Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / General / Models / June 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Revell 1/48 Eurofighter Typhoon

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
flak monkey - 16 Jun 2007 22:28 GMT
Picked one of these up the other day to go into the "build soon" section of
the stash, as I'm trying to work through RAF fighters from Hunter to Typhoon
in 1/48 and it is, as they say, the only game in town. What that means is
that I have Academy's Hunter F6, the Airfix Lightning F2A/ F6 (can't find an
F1/ F3 kit for love nor money) Revell's boxing of the Hase Phantom FGR2, and
an Airfix Tornado F3; if anybody has an Italeri F3 in 1/48 they'd be willing
to part with I'd love to hear from them. So, a mixed bag of dogs and stars
there as any fule kno. Guess what. The Revell Eurofighter is the star of the
show.

Okay, so the Typhoon doesn't have the brute force presence of the Phantom,
the adrenaline fuelled hotrod credentials of the Lightning, it's devoid of
the Hunter's Kate Moss looks and for the time being it can't match the
Tonka's fully paid up membership of the warbird club. None of these things
matter, because Revell have produced an absolutely must have kit here, and
they've done it at a bargain price to boot.

Opening the (crap) box, we have four large sprues of Revell's grey plastic
providing the majority of the kit parts. Two smaller sprues contain some
very finely moulded detail parts and the single seater spine and airbrake. A
further sprue of nicely done clear parts is bagged seperately. Panel lines
are recessed, perhaps a little wide on the fuselage, but bang on the money
everywhere else. Worthy of special mention are the underwing integral flare
dispensers. The cockpit is a little simplified, but there is some nice
raised detail representing controls and instruments, and the HOTAS
controller is very nicely done. Decals are provided for instruments, but
frankly they are best left on the sheet. The ejector seat is made up of six
parts, and with the exception of a moulded on harness, looks superb. Wheel
wells are nicely done too; it won't take a scratch building genius to bring
them up to a very high standard.

Moving on, the undercarriage is very finely moulded, particularly the
maingear retraction arms. Brake detail is included on the mainwheels' inner
faces. The complex intake looks extremely well engineered, and having
dryfiited the parts together I suspect the seamless intake guys are going to
have a very lean time here. No compressor faces are provided, which won't
please the penlight police one bit, so Revell lose a few marks here. At the
hot end of the engines, the afterburners are represented in a very
simplified form. The Eduard etch set goes some way to addressing this, but a
set of resin cans of the quality of, say, the Aries Lightning set would be
ideal.

The kit provides a comprehensive array of weapons and other stores. No,
sorry, I lied; it's bewildering. Just about everything the Typhoon can carry
is represented here. The characteristic 1000L tanks, Meteor BVRAAMs, AIM
9Ls, AIM120s, IRIS-T AAMs, AIM132 ASRAAMs, Storm Shadow  and Taurus
missiles, wingtip chaff/ ECM pods, Luftwaffe recconaisance pod and GBU-24
LGBs are all here and they are done to such a high standard that the weapons
alone justify the price of the kit. The Sidewinders in particular are the
best IM items in this scale I can remember seeing (I'm thinking of buying a
second Typhoon kit just to get another pair of 'winders for my Phantom).

Decals are provided for three RAF machines (3 Sqn, 29(R) Sqn and 17(R) Sqn),
a Luftwaffe machine from JG73, an Austrian AF machine of unidentified unit
(Revell jumping the gun slightly there), an Italian aircraft of 4' Stormo,
and finally a Spanish AF example of Ala. 11. Comprehensive airframe and
stores stencilling is provided, and the decals are printed in perfect
register. A well printed A4 instruction booklet rounds off the package.

Sounds hard to criticize, really. Well, no, it's not. First of all, please
somebody at Revell AG just listen to modellers and stop with that mind
f***ingly stupid "25% hellgrau, seidenmatt, 74% grau, seidenmatt, 1% blau,
matt" nonsense, okay? I mean "1% blau, matt"? Are you having a Steffi Graff?
Just tell us what colour it's supposed to be. That way we spend less money
on AirDoc books and more on your kits. Nobody buys your paint anyway.
Secondly, please stop putting kits in cereal boxes.

Thanks for reading what to many of you is probably old news.

     ------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDem
Rufus - 16 Jun 2007 23:51 GMT
You should get up-close and personal with a full scale one
sometime...and then see it fly.  You'll take back your second paragraph...

Signature

     - Rufus

> Picked one of these up the other day to go into the "build soon" section of
> the stash, as I'm trying to work through RAF fighters from Hunter to Typhoon
[quoted text clipped - 68 lines]
> Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
>       ------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDem
flak monkey - 17 Jun 2007 01:46 GMT
> You should get up-close and personal with a full scale one sometime...and
> then see it fly.  You'll take back your second paragraph...

