Airfix 1/48 Sea Vixen, a quick build.

[Shar2]

Thought I'd build this whilst I wait for the extra parts I need for the Scharnhorst build. It's not brilliant and I've already noticed some mistakes/omissions. I mucked up around the navs window getting glue on it and no matter what I tried I couldn't sort it. Also the seats aren't fixed as I'm going to replace them with resin when they are released. Also one seat was damaged when the cats tail swiped it of the table and I promptly trod on it chasing said cat away doh!

The kit built up very easily but I did find getting the wings to stay folded quite awkward.

[The real Apache]

Airfix are an odd bvunch, their quality always varied, some of their more obscure german aircraft were spot on yet they still, apparently miss the mark. Shame, this model should have been a cracker

[Shar2]

The real Apache said:

Airfix are an odd bvunch, their quality always varied, some of their more obscure german aircraft were spot on yet they still, apparently miss the mark. Shame, this model should have been a cracker

Not quite sure where you think they miss the mark on this. The only failings of this kit were from my own making. Admitedly the seats could be better, but if one uses the pilots then they would be fine. The kit went together very nicely all told and the details/panel lines are very nicely done. The decals are superb, being produced for Airfix by Cartograph. I don't think Hasetamihobbpeter could have done better, certainly not for the price. Anyway it seems to be selling like hotcakes, I have another three in the stash and that bodes well for future Airfix releases. One other thing, renouned Sea Vixen expert Roy Sutherland helped out with this kit and has said Airfix have done a wonderful job on it.

[The real Apache]

I heard the decals were good but the separate canopy frames is a daft idea and the intakes are supposed to be a bit off, I just thought the detail was a bit lacking from what images I've seen so far.

[Shar2]

I actually think the separate canopy frames is a good idea as you can paint them without any worries of ruining the clear parts. As for the intakes, they look fine to me, although they might need a small blanking plate behind the boundary layer slot to stop some see through. Most people who have complained about this area think it's a bad fit, it's not, that's the way the real intakes are.

[dr_gn]

That looks like a very nicely built model, congratulations. Maybe you could send for a spare glass panel?

Re. Airfix in general...if you compare a model like the Sea Vixen at £35, with the Wingnut Wings SE5a at £38 (*including* delivery from NewZealand!), there really is no comparison in terms of detail (there is even a photo-etch fret included), quality of moulding, fit, finish and even packaging. The W.W. instruction manual is in itself worth a bit of cash simply for the great reference photographs. All this from a company only a couple of years old. How long has Airfix been going? Many of the latest releases from Airfix (Spitfires, Bf109's, Bf110's etc) have got panel lines so deep that you wonder who designed the masters. Many 1970's Matchbox models are still at least as good, or better IMO.

[Eric Mc]

By all accounts, the new Sea Vixen is a cracker and, at £35 is a lot of model for your money compared to a similar scale WW1 fighter.

Having struggled mightilly with the old FROG Sea Vixen (it's on hold at the moment whilst I concentrate on assembling tax returns rather than plastic kits). I dearly hope Airfix have a go in 1/72 scale too.

I can't wait for their Valiant.

Smashing result Shar, by the way. I'm sure a few built Sea Vixens will appear at Farnborough IPMS meets soon.

Edited by Eric Mc on Saturday 1st January 17:05

[The real Apache]

Shar2 said:

I actually think the separate canopy frames is a good idea as you can paint them without any worries of ruining the clear parts. As for the intakes, they look fine to me, although they might need a small blanking plate behind the boundary layer slot to stop some see through. Most people who have complained about this area think it's a bad fit, it's not, that's the way the real intakes are.

Yeah painting is easier but glueing them in is a bit of a problem, I always feel that, if possible, glazed areas should be enginered to include some fuselage to enable it to be sanded/filled to ensure a smooth transition from perspex to aluminium as it the real thing

[dr_gn]

The real Apache said:

Shar2 said:

I actually think the separate canopy frames is a good idea as you can paint them without any worries of ruining the clear parts. As for the intakes, they look fine to me, although they might need a small blanking plate behind the boundary layer slot to stop some see through. Most people who have complained about this area think it's a bad fit, it's not, that's the way the real intakes are.

