Jump to content

1/48 - Supermarine Scimitar by DB Model Kits (DBMK) - 3D renders+3D printed test parts+schemes - release in 2024 ?


Homebee

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

A little forethought and ingenuity could have seen the Scimitar be the aircraft the Phantom was to become.

I disagree.  The F-4 wasn't just a hot airframe, it had a cutting-edge radar and IRST suite.  It represented a quantum jump in capabilities - a true all-weather fighter equally effective in day or night conditions.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

Airfix is one company known to make use of LIDAR scans in developing its kits. If the scan is for a kit, then Airfix is the most likely company doing it. When have Trumpeter or Dragon ever made use of LIDAR for one of their kits.

It's not Airfix, they now have their own scanning equipment and a researcher who can use it and its not him in the photo. When they scan an item it's made clear that there should be nothing published about what they are doing especially as they are usually paying for the access. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

That’s a bit unfair. The appropriate comparison is to the F-4 Phantom.  The Phantom flew a little over a year later than the Scimitar and the engines of the two aircraft had the same dry thrust but the Scimitar had no afterburner and was entirely subsonic. A little forethought and ingenuity could have seen the Scimitar be the aircraft the Phantom was to become.

I see what you're saying but I think a more appropriate comparison would be to the F3H Demon rather than the F4. Like so many British designs of the time though they weren't developed to their potential. I think Sea Vixen may have given the F4 a run for its money though if they'd spent some cash on it.

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

11 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

That’s a bit unfair. The appropriate comparison is to the F-4 Phantom.  The Phantom flew a little over a year later than the Scimitar and the engines of the two aircraft had the same dry thrust but the Scimitar had no afterburner and was entirely subsonic. A little forethought and ingenuity could have seen the Scimitar be the aircraft the Phantom was to become.

 

19 minutes ago, Richard123 said:

I see what you're saying but I think a more appropriate comparison would be to the F3H Demon rather than the F4. Like so many British designs of the time though they weren't developed to their potential. I think Sea Vixen may have given the F4 a run for its money though if they'd spent some cash on it.

 

It wasn't a lack of development that prevented the Scimitar from being more capable, the specification it was built to meant it was never to excel. The small size of British carriers and limitations of British catapults meant the spec required the Scimitar to be able to take-off unassisted and have a relatively low landing speed. This meant high lift was required, which therefore necessitated a relatively thick wing (9%) and high lift devices (including boundary layer bleed), Britain was behind with supersonic aerodynamics, this is why the aircraft look much more streamlined and lack the sharp, straight edges and angular look of later, supersonic, aircraft.

 

The Scimitar was also the RN's first BIG and heavy aircraft with more complicated systems, so it was going to be a learning curve - hence the high accident rate and poor serviceability. All of this led to the Scimitar being a fairly unremarkable and unreliable aircraft that was obsolete almost as soon as it went into service - precisely why I find it such an interesting subject.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Richard123 said:

I see what you're saying but I think a more appropriate comparison would be to the F3H Demon rather than the F4. Like so many British designs of the time though they weren't developed to their potential. I think Sea Vixen may have given the F4 a run for its money though if they'd spent some cash on it.

 

The best way yo develop the Sea Vixen to a point comparable to the Phantom would have been to develop a new aircraft...

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

1 hour ago, Giorgio N said:

 

The best way yo develop the Sea Vixen to a point comparable to the Phantom would have been to develop a new aircraft...

But that would have required the specification to have been for afterburning engines and supersonic performance. As people have noted, the Scimitar was basically obsolete as soon as it entered service because it was narrowly tailored to a short-sighted spec that guaranteed no other country would want it. Whereas the F-4 had the flexibility and development potential to win sales in many countries, reducing the unit cost, and is even now in limited service with Greece, Iran, South Korea, and Turkey; Japan retired its last F-4s this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, this Scimitar bashing is striking. 

 

I just like the way it looks and the fact it is not the 346th Bf 109 in 1/48 scale.  I don't build models based on the performance of the real airframe, if that was the case all I'd build would be SR-71s.  

  • Like 13
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

the Scimitar to be able to take-off unassisted and have a relatively low landing speed.

I remember being at a RAeS lecture by an old boy from the A&AEE who had carried out the Scimitar's carrier performance trials. After the aircraft landed on following one of the unassisted take-offs he recalled taking great delight in pointing out to the pilot the two black lines on the deck, he had taken off with the brakes on. 😮

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, VMA131Marine said:

But that would have required the specification to have been for afterburning engines and supersonic performance. As people have noted, the Scimitar was basically obsolete as soon as it entered service because it was narrowly tailored to a short-sighted spec that guaranteed no other country would want it. Whereas the F-4 had the flexibility and development potential to win sales in many countries, reducing the unit cost, and is even now in limited service with Greece, Iran, South Korea, and Turkey; Japan retired its last F-4s this year.

Heresy!

 

To be honest that is pretty accurate - similar to the Lightning. That said the point about underdevelopment of British aircraft like the Buccaneer is accurate but linked to the lack of foreign sales. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Aeronut said:

I remember being at a RAeS lecture by an old boy from the A&AEE who had carried out the Scimitar's carrier performance trials. After the aircraft landed on following one of the unassisted take-offs he recalled taking great delight in pointing out to the pilot the two black lines on the deck, he had taken off with the brakes on. 😮

There is a picture of the lines in the Air Britain book!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ad-4N said:

Man, this Scimitar bashing is striking. 

