Jump to content

Is The New Airfix 1/72 Mosquito B.Mk.XVI Under Scaled?


andyrowe
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone.

Just received the new Airfix 1:72 DeHavilland Mosquito B Mk.XVI and was wondering if anyone else thinks the fuselage is too short in length?

On the box it states the length of the kit as 174mm. I also have the Airfix Beaufort kit which states the length of the kit as 186mm. A 12mm difference. 

Now, in reality, the Mossie (13.56m) is longer than the Beaufort (13.46m) by 100mm. It's got me thinking that Airfix has measured the fuselage of both kits and stated that as the length of the completed kits. They haven't taken into account the spinners of the Mossie that jut slightly forward of the nose of the aircraft. But even if this is so, I doubt that it would equate to a 12mm difference on the final kit as the spinners don't protrude all that much further.  

Have Airfix made an error in their dimensions? I'm no rivet counter but 12mm is a huge difference on a 1:72 scale kit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first thing to do would be to measure the kit itself rather than rely on the box measurements...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't find a 3 view that shows the spinners projecting beyond the nose on the B/FB Mossies, at least with the single stage Merlins.

 

 

Edited by Graham T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 12mm!  That's half an inch give or take a bit and equals to three feet! That is a huge amount under scale. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Graham T said:

Can't find a 3 view that shows the spinners projecting beyond the nose on the B/FB Mossies, at least with the single stage Merlins.

 

 

 

The B.XVI is a two-stager.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just off the top of my head... 

 

1) The kit was LIDAR scanned from a museum subject (which introduced other problems - but that's a different story) so highly unlikely to be inaccurate with that technology (compared to someone with a tape measure). In fact it is often too accurate measuring layers of paint etc.

 

2) The kit matches the Tamiya 1/72 widely cited as being very accurate (apart from its rudder / fin height which is about 1.2mm too tall in scale), the Tamiya product designers having measured up a Mosquito at the Mosquito Museum. In any case the sort of thing someone might have noted over  time :)

 

 3) As far as i can tell it matches perfectly the 1/72 3-view plans I have for the BXVI in the book "Areo Detail 23 De haviland Mosquito". Not completely sure of the accuracy of these but seem both comprehensive and authoratitive. Covering detail differences with copious notes on all variations and illustrations / plans  - they would represent a pretty good indication of any inaccuracy if there.

 

There seem to be a lot of supposed errors attributed to this kit - many of which seem, in my opinion, to be quite subjective. Quite disappointing.

Hope this offers some reassurance on this point.

 

Rich

 

 

Edited by RichG
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the new Airfix Mossie, although not for me personally (I did buy one but have passed it on), is the subject of a bit of a free for all at the moment when it comes to alleged 'glitches', the bomb bay and fairing not withstanding.

 

Perhaps expectations were set rather high by Airfix from the outset when they announced they would be Lidar scanning a real example and that we then secretly hoped that they would deliver the perfect model, which we all know does not exist in reality, and are now feeling somewhat let down as a result? For sure it would have been better if they'd scanned the B.35 at the de Havilland museum instead of the TT.35 at Cosford but otherwise I'm not too sure what they could have done differently. With hindsight they might regret not giving the scans to a Mossie expert for final sign-off but perhaps commercial confidentiality may have been a concern, who knows?

 

What we now have is a highly engineered and modern kit of a two-stage Mosquito that can/will also form the basis of a plethora of other types as well but with the downside that for complete accuracy a not unsubstantial sum may need to be spent on after market bits to correct the bomb bay issue, unless you are able to do this yourself.

 

Just a thought.

 

Regards

Colin.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, fishplanebeer said:

and that we then secretly hoped that they would deliver the perfect model, which we all know does not exist in reality, and are now feeling somewhat let down as a result?

no one expects 'perfect', but it is the degree of imperfection that causes rankles,  especially...

4 minutes ago, fishplanebeer said:

With hindsight they might regret not giving the scans to a Mossie expert for final sign-off

Yes.   But as the other thread points out, 'we' as in the folk who spend time on here and similar forums, are a small part of their demographic.   I don't think it cost them many sales.   

4 minutes ago, fishplanebeer said:

but perhaps commercial confidentiality may have been a concern, who knows?

You can use Non Disclosure Agreements, but when they involve knowledgeable modellers, they pick their input carefully.    I've not seen people talk about being involved until after the kit is done,  or due.  

