1/48 - Fairey Battle Mk.I by Trumpeter - released

[dragonlanceHR]

3 hours ago, bjohns5 said:

Classic Airframes messed up the shape of the nose a bit. But I predict Trumpeter will screw up their version MUCH worse since they seem to mostly take the lazy route of just copying the plans out of some book or magazine without checking against either period photos or preserved examples.

CA messe the nose and the length IIRC. There were scans of the hand drawn correction plan floating on the internets, I'II see if I can find them on my drive.

[AmaruTG]

9 hours ago, Harold55 said:

I have built some nice Trumpy kits and I have a couple that are still in the box. My own experience is they can make good kits.  I will wait to see what's in the box and read some reviews.  I have a Classic Airframe one that I could do also so I have a decision to make.

I agree with you. They have some *acceptable* kits. End product depends if the subject is developed by A or B team, as far as I have noted...

[mahavelona]

This is great news. We all know what Trumpeter kits are like.. but I will take this over a £120+ classic airframes kit second hand on eBay, which by all reports is a tricky build with some shape issues.

 

So long as the canopy shape is correct, I think we will be okay.

 

At the end of the day this will be a semi-affordable, easily building modern Battle kit which is something we have needed for a long time

 

[pacificmustang]

Maybe this will spur on Airfix to release a 1/48 kit. We can only hope !

 

Bruce 

[mahavelona]

6 hours ago, pacificmustang said:

Maybe this will spur on Airfix to release a 1/48 kit. We can only hope !

 

Bruce 

Airfix may face an uphill battle now...

Ahem

[Gordon J]

8 hours ago, pacificmustang said:

Maybe this will spur on Airfix to release a 1/48 kit. We can only hope !

 

Bruce 

To release a kit of a Fairy? 🤨

 

Sorry.

 

I'll get my coat.

 

😬

[gingerbob]

Perhaps the Airfix one will turn out to be Fantome-ware.

[New Tool]

I really look forward to a faulty Trumpeter Battle. I couldn't create a better one myself, so I will welcome it, and thanks to Trumpeter for making it.

I'm looking forward to it very,  very much.

If I don't like the end result then I'll buy a different one.... but if it does have faults ... then a faulty one will do in the mean time.

I'd buy an Airfix one too though, if it ever came around.

It gives us the choice of either  making a dubious model, or not having one at all.

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by New Tool

[gavingav1]

On 08/02/2023 at 01:57, pacificmustang said:

Maybe this will spur on Airfix to release a 1/48 kit. We can only hope !

 

Bruce 

I don't see why not, Airfix have never shied away from duplicating kits already on the market, Airfix has it's own fanbase and it's market is very different to Trumpeter's .

[Hurricaneflyer]

I personally have quite a bit of faith in Trumpeter for this kit, as while they do make some mistakes from time to time, when they do make a good kit it becomes doubly better than its competitors by being both generally more affordable and widespread than them (which really counts for places far from everywhere else like New Zealand!)  But even if it is the inaccurate blob that that everyone predicts it will be, at the end of the day so long as it looks like a Battle and is relatively affordable, that is all that really counts, for me at least. I am going to buy at least 3 of them once they become available.

 

Sincerely, Hurricaneflyer

Edited February 13, 2023 by Hurricaneflyer

[bjohns5]

On 2/7/2023 at 2:41 AM, dragonlanceHR said:

CA messe the nose and the length IIRC. There were scans of the hand drawn correction plan floating on the internets, I'II see if I can find them on my drive.

Noblecraft made a very nice resin replacement nose and tail that corrected the nose errors and added the offset vertical stabilizer that Classic Airframes had not modeled in their plastic. I have one squirreled away for when I get inspired to build my Battle. 

[bjohns5]

On 2/12/2023 at 3:53 PM, Hurricaneflyer said:

But even if it is the inaccurate blob that that everyone predicts it will be, at the end of the day so long as it looks like a Battle and is relatively affordable, that is all that really counts, for me at least. I am going to buy at least 3 of them once they become available.

 

Sincerely, Hurricaneflyer

The problem with someone like Trumpeter putting out a mainstream kit that only vaguely looks like the subject is, even if it's filled with errors, that will poison the waters for other makers who might have otherwise released their own, better version just because Trumpeter has flooded the market with thousands of their kit. Prime example of that is the Monogram/ProModeler kits like the 1/48 Kingfisher and big bombers that were sigificantly flawed, but it still took a long time for other makers to consider making those subjects because there was such a huge number of those older kits still in circulation.