Yeah painting is easier but glueing them in is a bit of a problem, I always feel that, if possible, glazed areas should be enginered to include some fuselage to enable it to be sanded/filled to ensure a smooth transition from perspex to aluminium as it the real thing

You've also got the problem of trimming and sanding the sprue gates which are attached directly to the outside edge of the visible, unpainted glazing. This makes it easier to damage the brittle plastic and also there is more chance of an unsightly trim mark on the glazing. From what I've seen of the cockpit (after looking at the kit in the LHS), it is covered in ejector pin marks (just like the 1:24 Mosquito). Very poor design.

[The real Apache]

If you notice the close up shots of the Scimitar in this vid you'll see what I'm trying (clumsiliy) to say

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFzRtOuj5GQ&fea...

Edited by The real Apache on Saturday 1st January 18:25

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

By all accounts, the new Sea Vixen is a cracker and, at £35 is a lot of model for your money compared to a similar scale WW1 fighter.

They aren't similar scale though. The Wingnut Wings SE.5a is 1:32 scale, the Airfix Sea Vixen 1:48 scale, so in terms of size and part count, quite similar I'd imagine.

[Zaxxon]

I don't think Airfix can be compared to Tamiya or Hasegawa and like wise it looks like Wingnut models are even better (I have not made one yet).

I made the mistake of building a 1/48 Airfix Hurricane 2 weeks ago and that was enough to remind me why I have not touched Airfix in ages. So much flashing, bad fit of parts and very poor detail. It surprises me how they have not managed to improve things.

I will soon be building one of my christmas pressies at the moment a 1/48 Tamiya Swordfish and it looks to be to be an absolute treat. I'm halted at the moment though whilst I wait for the photo etch parts to arrive in the post as well as a full set of Vallejo paints.

Shah2, the Javelin does look very nice, what did you finish it with? Was it Future?

[dr_gn]

Zaxxon said:

I don't think Airfix can be compared to Tamiya or Hasegawa and like wise it looks like Wingnut models are even better (I have not made one yet).

I made the mistake of building a 1/48 Airfix Hurricane 2 weeks ago and that was enough to remind me why I have not touched Airfix in ages. So much flashing, bad fit of parts and very poor detail. It surprises me how they have not managed to improve things.

I will soon be building one of my christmas pressies at the moment a 1/48 Tamiya Swordfish and it looks to be to be an absolute treat. I'm halted at the moment though whilst I wait for the photo etch parts to arrive in the post as well as a full set of Vallejo paints.

Shah2, the Javelin does look very nice, what did you finish it with? Was it Future?

I must admit, I did enjoy building the Airfix Sunderland last year, but it was an interesting contrast with my recent 1976 vintage Matchbox Bf109 build:

The vast majority of time spent on the Airfix model was removal of flash, cutting and shutting things, filling gaps and sink marks, and generally pissing about trying to get things to fit to one degree or another (not to mention masking and painting the non existant canopy frames!).

The Matchbox model went together like a dream, the majority of my time was spent on *adding* detail to the existing kit. I reckon that OOB, I could have built the Bf109 with no filler at all, and no flash removal.

The end results of both models were quite reasonable, but I'd much rather spend my time *modelling* like with the Matchbox kit, rather than *correcting* like with the Airfix kit.

[SlipStream77]

Eric Mc said:

By all accounts, the new Sea Vixen is a cracker and, at £35 is a lot of model for your money compared to a similar scale WW1 fighter.

I recently bought a 1/48 Airfix Canberra B(I)8 for about £23, in terms of size of model for value it's got to be difficult to beat.

I'm working on two old Airfix models at the moment, a Jaguar and Harrier, both 1/48. I can't comment on the quality of fit on the Canberra as I haven't looked into that yet, but the instructions, colour painting/decal guide and the decals themselves are of excellent quality.

Back on topic, the Sea Vixen looks really good, it reminds me of the Gloster Javelin. According to Wiki, their first flights were within two months of each other.

[Shar2]

Zaxxon said:

I don't think Airfix can be compared to Tamiya or Hasegawa and like wise it looks like Wingnut models are even better (I have not made one yet).

I made the mistake of building a 1/48 Airfix Hurricane 2 weeks ago and that was enough to remind me why I have not touched Airfix in ages. So much flashing, bad fit of parts and very poor detail. It surprises me how they have not managed to improve things.

I will soon be building one of my christmas pressies at the moment a 1/48 Tamiya Swordfish and it looks to be to be an absolute treat. I'm halted at the moment though whilst I wait for the photo etch parts to arrive in the post as well as a full set of Vallejo paints.