But we are not privy to whatever pressures they are, most likely the bean counter kind,   as you approach the point of diminishing returns combined with need to 'get it done' :shrug:

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I will wait to build the two I pre-ordered until @tonyot gets his hands on the case he has undoubtedly purchased. Until I get my paws on the actual plastic, I will refrain from the kit-bashing I see in the Rumormonger section;  that being said, I'm sure it's light years ahead of my Matchbox two-stage Mossie kit. However, I do wish the powers-that be at Airfix would have people  whose expertise  they recognize involved in the research, scanning, and measurement of aircraft that they wish to produce, or at least to examine that information to look for significant errors. It seems to me that that their people don't really know what they are looking at sometimes. Reminds me of the 1/72 F3D  that Sword measured  that was a missile test mule and had cable ducting not found on an operational Skyknight. (Ask me jow I know!)

Mike

 

Don't get me wrong. I will be very happy to get  the new Mossie, and will certainly make a decision as to what errors I have the skills to correct when mine arrive and the examination of  of all my Mossie references and the study of the  discussions here on BM has taken place.

 

I don't understand why Tamiya didn't release a two-stage Merlin Mossie- they could even have put a proper fin/rudder on an additional sprue.

Edited by 72modeler
corrected text
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is 80%+ of the people who will buy this kit will not be remotely aware of any of its 'defects' and probably wouldn't care too much anyway so in that sense Airfix probably have a success on their hands, and good if this means they can continue to enhance their range and bring out new kits. And if the more discerning modeler minority group jump all over it and complain about this and that but then still buy the kit anyway why should Airfix be too concerned and spend extra money/time for precious little benefit, or diminishing returns?  An old friend of mine who served in the Navy once told me that if the old 'Ark Royal' carrier had only ever left port when there were no mechanical issues or problems it would never have left, ever. The point being nothing comes error or fault free if it is ever to see light of day and plastic model kits are no exception, it's just a case of how big the problem and how much effort it will take to fix it.

 

As I said who knows why a trained eye wasn't used to give the final scans the OK (or maybe they were?) but the end result is a modern, well molded kit of a two stage Mosquito that folks have long been asking for so in that sense it's happy days, the Mosquito has now left port so as to speak.

 

Just my take on things and I'm sure others will disagree but that's just part of the enduring appeal of our hobby.

 

Regards

Colin.

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, fishplanebeer said:

The reality is 80%+ of the people who will buy this kit will not be remotely aware of any of its 'defects' and probably wouldn't care too much anyway

As an 80+%er, I do feel sorry for* those who never get to build the models they want because none of the kits measure up to their expectations of accuracy 😔 but as you said, it's each individual's hobby to enjoy in their own way...

 

*the modelled statement may not accurately reflect the actual feeling :lol:

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Alan P said:

As an 80+%er, I do feel sorry for those who never get to build the models they want because none of the kits measure up to their expectations of accuracy 😔 but as you said, it's each individual's hobby to enjoy in their own way...

 

I daresay Airfix are a bit cheesed off with the mistake, but as has been said it won't affect sales to any great extent. The Blenheim got some flak for having features from the Bristol Bolingbroke, including the engine nacelles. I would never have known had I not been a member of Britmodeller.

 

Ignorance is sometimes bliss! 😉

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t disagree with anything said above but got to wondering a philosophical point over morning coffee while reading.  Imagine a Wingnut Wings company on steroids actually produce the perfect kit. Impossible I know but as I said it’s philosophical. So it arrives. It comes with all the correct paints too and an infinite decal sheet. I mean that you just say what machine you want and the right decals magically appear. The fit is perfect. It falls together. No one can find a single problem or fault. Even a seven year old produces a competition winner!  
 

Now

1 does that still mean we are “modellers” or just assemblers?

and 2. Where is the fun in that

 

“Britassembler” ?????   Nah  

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't understand the big fuss about this new kit... Tamiya have had a B.XVI in their catalogue for years and it's a pretty nice kit and easy to build:

https://www.scalemates.com/it/kits/tamiya-60753-havilland-mosquito-b-mkiv-pr-mkiv--134549

 

Really if you're pedantic regarding markings accuracy this would need a set of aftermarket decals as the japanese company did not include any for a proper B.XVI in the box, but can be sorted with generic RAF code sheets.

It should also be said that the engine nacelles and a few other details are not 100% correct for a B.XVI but hey, no kit is perfect ! For most modellers this will be a pretty good representation of a B.XVI while those modellers who really want to get all details right for their favourite variant will find this kit is a good basis to add all the proper details, be it via aftermarket items or by scratchbuilding the differences...