Edited February 20, 2023 by bjohns5
Fix spelling/grammar

[JFM148]

22 hours ago, bjohns5 said:

The problem with someone like Trumpeter putting out a mainstream kit that only vaguely looks like the subject is, even if it's filled with errors, that will poison the waters for other makers who might have otherwise released their own, better version just because Trumpeter has flooded the market with thousands of their kit. Prime example of that is the Monogram/ProModeler kits like the 1/48 Kingfisher and big bombers that were sigificantly flawed, but it still took a long time for other makers to consider making those subjects because there was such a huge number of those older kits still in circulation.

The same happened with lots of models made by X or Y company in the 70's and 80's and then Hasegawa, Tamiya, Eduard developed more detailed kits.  Why the "Big Guys" did not released a decent Battle for over 40 years?  Should we give them another 40 years to react?  I rather go with a flawed Battle now that I can deal with than with empty air until a Big Guy reacts and makes a Flawed Battle (Yes, Tamiya, Eduard and others have big mistakes just as well) in 40 years, when I will be in the proverbial cloud dressed in white with an harpe in my hands...

[alt-92]

6 hours ago, JFM148 said:

in 40 years, when I will be in the proverbial cloud dressed in white with an harpe in my hands...

Look on the bright side - plenty of time for modelling. 

 

 

me, I'm just slightly worried with them releasing a Fulmar at the same time.  They're not the same aircraft even if they look superficially similar.

[JFM148]

18 hours ago, alt-92 said:

Look on the bright side - plenty of time for modelling. 

Hope there is good Hobby Shops up there, otherwise, I will know I ended up in the other alternative "not so nice place" 😉🤭 

[Rabbit Leader]

On 2/22/2023 at 12:37 AM, JFM148 said:

Why the "Big Guys" did not released a decent Battle for over 40 years?  Should we give them another 40 years to react?

Although I concur with @bjohns5 comments that this will likely kill off other manufacturers, the above comment holds equally as much weight. Like most on here, we are all a little suspicious with what this new Battle kit will look like, however at the end of the day it’s been a long neglected subject from all the major players, so Trumpeter deserve some credit for considering the type as a 2023 release. Let’s all hope it’s a good one. 
Cheers.. Dave 

[mahavelona]

So long as the canopy is the right shape, then we should be okay I feel. The reason in my mind is that 3D printing can rectify anything shape wise and small manufacturers on this forum are able to produce correction sets (not unlike that resin tail available for the CA Battle).

 

We are unlikely to get another Battle kit soon so if the Trumpy kit turns out to be flawed there should be a market for corrective 3D printed parts. Same goes for their Fulmar.

[Tokyo Raider]

This (outside of ICM B26 marauder) is my favorite kit of the year...   I really have wanted a new tool Battle!

 

I have no hope it will be accurate, because of track record of Trumpeter and hobby boss kits of past.

 

I would eagerly buy any corrective kits in aftermarket...

[Elias]

Any new kit of Battle is more than welcome. 

The CA kit was a mess.

[Sebastien]

Don't I know that...

 

[Mike]

I've just run through this thread from stem to stern, and what a load of whining about Trumpeter, and VERY little information about the kit other than a few "I like Battles", and one or two sensible "let's wait until we see some plastic".

 

Please just knock off this negative nonsense, and stick to the topic.  Yes, we know you're all incredibly witty with your quips and analogies, but when it extends to two pages, it gets really really irritating.  Once we have the sprues to look at, complain about inaccuracies by all means (within reason and not ad infinitum), but ditch the grouching in the meantime.  Same goes with any other Trumpy/HB/etc. threads.

 

I'm also not liking the "If they do something right it's someone else's research", but when they do something wrong it's all their fault attitude, which shows massive bias.  Is there any proof of this for more than one or two of their good kits?  If there is, I'm all ears.  Plus, the Wyvern and Sea Hawk are very good kits, and I disagree with the slating that the Seafang/Spiteful gets.  It's a long while since I did it, but I went over the sprues (in my hands) with some pretty good side-on photos, some plans, and my own built kit from Falcon, and disagree with the "wing position is all wrong" aspect.  I can no longer remember the exact details, but the leading-edges of the wings lined up with other details in photos, plus other aspects that have long gone from my tiny mind.  I don't mention it very often, but there we go.