 

I just like the way it looks and the fact it is not the 346th Bf 109 in 1/48 scale.  I don't build models based on the performance of the real airframe, if that was the case all I'd build would be SR-71s.  

You can like the Scimitar, and I do, and still think it was a fairly mediocre aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, VMA131Marine said:

You can like the Scimitar, and I do, and still think it was a fairly mediocre aircraft.

 

Yep, it was no Phantom for sure.  And just to prove I do build high performance aircraft and not just motley ones:  

 

lmd1AyW.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to who might be ‘behind’ the LiDAR scanning of the Scimitar.

You are in charge of product development.  Your superiors have decided to tool a Scimitar as one of the very few types that, though seeing service usage, is still not mainstream tooled.  Your options are:

-          Rely on ‘artwork’ drawings.  This has given trouble in the past and in any case they lack much essential detail.  Manufacturers’ drawings are unavailable/incomplete.

-          Measure yourselves, as you have done in the past.  Unfortunately none of you present team speak sufficient english, and neither they nor any available interpreter holds a UK driving licence.  So there is airfares, hotel, car hire etc for 4.  That’s before any complications from COVID….

-          Though you’ve heard of LiDAR, you’ve not used it before as don’t know how to source and/or use it.  You know Airfix use it.  Again you would have to visit UK with above complications.  However you have recently learnt that there is a UK organisation who will scan and transmit results to you over the internet.  What’s more you own identity can remain secret as can scale and other details of the end product!

 

In 2 - 3 years all will be revealed......

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, VMA131Marine said:

You can like the Scimitar, and I do, and still think it was a fairly mediocre aircraft.

I am not sure how much of a mediocre aircraft it was. It was well liked by its pilots, was fast low down, packed a hefty punch with 4 30mm cannon plus a good range of weapons and had bags of fuel (it could reach Malta unrefuelled from the UK.) As a strike fighter it was pretty potent.

 

Comparisons are difficult -  nothing flying in Jan 56 was as good as the F-4 that flew almost 3 years later. The reason it left service so quickly was more the Buccaneer than any failing with the Scimitar.

 

To really judge it would have needed a conflict. 

 

Will

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed: but it can be learnt, which is presumably what Airfix did.  I imagine that the people who did the scanning would be able to direct you there.  A worthwhile 'investment' for future work.

I almost put a fourth option, that you pay somebody to manage the data for you.  Someone who knows Lidar, developing it, aircraft mold design / development yet is never going to tool a Scimitar themselves.  **f*x?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ad-4N said:

Man, this Scimitar bashing is striking. 

Agreed … Im an American and would love a new tooled I.M. kit. Though I tend to agree this could also be for flight simulator gaming. I believe that @Richard123 got the comparison correct. I have often compared the Demon and Scimitar as being similar in their poor thought out design and failure. Its a hole in R.N. Lineups that needs to be filled, to that end could Sword be an option for the manufacturer ? They have a decided interest in the 1950’s Naval types from the USN already, could they be expanding into mor RN subjects ? They did the R.N. Skyraiders not to long ago if memory serves. 
 

Dennis

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Denford said:

Agreed: but it can be learnt, which is presumably what Airfix did.

 

Yes, you can master the processing of such data. But you learn first, and then you start using such tools.

 

  

2 hours ago, Denford said:

A worthwhile 'investment' for future work.

 

Yes and no. To invest in learning to master such data, you need to be sure that you will use lidar regularly. What's more, you need to have a team large enough to be able to afford to have some of it stop designing for a few months of learning.

If you don't use lidar for every project in the future, and you have a small team and delegating even one designer will move a project.... well then it is a poor idea.

  

2 hours ago, Denford said:

I almost put a fourth option, that you pay somebody to manage the data for you.  Someone who knows Lidar, developing it, aircraft mold design / development yet is never going to tool a Scimitar themselves.  **f*x?

 

This means that additional money has to be spent on a team that will scan the aircraft and process the data into a form suitable for further design. For such a commercially dubious subject as Scimitar, this really doesn't make sense.

 

If at least the scanned aircraft was a Javelin, the project in 1/72 could be profitable even with a larger investment. More versions, more camouflage options, the aircraft was used by the RAF in the UK, in Germany, in the Far East.

 

Last but not least - if I were managing a company with experience in model design and with a number of kits released, I would not allow Airfix to develop the moulds. It would be a bigger investment than developing in-house, and the model would differ in design standard.

 

Anyway, I wouldn't take the Scimitar in general. The aircraft is too little known and has too little potential. In my opinion it's a great subject for a company producing good quality short-run models. If I had to choose an FAA related theme, I would much more likely do Sikorsky S-55, which is probably also why AMP is designing it and the model in 1/48 should come out next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seem to remember Tan Model uses Lidar, read somewhere that they Lidared everything at a Turkish Aircraft museum or air show.

 

Paul Harrison

Edited by GreenDragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of dislike for the Scimitar in this thread, which I'm surprised by - It's big, fast, powerful, versatile, looks the part, and it's naval!

 

All things that will make even quite an average aircraft popular - and none of which (aside from big in the Jav's case) are satisfied by either the Javelin or the Swift that it's so far been compared to.

 

As an example of what I mean, take the case of the Javelin and the Sea Vixen - both designed for the same role and largely the same performance, but the Sea Vixen is both more of a looker and carrier based, and is far more popular than the Javelin (and particularly seems to be a far more popular subject when it comes to kits, which is ultimately what we're interested in here) - despite both of them being pretty unremarkable in terms of actual performance, service history, and colour schemes.

Edited by ChocolateCrisps
  • Like 2
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...