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

2 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

Tamiya have had a B.XVI in their catalogue for years and it's a pretty nice kit and easy to build:

https://www.scalemates.com/it/kits/tamiya-60753-havilland-mosquito-b-mkiv-pr-mkiv--134549

Well, it's a Mk IV which is why everyone was so hyped for the Airfix Mk XVI. But as you say, there has been a conversion for it for years and anyone who wanted a Mk XVI could have had one for a few more quid.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Alan P said:

Well, it's a Mk IV which is why everyone was so hyped for the Airfix Mk XVI. But as you say, there has been a conversion for it for years and anyone who wanted a Mk XVI could have had one for a few more quid.

And the application of some old fashioned modelling which is the real fun part imho 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, fishplanebeer said:

The reality is 80%+ of the people who will buy this kit will not be remotely aware of any of its 'defects' and probably wouldn't care too much anyway so in that sense Airfix probably have a success on their hands, and good if this means they can continue to enhance their range and bring out new kits.

You make a fair point but a large wedge of the 80% would probably be just as happy with Airfix's 50 year-old Mk II/VI/XVIII kit, which the company could have carried on making money from without incurring the cost of developing a new tool. It follows that Airfix believe that cost will be justified by the sales the new kit will achieve to more discriminating enthusiasts who do know something about Mosquitoes. If that's the market they're relying on to generate a profit, it's in their own interest to take every reasonable measure to ensure the kit's accuracy. But they haven't. They didn't confirm before they measured up the airframe they've based the kit on that it's fully representative of the mark that they intended to replicate. Nor do they seem to have checked the drawings produced from their lidar scans against other reference material, like contemporary photographs of wartime B.XVIs. Moreover, this isn't the first time the current incarnation of Airfix has been caught out this way, so the lesson really should have been learned.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 72modeler said:

I think I will wait to build the two I pre-ordered until @tonyot gets his hands on the case he has undoubtedly purchased. Until I get my paws on the actual plastic, I will refrain from the kit-bashing I see in the Rumormonger section;  that being said, I'm sure it's light years ahead of my Matchbox two-stage Mossie kit. That being said, I do wish the powers-that be at Airfix would have people  whose expertise  they recognize involved in the research, scanning, and measurement of aircraft that they wish to produce, or at least to examine that information to look for significant errors. It seems to me that that their people don't really know what they are looking at sometimes. Reminds me of the 1/72 F3D  that Sword measured  that was a missile test mule and had cable ducting not found on an operational Skyknight. (Ask me jow I know!)

Mike

 

Don't get me wrong. I will be very happy to get  the new Mossie, and will certainly make a decision as to what errors I have the skills to correct when mine arrive and the examination of  of all my Mossie references and the study of the  discussions here on BM has taken place.

 

I don't understand why Tamiya didn't release a two-stage Merlin Mossie- they could even have put a proper fin/rudder on an additional sprue.

 

You say kit bashing, but I find it useful to know exactly what you are paying for if you are going to purchase a kit. I want to know the bad as well as the good.

 

I was looking at buying this kit, but now I've decided not to and wait for the SH kit. If that turns out to have significant errors I will then buy the Airfix kit and fix the main errors.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, AWFK10 said:

You make a fair point but a large wedge of the 80% would probably be just as happy with Airfix's 50 year-old Mk II/VI/XVIII kit, which the company could have carried on making money from without incurring the cost of developing a new tool. It follows that Airfix believe that cost will be justified by the sales the new kit will achieve to more discriminating enthusiasts who do know something about Mosquitoes. If that's the market they're relying on to generate a profit, it's in their own interest to take every reasonable measure to ensure the kit's accuracy. But they haven't. They didn't confirm before they measured up the airframe they've based the kit on that it's fully representative of the mark that they intended to replicate. Nor do they seem to have checked the drawings produced from their lidar scans against other reference material, like contemporary photographs of wartime B.XVIs. Moreover, this isn't the first time the current incarnation of Airfix has been caught out this way, so the lesson really should have been learned.

 

 

That's true but I think only to a certain extent.  Thinking back to when I was in my early modelling period at the age of 10-13 I could spot a kit that was already old mould and getting past it by the early 1960's.  Think early Merit with moulded on lines for decals or say the early Airfix Me 110 or Stuka with pegs for pilot to sit on.  But then at the same time one could buy other kits that were more state of the art for that time  ( mostly with moving parts gimmicks/features).  Even then I could make an assessment that say currently new late 1960's Airfix were much better kits than older Airfix or Lindberg stuff where you were lucky to get 2 fuselage halves and wings !