Shah2, the Javelin does look very nice, what did you finish it with? Was it Future?

You must remember the Airfix Hurricane is getting on a bit now and it sounds like the moulds are wearing out if you have a lot of flash.

The Sea Vixen is in a completely different class. No flash, excellent fit only large sprue gates caused concern when removing smaller parts. When Airfix released the 1/48 Lightnings and Canberras they were well reviewed with only a few niggles with things like the Canberra tail feathers. The Sea Vixen is another notch or two above those two excellent kits. If they continue producing kits of this quality then I think they will do very well and I'm really looking forward to the Seafire XVII and the Lynx which are due to be released this year.

Hasegawa and Tamiya have not always been and still aren't perfect with all their kits. I think some people just have a major downer on Airfix. Since they were bought out by Hornby they really have started to get things right, give them a chance, at least we can say the UK still has a major model company, even if they are only designed here.
As for the finish I used Alclad Gloss Coat.

[Eric Mc]

Well said Shar.

As far as I am concerned, I am prepared to accept a less than perfectly engineered model if

a) it's affordable
b) reasonably accurate
c) a subject I like

And I don't mind a bit of flash here and there. After all, modelling to me is as much about tidying up and fettling as simply plonking them into place like a 3-D jigsaw.

Even Tamiya, who make undoubtedly excellently engineered kits, get things wrong dimensionally. And as for Hasegawa, no matter how good their current kits are they are just far too expensive at the moment.

I think Airfix need to be aiming to copy current Revell Germany releases. Revell Germany are the best enginered and value for money models out there at the moment.
But, like with Airfix, they have their ancient clunkers too and you do need to know the pedigree of what you are buying to avoid disappointment.

Edited by Eric Mc on Saturday 1st January 22:56

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Well said Shar.

As far as I am concerned, I am prepared to accept a less than perfectly engineered model if

a) it's affordable
b) reasonably accurate
c) a subject I like

And I don't mind a bit of flash here and there. After all, modelling to me is as much about tidying up and fettling as simply plonking them into place like a 3-D jigsaw.

Even Tamiya, who make undoubtedly excellently engineered kits, get things wrong dimensionally. And as for Hasegawa, no matter how good their current kits are they are just far too expensive at the moment.

I think Airfix need to be aiming to copy current Revell Germany releases. Revell Germany are the best enginered and value for money models out there at the moment.
But, like with Airfix, they have their ancient clunkers too and you do need to know the pedigree of what you are buying to avoid disappointment.

Edited by Eric Mc on Saturday 1st January 22:56

...but none of that explains how Wingnut Wings can produce superb, state-of-the-art kits, manufactured in China and distributed from New Zealand for the same price - delivered - as a fairly average Airfix kit.

Surely after all the experience Airfix have, they should be producing world leading models by now? Their recent output is at best inconsistent and at worst, dire IMO.

[Eric Mc]

I think Airfix kits, taken on the whole, are pretty good value for money, especially compared to the Japanese and some Eastern European kits. Wingnut Wings models certainly do seem to be exceptionally good value for money - but without knowing the finacial structure of the company, I wouldn't really know how they arrive at their privcing policy.
I also think exchange rates are one factor in their lower prices as would distribution costs.

Despite the quality of Wingnut Wings kits, they produce models in a scale and of an era that I don't usually build so I probably won't be purchasing their models, unless they have a go at 1/72.

Modellers look for different things in models. Obviously, the characteristics you appreciate in a kit are different to mine and we'll just have to agree to differ.

[dr_gn]

Eric Mc said:

Modellers look for different things in models. Obviously, the characteristics you appreciate in a kit are different to mine and we'll just have to agree to differ.

I think with the limited time I have available for modelling these days I'd rather model than correct. Depends on the magnitude of the project I suppose.

[Eric Mc]

dr_gn said:

Eric Mc said:

Modellers look for different things in models. Obviously, the characteristics you appreciate in a kit are different to mine and we'll just have to agree to differ.

I think with the limited time I have available for modelling these days I'd rather model than correct. Depends on the magnitude of the project I suppose.

By concentrating on small 1/72 kits, I find it easier to sort out errors or mis-mouldings, flash etc. It still takes me ages to make a model - no matter how perfectly or imperfectly moulded it might be.

Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 2nd January 10:35