Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
A figurine is a miniature-sized statuette that reproduces an animal subject or fictional character to scale. It is important to choose the scale of the figurine to ensure the realistic effect of the scale model. The Airfix catalogue offers products in a wide variety of scales: The accompanying images, especially the one featuring all three wings in line, highlight the difference. I am inclined to think that Airfix is probably the most correct here. On the market for 80 years now, the Airfix brand has been one of the leaders in modeling in Great Britain. It is none other than the oldest manufacturer of plastic model kits. The British company was founded in 1939 by Nicholas Kove,a Hungarian businessman. In the early days, Airfix only manufactured inflatable rubber toys.
A great addition to what’s already available and significantly better than the Revell offering in my view in terms of detail, tooling and options. The recessed detail is ok but could be finer for sure are counterbalanced by the beautifully delicate and detailed undercarriage legs and bulged tyres – all positive, as is the choice of decals. It offers good value for money and all in all a nice new kit beautifully presented. The wings include nicely detailed flaps that can be modelled raised or lowered, with two different inboard nacelle end-caps to suit raised or lowered flaps. In fact, on the real plane, the full size end-cap fitted to the flap partially disappears inside the open end of the engine nacelle, but the way the kit simulates this at least serves to set the flap angle. Slightly less pleasing is the slightly sagged fabric effect on the ailerons; why some tool makers insist on representing fabric covered control surfaces this way I do not know. Take a look at a real example and they would see that the fabric is drum-tight with rib-tapes indicating the location of the structure beneath. In 1/72-scale there should be at most just a hint of the tape reinforcement outlining the structure beneath. Airfix’s ailerons really need to filled and smoothed out, with perhaps decal strip rib-tapes, to appear more authentic. On the plus side, as I have already mentioned, Airfix’s recessed panel lines are restricted to representing panel skins rather than occurring on every rivet line. So, despite being perhaps a little deep, they are at least restrained in frequency. There are no clear parts for wingtip lights, something more noticeable than the under-fuselage signalling lights that are supplied! At least some fine aileron actuators are provided, and there are cable-cutters on the leading edges. Here is one of the best earlier threads re GRAND SLAM Lanc colours. I quote, and muse upon, a lot of Moore's findings as recorded in the Scale Models article in posts 12 and 65. It really does come down to faith: in what/whom do you put your trust: what the colours ought to be as far as we can discern from the available documents from the time combined with the culture of rigid adherence to laid-down standards or the testimony of a skilled and respected artist armed with painted MAP paint samples visiting the aircraft in person with the explicit aim of getting the colours right for a painting he had been commissioned to do. I'm still on the fence, I'm afraid. Elsewhere in the thread people contribute many of the available photos of GRAND SLAM Lancasters. The kit is engineered in a slightly unusual way compared to most Lancaster kits because the wings must accept both in-line and radial engine options. Theses differ in the way the nacelles blend with the wing, and so Airfix has cutouts in the wing leading edges to allow for this. The other unusual aspect is the way the two wing spars, having been inserted through the fuselage, then have the wheel well interiors attached directly to them. This then requires that the wings be assembled around the wheel wells and onto the spars. All well and good, except that one of the benefits of building WW2 British heavies is that you can usually assemble the wings separately from the fuselage to aid dealing with seams and enable the wings and fuselage to be painted and decaled separately from each other. All is not lost however, as you can assemble the spars and wheel well structure as per the instructions, then simply cut through the spars adjacent to the wheel well to enable these to be assembled with the wings separately. More than enough spar will be left to slide the wings onto later after painting. The rearmost part of the fuselage adjacent to the elevators is catered for by an insert to allow for slight variances depending on the model of tail-turret fitted. AJ-T piloted by Flight Lieutenant Robert Norman George Barlow DFC (RAAF), No 617 Sqn, “Operation Chastise, RAF Scampton, England 16/17th May 1943. This aircraft and its crew were unfortunately lost in action on the Dams Raid.The instructions are logical and well laid out. The usual exploded-stage diagram approach is used. The colour painting guide is provided as a separate sheet and I like that, making it much easier to use and have in front of you when painting and applying the decals. I simply love the ‘Tiger Force’ scheme with the Lanc in white – stunning and a great challenge for us modellers to get it looking authentic. There were 32 BI Specials delivered in Feb / Mar 1945. PB995-998 and PD112-139. 24 of these were used on operations by 617 before the war ended.
