Airfix NT Defiant

[JohnRatzenberger]

There's now no hope for a Mustang thread ....

[lancfan]

A mustang thread- wild horses couldn't stop one!


David.

[Dazzled]

I've done so much groaning at these puns that I've become hoarse

[AndrewR]

There's now no hope for a Mustang thread ....

It would be a one trick pony.

[ShaunW]

There's now no hope for a Mustang thread ....

It would be a one trick pony.

Neigh, enough of these horse puns already.

[AndrewR]

There's now no hope for a Mustang thread ....

It would be a one trick pony.

Neigh, enough of these horse puns already.

The thread has gone to the dogs!

[iggie]

I wish someone would get this thread back in harness

[AndrewR]

I wish someone would get this thread back in harness

Who is going to crack the whip?

[lancfan]

A new tool kit shouldn't need that kind of persuasion.

David.

[Dazzled]

Right, all puns aside, I've spent a bit of time with my new kit, a couple of reference books, the internet, a ruler and a calculator. I think I now have an insight into the nose shape that's been bugging me.

First off, nasal issues aside, this is a great kit and well up to Airfix's current standard. Superb crisp moulding, fine surface detail and well produced clear instructions make up a package that looks like it's going to be a real treat to build.

So, what's with the nose?

I've looked at a lot of drawings, even more contemporary photographs and pictures of models from other manufacturers. The drawings were a mixed bag; some good, some clearly inaccurate. Photographs were immensely helpful and provided very useful comparative measurements as well as insights into profile shapes. Other models provided the clue as to what may well have happened with the Airfix kit. This is down to 2 manufacturers; MPM and Classic Airframes.

MPM's 1/72nd scale kit of the Mk.1 has the same nose profile as seen on the Airfix kit. The 1/48th CA kit has, in my opinion, the correct nose profile for a Mk.1. Working back through pictures has confirmed this. The Mk.1 Defiant, when viewed from the side, should have a smooth continuous profile along the top of the nose and around the curve of the spinner. This is visible in all contemporary pictures of the real aircraft. Both the MPM and Airfix kits have a pronounced step where the spinner meets the cowling. CA's kit, on the other hand, has the correct contour.

What I believe has happened is that the nose has been modelled on a Mk.2, some of which (but not all ) had a different spinner. The spinner on the Airfix kit is spot on for size (for a Mk.1) but the front of the upper cowling is a tad too high at the front, leading to the step. It appears that both MPM and Airfix worked from plans where the nose shape may have been dictated by a misunderstanding or an aircraft modified with an erroneous part. Both kits feature noses that are slightly too deep at the front and have flattened cowlings at the forward end.

As I said, I think Classic Airframes got it right and here's a link to a dual build of a Mk.1 and a Mk.2. Check out the differences in nose shapes.

http://hsfeatures.com/features04/defiantph_1.htm

[Purplethistle]

So, the Classic Airframes wins by a nose?

[MarkyM607]

So, the Classic Airframes wins by a nose?

Don't saddle us with puns again!!.

[lancfan]

What I believe has happened is that the nose has been modelled on a Mk.2, some of which (but not all ) had a different spinner.

Dazzled, Given that the Hendon Defiant is a mark 2 do you think it possible that Airfix took the lazy way out and assumed that the front/top cowlings of both marks were based on the same shapes?


David.

[VMA131Marine]

What I believe has happened is that the nose has been modelled on a Mk.2, some of which (but not all ) had a different spinner.

Dazzled, Given that the Hendon Defiant is a mark 2 do you think it possible that Airfix took the lazy way out and assumed that the front/top cowlings of both marks were based on the same shapes?


David.

The Hendon Defiant is a Mk.1, and Airfix had lots of access to during its recent restoration.

[lancfan]

really? some sites cite it as a mark 2. Anyway, given that then how did they get it wrong? true it is a small fault but with the full size to work against there is no excuse and it is not the first faux pas they have made with new tool kits. be that as it may it will be a big improvement on what went before- it just means we will need a new resin nose designed for the new kit.

David.
edit- just checked the serial and yes you are right it is indeed a mark 1.