Arma 1/48 announcement at Babaryba

[TheKinksFan]

iModeler review with alot of photos: https://imodeler.com/2024/06/imodeler-review-arma-hobby-1-48-p-39-airacobra/

[2996 Victor]

6 hours ago, TheKinksFan said:

iModeler review with alot of photos: https://imodeler.com/2024/06/imodeler-review-arma-hobby-1-48-p-39-airacobra/

Excellent share, thanks - it definitely looks the bee's knees to me! I love that Arma have included so many parts for sub-variants. Great stuff!

[Tbolt]

Instructions.

 

https://armahobbynews.pl/en/blog/2024/06/11/p-39q-airacobra-in-1-48-scale-kit-instructions/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR2wAx4dt-qvEkuNR9SrTh3SPxyj4k0-B1eGG1kSvWzboGMT3lLXI6vRZ88_aem_AaShaqWNuAvXbYnPRIFaEyyDsEj4_hxwy6_jqf8h_8Uocvlpw5ls0gfgnLJEMKtxDg6rKXzoPIVVJOZKbMmqa0Ns

[New Tool]

On 6/10/2024 at 9:24 AM, TheKinksFan said:

iModeler review with alot of photos: https://imodeler.com/2024/06/imodeler-review-arma-hobby-1-48-p-39-airacobra/

That kit has a lot of balls.

[Tomas Enerdal]

The Hurricane is a very special aircraft.

On one hand it clearly shows its lineage to its fabric covered ancestors, the sleek interwar biplanes.

On the other hand it shows a lot of rather heavy handed iron mongery, with a lot of domed rivets, fasteners and the like.

The way it bridges several generations of aircraft design makes it almost enigmatic and, as stated; special.

The way ARMA has portrayed it in 1/48 is nothing short of fantastic. It certainly made my jaws drop to the floor!

 

Now, the Airacobra is quite a different bird. As aircraft they cannot be directly compared. However, to me it seems like ARMA has captured its characteristics in an equally fantastic way as well, with its smoother surface and more subtle lines.

Judging the way ARMA has handled the Hurricane, I expect it to be very, very accurate with respect to shape, dimensions and detail. As a kit I expect it to be equally well fitting and easy to build perfectly. 

 

Personally, the Airacobra is not my first choice of subject. But I expect myself to become tempted some day, if nothing else because it's a 1/48 ARMA kit.

 

I sincerely hope that ARMA will continue with their Hurricanes and venture into the Mk.I series. At the same time, my sincerest congratulations to Airacobra fans!

 

 

[2996 Victor]

1 hour ago, Tomas Enerdal said:

The Hurricane is a very special aircraft.

On one hand it clearly shows its lineage to its fabric covered ancestors, the sleek interwar biplanes.

On the other hand it shows a lot of rather heavy handed iron mongery, with a lot of domed rivets, fasteners and the like.

The way it bridges several generations of aircraft design makes it almost enigmatic and, as stated; special.

The way ARMA has portrayed it in 1/48 is nothing short of fantastic. It certainly made my jaws drop to the floor!

 

Now, the Airacobra is quite a different bird. As aircraft they cannot be directly compared. However, to me it seems like ARMA has captured its characteristics in an equally fantastic way as well, with its smoother surface and more subtle lines.

Judging the way ARMA has handled the Hurricane, I expect it to be very, very accurate with respect to shape, dimensions and detail. As a kit I expect it to be equally well fitting and easy to build perfectly. 

Well said, Tomas! 

[Tbolt]

We included exactly as many parts as we considered necessary in the new Airacobra 1/48 model kit. We didn’t want to simplify or complicate anything too much. We considered it for a long time, we also took into account the experience with our 1/72 Airacobra kit. We wanted it to be possible to easily build all the most important versions of this aircraft from out-of-the-box, which is not so easy, because although at first glance all Cobras are very similar, they differ in many small details. At the same time, we did not want to endlessly increase the number of alternative parts, which is related to the size of the mouldings and the price of the kit. And there is some additional stuff for 3D self-printing!

 

👉Let’s take a look at what we ended up with:

https://armahobbynews.pl/en/blog/2024/06/17/airacobra-40010-scale-variants-available/

 

https://www.facebook.com/share/U2iSxrKnEte7Zoa8/

 

[Overflow]

Cool for Arma, but why did not they include proper surface detailing as seen on their superlative Hurricane.

[Bozothenutter]

11 hours ago, Overflow said:

Cool for Arma, but why did not they include proper surface detailing as seen on their superlative Hurricane.

'Round and round we go......'