 

Don't forget.  In this hobby of ours, the windscreen is usually over 6 scale inches thick, as are the gear bay doors, with blunt trailing edges, oversized gear, struts and over simplifications necessary to allow components to stand up to handling, never mind sitting in your display case for the rest of time.

[gingerbob]

On 2/22/2023 at 10:37 AM, JFM148 said:

Hope there is good Hobby Shops up there, otherwise, I will know I ended up in the other alternative "not so nice place" 😉🤭 

 

Are you referring to Heller?

 

On 1/14/2024 at 3:52 PM, Mike said:

...and VERY little information about the kit other than a few "I like Battles", and one or two sensible "let's wait until we see some plastic".

 

 

I'm also not liking the "If they do something right it's someone else's research", but when they do something wrong it's all their fault attitude, which shows massive bias.  Is there any proof of this for more than one or two of their good kits?  If there is, I'm all ears.  Plus, the Wyvern and Sea Hawk are very good kits, and I disagree with the slating that the Seafang/Spiteful gets.  It's a long while since I did it, but I went over the sprues (in my hands) with some pretty good side-on photos, some plans, and my own built kit from Falcon, and disagree with the "wing position is all wrong" aspect.  I can no longer remember the exact details, but the leading-edges of the wings lined up with other details in photos, plus other aspects that have long gone from my tiny mind.  I don't mention it very often, but there we go.

 

 

First comment (edited down, I admit) - this IS the Rumourmonger section- how much hard knowledge are we going to have?

 

Sorry Mike, but as my (so far) abortive build of the Spiteful (link in case anyone cares) hopefully shows, while you can recognize that it is meant to portray a Spiteful (or Seafang), it is definitely not anywhere near accurate.  I will grant that it is inaccurate in original ways, compared to the other attempts I've examined (Silver Cloud, Falcon- which comes closest).  Interestingly, they made different errors on the Attacker's wing compared to the Spiteful's, or should I say that they didn't even steal their own data?  (For those who don't want to slog through my feeble attempt at building it- and I can't blame you- I was comparing against Supermarine blueprints and such data, which ought to be "reasonably close", I would imagine.)

 

I have no strong emotional or political stance about Trumpeter, and I'm not convinced that them kitting something will stop others from doing so.  Sure, it might have some influence, but the bottom line is that if some kit company thinks they can make enough to justify doing it (or the owner wants to badly enough), then they'll do it.  Some might also feel that they can do a better job at it than the competition, while others might not really care as long as theirs is the one that gets stocked and sold.

[New Tool]

How closely related are the Battle and Fulmar? Similarities? Or am I just seeing superficial resemblance? 

... ( i.e. so will the Trumpeter kits be similar ... and could some parts be interchanged if one kit's part suits better to the other).

[Work In Progress]

1 hour ago, New Tool said:

How closely related are the Battle and Fulmar? Similarities? Or am I just seeing superficial resemblance?

Superficial. There is no commonality in the airframes of the two types, but they do have a family relationship and resemblance. First came the Battle, then came the Fairey_P.4/34 which was proposed as a smaller bomber, and the Fulmar was derived from that.

[Phoenix44]

On 20/02/2023 at 21:30, bjohns5 said:

The problem with someone like Trumpeter putting out a mainstream kit that only vaguely looks like the subject is, even if it's filled with errors, that will poison the waters for other makers who might have otherwise released their own, better version just because Trumpeter has flooded the market with thousands of their kit. Prime example of that is the Monogram/ProModeler kits like the 1/48 Kingfisher and big bombers that were sigificantly flawed, but it still took a long time for other makers to consider making those subjects because there was such a huge number of those older kits still in circulation.

I'm sorry but this is illogical. If people buy the inaccurate version then they don't care about accuracy. If people don't buy it because it's inaccurate, then the market still exists. What might happen is that the small slice of the market that cares about accuracy doesn't get what it wants.  Well that's hard luck, there's no "poisoning". As for the idea that "the market" buys second-hand kits, that's obviously not true. I suspect the vast majority of modellers in China, Japan and elsewhere only buy new. They don't scour eBay for Monogram Kingfishers. There's lots of those about because they didn't get made and people sell them. That's why there's no new version.