a phone. 

 

This distorts the image and makes it appear 'bulged.

 

Try repeating the pictures yourselves with a phone and you will see what I mean.

Even allowing for camera distortion there are some serious issues, that wing trailing edge to rear fuselage/tailcone area is an obvious one.

I also trust the members that have inputted here, about knowledge of the subject matter and photography, I don't think it's a random 'knocking of the kit'.

 

The wing might be able to be thinned down, but there will be knock on consequences with the engine intake and corresponding wing root section on the fuselage molding, and the rear fuselage modification will be difficult.

Depending on the nose contours issue and nose undercarriage in the plastic, will have to see if they are reworkable.

 

I honestly don't understand why some of the parts are so wrong, even if they don't lidar the subjects, just observing one and decent measuring and photos would sort some of it.

 

 

Personally I don't think it will be long before Airfix covers the subject, I will wait.

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trenton guy said:

Mine is on the way. I will wait until I touch it to trash it.

No one is trashing kit as you put it, people are having a discussion on its merits and shape issues as they see them, so please dont inject this int the discussion.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Trenton guy said:

Mine is on the way. I will wait until I touch it to trash it.

 

In that case, touch carefully, as it would be good to see some taped-up shots and your perspective as to whether it can be fixed before you trash it. 

 

Tony 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Trenton guy said:

Mine is on the way. I will wait until I touch it to trash it.

At least i understood the irony of your comment. Shame others didn't

 

Andy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 71chally said:

Even allowing for camera distortion there are some serious issues, that wing trailing edge to rear fuselage/tailcone area is an obvious one.

I also trust the members that have inputted here, about knowledge of the subject matter and photography, I don't think it's a random 'knocking of the kit'.

 

The wing might be able to be thinned down, but there will be knock on consequences with the engine intake and corresponding wing root section on the fuselage molding, and the rear fuselage modification will be difficult.

Depending on the nose contours issue and nose undercarriage in the plastic, will have to see if they are reworkable.

 

I honestly don't understand why some of the parts are so wrong, even if they don't lidar the subjects, just observing one and decent measuring and photos would sort some of it.

 

 

Personally I don't think it will be long before Airfix covers the subject, I will wait.

 

I agree that the comments are from people with Vampire knowledge far greater than mine and that their photos or comparisons back them up.

 

I am not saying they are wrong, but I find it odd that a company with a hitherto good reputation could make such large easily spotted errors, hence my previous comments. Please read them in that context.

 

I too am dissappointed as I wanted something better than the CA Vampire in my collection.

 

I'll wait and see, then judge it once the experts have actually seen the plastic.

 

Andy 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Red Dot said:

I agree that the comments are from people with Vampire knowledge far greater than mine and that their photos or comparisons back them up.

 

I am not saying they are wrong, but I find it odd that a company with a hitherto good reputation could make such large easily spotted errors, hence my previous comments. Please read them in that context.

 

I too am dissappointed as I wanted something better than the CA Vampire in my collection.

 

I'll wait and see, then judge it once the experts have actually seen the plastic.

 

Andy 

Amen, and thanks for your comment. I guess one tries irony at ones peril.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, this one will be very interesting!

Going close to a model and take a pic "equal" to the distance of a real aircraft will lead to distortion, comparison will be difficult. Trying hard to see beyond the obvious distortion due to the wide angle effects the nose looks better than first thought.

The same goes for the nose gear, we see less of the nose gear on the built up model than we see on the real 599. Consider also the difference between a jacked up gear and a loaded one, perhaps with soft oleos.

I tend to discover (all the time) that there existed different versions of wheels/tyres on the same aircraft.

The tail may turn out to be easily fixable too, maybe it's just the fillet plate (between the wing and fuselage) that is too large and has too large radius?

Those who have kits on their way, please keep us informed when they arrive!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to Duxford this weekend and saw the real thing. What was very odd was that depending on the angle at which I viewed the wing, the depth of the wing at the root and to the tip varied widely depending upon my viewpoint. Same viewing through the i phone.  When I first looked, I thought " wow that wing is way thinner than the kit", and then when I lowered my viewpoint from my 6'1" height, then I really wasn't sure at all, the wing looking really quite fat.  Getting close to the nose, it was only at a certain height and angle that the "  egg" shape previously mentioned was so obvious. From other angles the curve was quite minimal and the curve on the lower windscreen seemed quite close to the one in the pictures of the built up kit.  Makes me think that I will want to see the real plastic in my hands before I commit.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tomas Enerdal said:

Hmm, this one will be very interesting!

Going close to a model and take a pic "equal" to the distance of a real aircraft will lead to distortion, comparison will be difficult. [...] 

 

We'll, it's mathematics and some knowledge. 

Not difficult, but takes more time, and preparation.

Nothing everyone can and will do. 

But that's basically why I wait for my kit to arrive, and do not judge from the rather useless photos of the built kits. 🙂

 

 

This is of course not judging the work of the builder of the models! 

Edited by Ka-Efka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, neilh said:

I went to Duxford this weekend and saw the real thing. What was very odd was that depending on the angle at which I viewed the wing, the depth of the wing at the root and to the tip varied widely depending upon my viewpoint. Same viewing through the i phone.  When I first looked, I thought " wow that wing is way thinner than the kit", and then when I lowered my viewpoint from my 6'1" height, then I really wasn't sure at all, the wing looking really quite fat.  Getting close to the nose, it was only at a certain height and angle that the "  egg" shape previously mentioned was so obvious. From other angles the curve was quite minimal and the curve on the lower windscreen seemed quite close to the one in the pictures of the built up kit.  Makes me think that I will want to see the real plastic in my hands before I commit.

 

I'm hoping you're right as this isn't a buy-and-see inexpensive kit. 

I'd like to see pics and perspectives from those who took the plunge, even if they fail to understand my sense of humour.

 

Tony 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often giggle at irony, yours too! As a Swede I very much like British humor. But I also appreciate that communicating in written text only can be difficult. The reader has no help from tone of speech or facial expression. Add a possible language barrier to that equation, and misunderstandings are bound to happen. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I received my kit.

Did a quick tape together of the main parts.

The observations regarding the shape issues on the wing are confirmed At least compared to the Airfix kit the wing is thicker and rounder at the leading edge.

This will be a hard one to fix. The other shape issues on the wing can be fixed I think.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dragonlanceHR said:

So the kit photos didn't lie? Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Afraid not.
And fixing it will be difficult. Thinning the wing on the inside surfaces will affect the mating to the fuselage, tail booms and air intake.
Re-profiling the leading edge is a lot of work but may be doable.

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

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, flarpen said:

Afraid not.
And fixing it will be difficult. Thinning the wing on the inside surfaces will affect the mating to the fuselage, tail booms and air intake.
Re-profiling the leading edge is a lot of work but may be doable.

 

And the nose... and the windshield...

 

V.P.

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

Johan, many thanks for the heads up!

What do you think about the nose and windshield?

Just curious, what do you think about the possibility to graft the Airfix wings to the PR  fuselage and booms? (Expensive perhaps, but may be worth it if one wants a really accurate two-seater?)

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...