 

If Airfix and others didn't upgrade their product lines eventually even younger buyers would go for other brands that did.  I suspect kids are more discerning buyers than we think. 

 

PS I recall my then 8 year old slagging off some electronic games and having quite an insight as to which games were worth him  (I mean me !) buying or not. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JohnT said:

It comes with all the correct paints too and an infinite decal sheet. I mean that you just say what machine you want and the right decals magically appear. The fit is perfect. It falls together. No one can find a single problem or fault. Even a seven year old produces a competition winner!  

 

Actually,  I wouldn't mind one of those. I'm assuming it applies its own canopy mask?  I hate doing that..

  • Like 2
  • Haha 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alan P said:

Well, it's a Mk IV which is why everyone was so hyped for the Airfix Mk XVI. But as you say, there has been a conversion for it for years and anyone who wanted a Mk XVI could have had one for a few more quid.

 

Oh, I'm aware of the fact that the Tamiya kit represents a Mk.IV and also of the main differences between this variant and the Mk.XVI, of which the most visible is the use of different engine cowlings to support longer powerplants, with a number of exhausts and intakes. The point is, are these differences so visible to make a difference to a modeller ? If they are, then the modeller would try to buy a kit of a proper XVI, but really how many would notice if I just slapped some decals for a B.XVI onto the Tamiya kit ? Probably many people here, but in the overall modelling community ?

 

My post is of course an ironic, maybe even sarcastic, take on certain ideas about what is "accuracy" and what can or not be acceptable when it comes to the features that a kit should have to represent a certain variant of a certain aircraft. Of course the Tamiya kit is not from the box a proper reproduction of a Mk.XVI as lacks certain features, first among them the different engine cowlings. For this reason most here would not consider this kit if they wanted to build a two-stage Merlin engined Mosquito from the box. Yet I wonder, is the new Airfix kit a proper representation of a Mk.XVI ? If I understand right what the real Mosquito experts here say then no, it is not. This because the kit features a number of parts that are not shaped like those used on a proper XVI...  so I wonder, what's the difference between the Tamiya and Airfix kits ? Both are nice kits of the Mosquito but none is a kit of a Mosquito Mk.XVI. The Airfix kit is clearly closer to a XVI compared to the Japanese one but still represents a different variant.

Now if those parts of the Airfix kit that make it a representation of a different variant have to be seen as little details that can be sorted with some work or aftermarket, well, by the same logic I'm here saying that the Tamiya kit is also a perfectly acceptable kit of a Mosquito XVI!

The same could be applied to many other types and really I see this with types that are a bit less familiar to the wider Britmodeller community. Almost everyone here could tell the difference between a Mosquito Mk.IV and a XVI but what about the many WWI types and their variations ? I'd be the first to have no clue if the various features that identify a certain variant are present or not in a kit or model but in the end these features are what make one variant or the other.

 

Of course in the end everyone is IMHO free to build whatever they like in whatever way they like, as long as we all have fun. I will still however find very funny how certain concepts are thrown around without noticing the implicit contradictions that they often carry with them...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are over complicating the discussion / argument here. 

Airfix have marketed a new tooled Mosquito XVI and have effectively produced a TT.35 - nothing more, nothing less. 

If we are happy to accept these 'minor' issues why don't we just all go out and buy Tamiya's new F-4B, slap on some 'Black Mike' decals and call it a FGR.2.. it's still a Phantom isn't it? 

Yes this is a hobby, however some of us like to delve down the accuracy road when we go about our craft. I don't have thousands of dollars worth of books and reference material to make caricatures of the real thing. 

For what it's worth, I have one of these kits on order. I'm sure I'll be happy with it but would have been even happier if all the parts provided were of the version depicted. 

 

If you watch this video the kit's designer is happy to hear feedback from us 'the Customer'. As long as we keep this discussion civil, I see no harm in providing constructive criticism to highlight our justified concerns.   

 

Cheers.. Dave 

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rabbit Leader said:

Airfix have marketed a new tooled Mosquito XVI and have effectively produced a TT.35 - nothing more, nothing less. 

It's not a TT35 either, as despite it having the bomb doors and cutaway fairing incorporating target sleeve stowage, it's missing several features of this variant including the winch unit.

Bottom line, it's neither fish nor fowl, but with a little bit of work and a few mods you should be able to build good representations of several different varieties of blood sucking insect from it.

  • Like 8
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...