Revell were not far behind Hasegawa with a well priced modern kit featuring quite a bit more detail. Unfortunately, as with their later Halifax kit, Revell was asleep at the wheel during some stages of the kit’s development. Most notably they forgot to crank in enough wing dihedral, and churned out some very bland and oversized main wheels. Fortunately both problems are easy enough to fix. Like Hasegawa, Revell got carried away with fine engraved panel lines, again especially on the wings. Revell too have offered a dambuster version of the kit. Fortunately, Revell’s price is such that these wing and wheel issues can be fixed whilst still have some change left over compared to the Hasegawa alternative.Rather than give lengthy written explanations, take a look at the accompanying images and it should be apparent as to why I feel Airfix are the winner in the engine nacelle stakes. All glazing is nice and clear with quite fine framing. The main canopy looks good. All that is left in terms of standard Lancaster bits area some pitos, a DF loop and the like. The 1980’s Airfix kit is still quite serviceable with fine raised rivet detail rather than recessed panel lines. There is a Grand Slam boxing if that’s what you are after. Interior detail is inferior compared to the kits previously mentioned. The kit gives the impression that it will build well with few hassles; but bear in mind the warning about errors and omissions that others have already found in the instructions.
As I have already stated, Airfix do not yet equal Hasegawa or Revell in terms of recessed panel line finesse, but the surface detail of this new tool Lancaster is tolerable. On the plus-side, Airfix have fewer panel lines represented on the wings compared to the other two brands. Moulding quality is about equal across all three brands, with equal levels of finely moulded small parts. I like the texture of Airfix’s plastic more than the more brittle type used by the other two.There have been no mainstream kits of the Lancaster Mk.II with its radial engines, nor of some of the later Lancaster versions. These, and models of Lancastrians, Manchesters, Lincolns and Yorks have remained in the realm of conversions or all-resin kits. Although outside this review’s scope, there is still only one 1/48-scale Lancaster by Tamiya (also with a dambuster boxing), which is also long in the tooth. In six or so decades of plastic modelling the Lancaster has not been as well catered for as it historic importance would suggest it should have been, even in the One True Scale of 1/72nd. Airfix’s first effort dates from 1958, followed by Revell in 1964. Both have serious accuracy and outline issues, and they are a best considered as collectables now. Revell was unusual in that it offered a Dambuster boxing as well. Frog was next in 1976 with a Tallboy carrying variant with bulged bomb-bay doors. It was generally fairly accurate, but failed to capture the engine cowling outlines correctly. It did however have perhaps the finest and most restrained surface detail of the 20th century Lancaster kits. Matchbox issued their kit in 1977, and despite being optimised for the younger modeller was generally well thought of, and was more accurate than the Frog kit. All of these pre-1980 releases were typical products of their time with the usual characteristics of their brands. As to its competitors from Revell and Hasegawa – You can save around 25-30% on Airfix and buy the less accurately shaped kit from Revell. The price of replacement resin wheels, which really are a must with the Revell kit, will reduce its price advantage however. For around 60-80% more than Airfix you can buy Hasegawa’s kit which offers only more refined panel lines and better props, but falls short on interior detail, no lowered flaps option, and inferior shape in a few subtle places. Pleasingly, the wing panel lines are based on panel skins and not rivet lines, so the wings do not share the patchwork quilt appearance of its Japanese and German competitors. This advantage balances out some of the downside to having deeper and wider surface detail compared to the Hasegawa and Revel kits. I did notice that the panel lines on the wings look wider at first glance than they actually are. This is because the plastic surface has a minutely pebbled finish*, other than a very narrow smooth surface finish either side of the recessed panel lines. These smooth strips either side of the panel line stand out against the pebbled surface making the unpainted line appear wider.
Great Deal 
New Comment