[Rulaman]

13 hours ago, Tbolt said:

We included exactly as many parts as we considered necessary in the new Airacobra 1/48 model kit. We didn’t want to simplify or complicate anything too much. We considered it for a long time, we also took into account the experience with our 1/72 Airacobra kit. We wanted it to be possible to easily build all the most important versions of this aircraft from out-of-the-box, which is not so easy, because although at first glance all Cobras are very similar, they differ in many small details. At the same time, we did not want to endlessly increase the number of alternative parts, which is related to the size of the mouldings and the price of the kit. And there is some additional stuff for 3D self-printing!

 

👉Let’s take a look at what we ended up with:

https://armahobbynews.pl/en/blog/2024/06/17/airacobra-40010-scale-variants-available/

 

https://www.facebook.com/share/U2iSxrKnEte7Zoa8/

 

 

Could anybody share an image showing the steel pilot head armor in use? Haven't found anything yet in the net/my books. TIA.

 

Cheers

 

Frank

[Tbolt]

13 hours ago, Overflow said:

Cool for Arma, but why did not they include proper surface detailing as seen on their superlative Hurricane.

 

It's got "proper" surface detailing. If you mean why haven't they added "rivet" holes, they have talked about that, see the previous page.

[Overflow]

Lots of euphemism to cover simple truth-surface detailing on par or worse than Hasegawa ,but to each its own.

 

[TheKinksFan]

37 minutes ago, Overflow said:

Lots of euphemism to cover simple truth-surface detailing on par or worse than Hasegawa ,but to each its own.

So don't buy and please don't comment on this thread if you have nothing constructive to add. This topic on the surface detail has already been beaten to death.

[Overflow]

And constructive is to praise half hearted tolling👎, this is an open forum, and one should accept both positive and negative criticism, basic communication.

[IanC]

14 minutes ago, Overflow said:

And constructive is to praise half hearted tolling👎, this is an open forum, and one should accept both positive and negative criticism, basic communication.

 

Yes, but you made your point two weeks ago in this thread. You're not happy with it, you stated your reasons, and you prefer the Hasegawa offering. So now what? It's not going to be changed, so rather than repeat your constructive criticism ad nauseum, you can either accept the kit as it is or move on.

[Overflow]

Lets keep it civil gents, you are absolutely right that I made several posts regarding the kit, from my perspective I did it because I am highly annoyed that on every Arma topic( in my highly subjective view no other brand( except ZM) gets such non objective coverage). We have few forum members ( usually the same) who a.) ridicule and dismiss any critique towards the brand

b.) without any new news regarding subject of the topic, in a coordinated effort, and with proper timing make not so covert advertising, or to put it in a more vulgar manner-pure pushing-each and every Arma topic-same people, same proactivity.

 

Have nothing against Arma, their Hurricane is a superlative kit, but their P-39 is not, and no amount of overt/covert pushing or going as far as posting poorly lit wing pics to dismiss riveting as a non exsistant detail can change that.

 

Looking foreward to next 1/48 kit, with all the details found on Eduard and now Miniart kits,

and especially found on Arma's own Hurricane.

 

Peace out.

 

 

 

[Tbolt]

2 hours ago, Overflow said:

Lets keep it civil gents, you are absolutely right that I made several posts regarding the kit, from my perspective I did it because I am highly annoyed that on every Arma topic( in my highly subjective view no other brand( except ZM) gets such non objective coverage). We have few forum members ( usually the same) who a.) ridicule and dismiss any critique towards the brand

b.) without any new news regarding subject of the topic, in a coordinated effort, and with proper timing make not so covert advertising, or to put it in a more vulgar manner-pure pushing-each and every Arma topic-same people, same proactivity.

 

Have nothing against Arma, their Hurricane is a superlative kit, but their P-39 is not, and no amount of overt/covert pushing or going as far as posting poorly lit wing pics to dismiss riveting as a non exsistant detail can change that.

 

Looking foreward to next 1/48 kit, with all the details found on Eduard and now Miniart kits,

and especially found on Arma's own Hurricane.

 

Peace out.

 

I'm still not really sure what you are complaining about. Do you think the panels are too big or the fasteners are done badly or details missing? Or are you just talking about the lack of rivets when you say proper surface detailing?

 

Also if by, poorly lit wing photo, you were referring to the picture I posted, that was posted to prove that the rivets are visible and the photo is not really poorly lit, but the aircraft is rather glossy compared to normal so the rivets stand out a bit more.

[Karearea]

1 hour ago, Overflow said:

poorly lit wing pics to dismiss riveting

Here’s a brightly lit photo.

 

I absolutely respect your right to your position. Personally I’m happy with where Arma have landed in the trade off between investment in molding (and therefore the final RRP) and the representation of the aircraft itself.

 

In honesty, the more I see reviews of this the more interested I am. It looks like a great kit, and I’m sure it will build up into an excellent representation.

