atdb27 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) Not sure if this has already been started 'Somewhere' on here? Not only are Airfix blessing us with a 48th Javelin but also announced,.. New Tool: Lightning F2A Harrier Gr1 Harrier Gr3 Vampire T11 We are to be spoilt ++ Other New Tooling Gladiator Gladiator + Floats Lancaster + Hercules Engines! WWII Bomb Loading set Typhoon 1 Hurricane Early version https://www.airfix.com/airfix-products/new-for-2013/ Wow Christmas has come early Adrian Edited December 19, 2012 by atdb27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonR Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I have just had a browse on the airfix site, Lightning is great news, and the Javelin is simply a big 'GET IN'!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canberra kid Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 That's a fantastic list, plenty there to get the juices flowing! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Absolutely nothing exciting there. Move along, nothing to see! W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killingholme Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Bravo airfix. Really exciting. I'll hav muliples of a couple of these. A Modern-tooled 'pocket money kit' of a Vampire T.11, who'd have thunk that! Will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Bravo airfix. Really exciting. I'll hav muliples of a couple of these. A Modern-tooled 'pocket money kit' of a Vampire T.11, who'd have thunk that! Will That for me is the real 'left field' anouncement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 That for me is the real 'left field' anouncement. Indeed! Remember when Heller released the Javelin T3? I think it's the same basic premise here with the sheer number of unit markings that can be applied to this version of the airframe, hence the high potential for multiple sales. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 That for me is the real 'left field' anouncement. I can't wait to see all of the the Xtradecal sheets - this little gem of a kit will generate!!! What shade of green do I need for an Admiral's Barge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Wot - no Balliol? Seriously though hats off to whoever persuaded the bean counters to back off. The Vampire will certainly be added to my stash, once as a Rhodesian example and RAN too. The fabric wing Hurri too. Maybe all silver Yugoslav or Belgian both pre war. Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 I can't wait to see all of the the Xtradecal sheets - this little gem of a kit will generate!!! What shade of green do I need for an Admiral's Barge? Dark blue, actually. The Sea Hawks were green, but the T.22s were the same scheme as the Hunter T.8s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The original Kit Builder Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I only wish they'd release a few more of these types in 48th. A new Gladiator and some 50's-60's British types in such a sclae would be most welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 The Dambusters Lancaster is available as a gift set, the "Anniversay Edition" https://www.airfix.com/airfix-products/new-for-2013/gift-sets/a50138-dambusters-lancaster-gift-set-172-a50138/ Are we to speculate that this will have a miniature Dam in the box too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) Dark blue, actually. The Sea Hawks were green, but the T.22s were the same scheme as the Hunter T.8s. Not so. http://img.photobuck...mpire-XA160.jpg Now, to turn it into a T10 - new canopy, fins and nose? Edited December 21, 2012 by Dave Fleming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Maas Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I only wish they'd release a few more of these types in 48th. A new Gladiator and some 50's-60's British types in such a sclae would be most welcome. Roden does a rather nice Gladiator in 1/48. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C. Bahr Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I only wish they'd release a few more of these types in 48th. That goes both ways... we need the Sea Vixen, Javelin, Lightning F.1/F.6 and Buccaneer in 72nd! Probably a few others I'm forgetting. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Not so. http://img.photobuck...mpire-XA160.jpg Now, to turn it into a T10 - new canopy, fins and nose? There was no T.10 only an NF.10. The fuselage on the 11 was wider to accommodate side by side seating. On the 10, the seats were slightly staggered. In effect only the wings and undercarriage carried over. Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Edit. - wrong section Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Dark blue, actually. The Sea Hawks were green, but the T.22s were the same scheme as the Hunter T.8s. You're almost correct! On page 29 of Adrian Balch's excellent 'De Havilland Twin Boom ' Book, there are two photo's. One is of XG775 on 9th September 1967 at RNAS Yeovilton in Blue and White (now WOULDN'T that look nice next to a similarly painted SHAR2!) AND of XA160 taken at RNAS Lee-on-Solent in August 1963. This is in GREEN and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 There was no T.10 only an NF.10. The fuselage on the 11 was wider to accommodate side by side seating. On the 10, the seats were slightly staggered. In effect only the wings and undercarriage carried over. Trevor Ooops, typo, I meant NF10! I'd forgotten the nose was widened (I wonder by how much) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) There was no T.10 only an NF.10. The fuselage on the 11 was wider to accommodate side by side seating. On the 10, the seats were slightly staggered. In effect only the wings and undercarriage carried over. Trevor I'm not sure thats correct Trevor? The T11 was an updated version of the NF(T)10. (A 'stripped down' version - with A1.Mk10 radar removed and replaced with navigational training radar). Fuselage pods were the same width - otherwise the wings wouldn't have fitted! Unless this extra width was further up the nose? These NF(T)10's didn't have ejector seats and neither did the early T11's..........Cockpits were of course re-arranged to accommodate ejection seats on later T11's . Now the length of the pods may have been different - due to the different equipment housed. The breakdown of John Adams/Aeroclub's lovelly 1/48th scale Vampire vac-form kit shows how DeH managed this. Essentially the rear fuselage pod and wings (not wing tips though!) were constant on ALL Vampires. The only external differences between the Marks were the nose pods and booms.... Edited December 21, 2012 by Bill Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I'm not sure thats correct Trevor? The T11 was an updated version of the NF(T)10. (A 'stripped down' version - with A1.Mk10 radar removed and replaced with navigational training radar). Fuselage pods were the same width - otherwise the wings wouldn't have fitted! Unless this extra width was further up the nose? These NF(T)10's didn't have ejector seats and neither did the early T11's..........Cockpits were of course re-arranged to accommodate ejection seats on later T11's . Now the length of the pods may have been different - due to the different equipment housed. The breakdown of John Adams/Aeroclub's lovelly 1/48th scale Vampire vac-form kit shows how DeH managed this. Essentially the rear fuselage pod and wings (not wing tips though!) were constant on ALL Vampires. The only external differences between the Marks were the nose pods and booms.... The back of my mind says that this was one of the things John 'discovered' when he was re-measuring lots of aeroplanes - the bulge is forward of the leading edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 The back of my mind says that this was one of the things John 'discovered' when he was re-measuring lots of aeroplanes - the bulge is forward of the leading edge. Hopefully John will be along shortly!!! In the meantime have a look at the header photo on The Vampire Preservation Grpup's WZ507 ( A machine I very nearly had a flight in a decade ago - scuppered by my divorce!!! grrrrrrrrr........ http://www.vampirepreservation.org.uk/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) Hope so, I may have been wrong, found this: The Vampire was designed as a single seater and the first two seater was the NF.10. The staggered arrangement allowed elbow room for the pilot and a radar scope to be fitted for the Nav. The early T.11's despite having a wider cockpit sill (not a wider fuselage) did not have ejection seats. The seats in a Sea Venom are lightweight Mk.4's and are structurally different to all other Mk.4 types. This causes a lot of confusion. http://www.network54... as a bomber... It could be the wider cockpit and different shaped canopy creates the illusion of a wider fuselage. Perhaps a new thread? Edited December 21, 2012 by Dave Fleming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Hope so, I may have been wrong, found this: [/size][/font][/size][/font] http://www.network54... as a bomber... It could be the wider cockpit and different shaped canopy creates the illusion of a wider fuselage. Perhaps a new thread? Yes, a good idea. The more elbow room could of course relate to internal equipment being removed...One thing though any actual difference in width would be small in 1/72nd!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenMG Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) The T.11 fuselage was modified to allow side by side seating by cutting down the cockpit sides and adding a curved section to give more lateral width for the pilot's shoulders. Compare an NF.10 pod and a T.11 pod and you'll see what I'm referring to - an outwardly curved section adjacent to the pilot's shoulders on the T.11 which the NF.10 does not have giving an extra few inches of width. It means that the 'wider' pod is only wider around the cockpit opening. This might help... Changes to the T.11 to accomodate ejection seats were all internal apart from the new canopy design. Mark Edited December 21, 2012 by StephenMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now