Jump to content

Arma Hobby NEW 1:72 P-39Q Airacobra


occa

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, alt-92 said:

Maybe we're reading a bit too much into that 'novelty' thing. Might be a translation quirk, wouldn't be the first time it just means a 'new kit/something new' .  

I'd put money on your having hit the nail on the head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Wulfman said:

At the risk of being a boring old fart, it’s got to be a Yak-9 !

 

Wullfman

Given current affairs I really can't see a Polish company replacing a kit with Russian markings (their VVS Hurricane according to the first post) with a kit of a Russian subject. 

 

There are a few French types they could do that would give options for Polish markings, or a world of single piston engined types that would fill gaps in their range. Not long to wait to find out :)

 

Andy

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

We thrashed through the available 1/72 Wildcat kits when the Airfix one first came out.  As I recall the bottom line was:

  • Airfix fuselage is overscale in diameter, gets the rear fuselage "crease" in the wrong place, which in turn affects the canopy which is also wrong in having a rounded top line from the side rather than the proper "dog kennel" shape.  It's not "unbuildable" but personally I just see no point in building a kit that doesn't actually look like a Wildcat.  A pity because the moulding and detail are good.
  • Hasegawa: my favourite for many years but our researches showed that its fuselage is underscale by about the same amount as the Airfix one is overscale.  It also has very little interior detail.  Nicely moulded and great surface detail though.
  • Sword Wildcat VI.  An attempt to make a Mark VI (FM-2) from modifying cloned moulds of the Hasegawa Mark V (FM-1).  It does not catch all the differences and one of the 2 main differences (engine cowling and nose) is not captured well.
  • Older kits (Airfix Wildcat VI, Revell F4F-4) don't merit further consideration.

 

So I am at a bit of a loss to identify a 1/72 Wildcat of any mark that even approaches the Arma kits in accuracy or quality.  If there are genuine doubts as to their accuracy, I would be interested in hearing details (and not vague assertions) so that I can decide whether I agree and/or care.  For the moment, in my viiew ,the prosecution has not made a case.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, MarkoZG said:

Hasegawa's Hayate isn't the latest Hayate kit in 1/72nd scale, something also happened in 2008 and 2010.

 

If you're talking about Sword's Ki-84 kits, they are no longer available and haven't been for years, so really not players in the 1/72 Ki-84 game. Besides, read @KRK4m's opinion above, having built them.

 

I, for once, would like to know what your issues with Junpei Temma plans' are. He is very open about his methods; your informed critique would be welcomed to help the rest of us (or at least me) to make a better informed decision if they should be trusted or not. So far I only read about your low opinion of them, but if there is a why somewhere I missed it.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here again we see an example of a common but forgivable flaw in logic. Forgivable especially since I'm sure I've done it myself. We don't need a new kit of X because so-and-so released a perfect X ten years ago. The trouble is, that perfect kit hasn't been reissued since, is no longer available through normal retail sources, and might show up on eBay once every two or three years, and that's only if you're really lucky. So the goodness of older kits is irrelevant if you can't buy them. Take me, for example (Please! Take me!) - I've frequently said that the Dakoplast 1/72 Yak-9 is the only 1/72 Yak-9 kit worth looking at, but just try to find one now. Did I mention that we need a new, accurate Yak-9/VK-105 series in 1/72? No? Well, we need a new, accurate Yak-9/VK-105 series in 1/72! :wicked:

 

John

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MiG-Mech said:

I'd like to see a modern Me 410 and He 219. 😇

That would be brillant, I'd love to see Arma tackle some bigger planes. The 219 in particular is such a beautiful aircraft with not that many toolings in 1/72.

 

Also, interesting to see that the Hayate is viewed as a somewhat unknown plane - pretty sure it was already one of my favorites as a kid!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, manuel said:

Just a true P-39.

 

44 minutes ago, 352nd Fighter Group said:

P-63 

 

3 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:

It's got to be Vulcan B1!

 

I wish...........

 

 

5 hours ago, John Thompson said:

 Did I mention that we need a new, accurate Yak-9/VK-105 series in 1/72? No? Well, we need a new, accurate Yak-9/VK-105 series in 1/72! :wicked:

 

John

 

There's just one problem, all those suggestions are in the wrong scale! :P :banghead::penguin:

 

/runs like hell and hopes Julien doesn't catch him

 

 

But seriously -  no sense asking the usual suspects, let's just wait and see what they come up with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Fukuryu said:

 

If you're talking about Sword's Ki-84 kits, they are no longer available and haven't been for years, so really not players in the 1/72 Ki-84 game. Besides, read @KRK4m's opinion above, having built them.

 

I, for once, would like to know what your issues with Junpei Temma plans' are. He is very open about his methods; your informed critique would be welcomed to help the rest of us (or at least me) to make a better informed decision if they should be trusted or not. So far I only read about your low opinion of them, but if there is a why somewhere I missed it.