[mr_stomach]

16 hours ago, Overflow said:

Lets keep it civil gents, you are absolutely right that I made several posts regarding the kit, from my perspective I did it because I am highly annoyed that on every Arma topic( in my highly subjective view no other brand( except ZM) gets such non objective coverage). We have few forum members ( usually the same) who a.) ridicule and dismiss any critique towards the brand

b.) without any new news regarding subject of the topic, in a coordinated effort, and with proper timing make not so covert advertising, or to put it in a more vulgar manner-pure pushing-each and every Arma topic-same people, same proactivity.

 

Have nothing against Arma, their Hurricane is a superlative kit, but their P-39 is not, and no amount of overt/covert pushing or going as far as posting poorly lit wing pics to dismiss riveting as a non exsistant detail can change that.

 

Looking foreward to next 1/48 kit, with all the details found on Eduard and now Miniart kits,

and especially found on Arma's own Hurricane.

 

Peace out.

 

 

 

https://cloud.mail.ru/public/KLvT/dtuBz5p6X

WA from Tuusula - airplane mostly in its original paint. We see rivets only on 2 feets close to surface, even if they present - look at wings, there are no rivets on top of. So on the model of THIS airplane rivets must be notable not far from 1/2 inch.

Today we see models covered by rows of black dots and even more - these rows darkened using artistic methods making model's look as weighted blanket.

 

I have 3 claims to Arma Hurricane

1) Price

2) these tiny holes on wings (rivets) - they must be filled, but it is not simple because they near the positive rivets.

3) Drop tank mounting poits - they made on bottom side of wings and when you need to remove them you destroing positive rivets.

[HKR]

27 minutes ago, mr_stomach said:

https://cloud.mail.ru/public/KLvT/dtuBz5p6X

It's not my scale and I'm not interested in this model at all, but I'm impressed by your (I mean all writers, not you in particular) denial of the problem (if this is really problem - not for me at least). In the photos of the original plane you can see these rivets literally everywhere.

I would not like to enter into a truly academic discussion about flat rivets represented as recesses, but I do not understand why the dividing lines between sheets are generally accepted as concave grooves. Where's the difference?

[2996 Victor]

34 minutes ago, mr_stomach said:

https://cloud.mail.ru/public/KLvT/dtuBz5p6X

WA from Tuusula - airplane mostly in its original paint. We see rivets only on 2 feets close to surface, even if they present - look at wings, there are no rivets on top of. So on the model of THIS airplane rivets must be notable not far from 1/2 inch.

Excellent reference, thank you for posting the link!

 

This is exactly my thoughts on small holes being used to represent flush rivets - they simply can't be seen on small scale models (the reason why I sold my MiniArt P-47D). Even panel lines are, in truth, way over scale.

 

Cheers,

Mark

[2996 Victor]

2 minutes ago, HKR said:

In the photos of the original plane you can see these rivets literally everywhere

Yes, but this appears to be a function of the original paint chalking and what looks like an oily seepage around the rivet heads, probably from a preservative spray used on the interior surfaces. The rivets are actually flush and wouldn't be visible on a new aircraft (by which I mean one in front line use, not necessarily factory-fresh).

 

6 minutes ago, HKR said:

I do not understand why the dividing lines between sheets are generally accepted as concave grooves.

Agreed! They are way over scale, particularly from some manufacturers.

 

Cheers,

Mark

[mr_stomach]

3 minutes ago, HKR said:

It's not my scale and I'm not interested in this model at all, but I'm impressed by your (I mean all writers, not you in particular) denial of the problem (if this is really problem - not for me at least). In the photos of the original plane you can see these rivets literally everywhere.

I would not like to enter into a truly academic discussion about flat rivets represented as recesses, but I do not understand why the dividing lines between sheets are generally accepted as concave grooves. Where's the difference?

The difference is - when you see at the real plane you see panel lines but not rivets.

https://cloud.mail.ru/public/3J3S/dN9WvFpqh

 

[HKR]

8 minutes ago, mr_stomach said:

The difference is - when you see at the real plane you see panel lines but not rivets.

https://cloud.mail.ru/public/3J3S/dN9WvFpqh

 

I see. So the P-39 is a better model than the Hurricane because the holes there are bad? Or maybe they are good there and bad here? I read your post and I understand that you don't like them on Hurricanes, I'm curious what other modellers think.

[mr_stomach]

4 minutes ago, HKR said:

I see. So the P-39 is a better model than the Hurricane because the holes there are bad? Or maybe they are good there and bad here? I read your post and I understand that you don't like them on Hurricanes, I'm curious what other modellers think.

No, P-39 is not better 🙂 P-39 looks like reasonable detailed kit. I have no Arma P-39 (and now not many people has it) so cannot tell more. I only do not want pay extra money for mythical rivets. On some planes with thin skin rivets are visible and i have no doubts in this case. But today i see modern models (Bf 109 for example) with raws of rivets that not present on real plane.