The reason is simple and obvious and I am sure that anyone with professional knowledge of optics, lenses and photography could give you much better explanation. Simple drawing over the photos is childish understanding of perspective and this is just what he does. I have been following his work long before he became famous and even contacted him and discussed his methods. For him this is "good enough" and I am fine with that as long as it is only for him. Problem arises when other people start using him and his work as relevant reference because they lack the above mentioned knowledge and/or information.

This is just one and most visible issue of using his work for anything serious, but there are many more to that. I really don't have the time to elaborate it in detail you can see everything on his pages. Just don't get blinded by nice finish and professionally looking drawings, this is (and never was) a guarantee of accuracy.

For the proper method of translating photos to accurate drawings, I suggest you to look at French sites (Patrouille Simple for example) and see how should it be properly done.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MarkoZG said:

The reason is simple and obvious and I am sure that anyone with professional knowledge of optics, lenses and photography could give you much better explanation. Simple drawing over the photos is childish understanding of perspective and this is just what he does. I have been following his work long before he became famous and even contacted him and discussed his methods. For him this is "good enough" and I am fine with that as long as it is only for him. Problem arises when other people start using him and his work as relevant reference because they lack the above mentioned knowledge and/or information.

This is just one and most visible issue of using his work for anything serious, but there are many more to that. I really don't have the time to elaborate it in detail you can see everything on his pages. Just don't get blinded by nice finish and professionally looking drawings, this is (and never was) a guarantee of accuracy.

For the proper method of translating photos to accurate drawings, I suggest you to look at French sites (Patrouille Simple for example) and see how should it be properly done.

 

 

Thank you very much, @MarkoZG, for bothering to provide a very informative answer. I will pay closer attention now and look into the resources you mentioned (I think I did in the past, long time ago, so I will have to brush my knowledge). As it should be, the final decision will be mine, but I feel better armed now to reach it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tbolt said:

 

With the price of petrol/oil, engery and shipping costs being a lot higher now, there's porbably nothing they can do about the small increase in their kit prices if they still actually want to make a profit. Look at the fairly recent increase in the price of ICM kits and that was before the current conflict.

Their prices were high before all the latest madness,  now paying 24-26€ for smaller single engined fighter with end opening flimsy box-good comparison with IBG, how can they do it better for 20€ max( D-9),  and even that is expensive.

Arma's products were always overpriced( my own opinion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tbolt said:

Breda 88


Do you think that we need a new one after the MPM/Special Hobby kit?
 

10 hours ago, steh2o said:

Sad but true... not only Arma's


I am lucky for having more than 60 kits in my stach. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Borisz said:


Do you think that we need a new one after the MPM/Special Hobby kit?
 


I am lucky for having more than 60 kits in my stach. :D

 

Yes as the SH kit isn't very accurate from what I read which is why I didn't get one in the end, though we might not get another one so I might have to buy one. Same goes for the Azur IK-3. 

 

Even if they were accurate, it's a bit like saying after the Airfix Spitfire Mk.I did we really need the Eduard Mk.I? Both are fairly accurate but there's quite a difference in quality of the two kits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Thomas V. said:

Their prices were high before all the latest madness,  now paying 24-26€ for smaller single engined fighter with end opening flimsy box-good comparison with IBG, how can they do it better for 20€ max( D-9),  and even that is expensive.

Arma's products were always overpriced( my own opinion).

 

Ordering right from Arma Hobby the KI-84 costs me a bit less than 19 Euro, the most expensive kit being the P-51 at 20.53, vs. 21.50 for the 190D-9 from IBG. So prices vary  a lot depending where you order from. I have to mail order everything so shipping costs are no longer a factor, they are more or less the same per kit if I buy smart (something I must do if I want value for my money).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Thomas V. said:

Their prices were high before all the latest madness,  now paying 24-26€ for smaller single engined fighter with end opening flimsy box-good comparison with IBG, how can they do it better for 20€ max( D-9),  and even that is expensive.

Arma's products were always overpriced( my own opinion).

 

But not as high as they are now as the P-51B seem to be a higher price than there previous boxing's of their other kits which I thought were fairly priced for the time.

 

So the IBG 190 is a better kit than Arma's kits? I haven't built or bought one but if that's the case it must be pretty amazing.

 

You could argue why all sorts of company's models are more expensive than others, but there's obviously a lot that goes in to these businesses that effects the final products price. For example there's good reasons why Airfix charge more for the same model than Eduard, it not just Airfix being greedy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tbolt said:

But not as high as they are now as the P-51B seem to be a higher price than there previous boxing's of their other kits

Until now, the P-51B/C is only released as an Expert/Limited boxing and not the standard editions we see from the F-4F and Hurricanes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, alt-92 said:

Until now, the P-51B/C is only released as an Expert/Limited boxing and not the standard editions we see from the F-4F and Hurricanes. 

 

The Mustang Mk.III boxing is a standard boxing and in the UK retails at slightly more than the Hurricane expert set.

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...