Saw one last Sunday at Cosford. Very nice. Seen them a few times, notably at
Farnborough last year all the way through qualification week. Impressive.
Like a PRS is impressive, but it don't have the kudos of a '57 Goldtop.
Lightnings and Phantoms in full on display mode... now that was something.
Still, I'm aware the Typhoon is without a doubt way way more formidable than
both put together.
Rufus - 17 Jun 2007 03:42 GMT
>>You should get up-close and personal with a full scale one sometime...and
>>then see it fly.  You'll take back your second paragraph...
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Still, I'm aware the Typhoon is without a doubt way way more formidable than
> both put together.

Have to admit that I've seen both the Angels and the T-Birds in F-4s and
I do have to say I've never been impressed with anything else since.

Signature

     - Rufus

Enzo Matrix - 17 Jun 2007 08:36 GMT
>> You should get up-close and personal with a full scale one
>> sometime...and then see it fly.  You'll take back your second
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> mode... now that was something. Still, I'm aware the Typhoon is
> without a doubt way way more formidable than both put together.

When they can actually get one serviceable...

Signature

Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

Nigel Heather the-heathers.co.uk> - 17 Jun 2007 11:08 GMT
Depends on what you mean by serviceable?

I was at RAF Coningsby last Thursday at the Eurofighter support office which
is close to the hangers and flightline.

Saw plenty of Typhoons, at least 5, maybe be up to 10.  The RAF were flying
them frequently whilst I was there.

There are also a number operating from BAE Systems Warton as an RAF
squadron, although they may have been transferred to Coningsby now.

Plenty of F3s around aswell, though they weren't flying anything like as
frequently as the Typhoons.

Cheers,

Nigel
Enzo Matrix - 17 Jun 2007 13:34 GMT
> Depends on what you mean by serviceable?
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> There are also a number operating from BAE Systems Warton as an RAF
> squadron, although they may have been transferred to Coningsby now.

That's exactly the point. The OCU formed at the maufacturer's own airfield,
a situation which to my knowledge has never before happened with an RAF
aircraft. At one point the "Case White" aircraft were so unreliable that
they were averaging less than an hour MTBF and the maintenance man-hours
required were nearly three times that of the Jaguar, which the Typhoon is
intended to replace.  My information comes from a friend who was posted to
the OCU at the time.  The situation seemes to have improved markedly lately,
but it was totally unacceptable that the latest combat aircraft for the RAF
(which is more than ten years behind schedule already) should have so many
problems when introduced to service.  My latest information is that the
aircraft now requires a similar number of maintenance man-hours as the
Jaguar, but requires a far higher level of trade proficiency. Everything
that went wrong with the Jaguar could pretty much be fixed with speedtape
and green paint, so I have to wonder whether the Typhoon is really the huge
advance that it is hyped to be.

Signature

Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

Eddie Bermuda - 17 Jun 2007 21:58 GMT
I don't think the Typhoon was primarily intended to replace the Jaguar?

Jaguar started out as a light ground attack/trainer whilst the Typhoon
was always intended to be an air superiority fighter.  The "swing role"
stuff was added during one of the many changes of mind the consortium
had.   Everyone seems to forget there were significant periods of time
during which the programme was stalled for lack of commitment from
various politicians, role changes from various customers, etc. Oh yes,
and it's primary role of shooting down swarms of MiGs went away in 1989.
 Of course, after all the criticism of the ADV the RAF were still going
to make sure they got a "proper" fighter, even though the opportunity to
ever use one has probably passed?

I seem to remember Case White was completed ahead of schedule, which
suggests that serviceability wasn't a big issue.  Colleagues actually
working with the jet say it's very serviceable, and they certainly seem
to be flying them a lot!  Haven't had any feedback from Conningsby yet.

Probably best not to believe all the hype, good or bad.

>> Depends on what you mean by serviceable?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> and green paint, so I have to wonder whether the Typhoon is really the huge
> advance that it is hyped to be.
Rufus - 18 Jun 2007 01:47 GMT
....ahhhh...the calamity of consortium...

Signature

     - Rufus

> I don't think the Typhoon was primarily intended to replace the Jaguar?
>
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
>> with speedtape and green paint, so I have to wonder whether the
>> Typhoon is really the huge advance that it is hyped to be.
kim - 18 Jun 2007 04:48 GMT
>I don't think the Typhoon was primarily intended to replace the Jaguar?

No, it was intended to create an illusion of european unity whilst at the
same time preserving jobs in politically  marginal constituencies!

> Jaguar started out as a light ground attack/trainer whilst the Typhoon was
> always intended to be an air superiority fighter.  The "swing role" stuff
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> politicians, role changes from various customers, etc. Oh yes, and it's
> primary role of shooting down swarms of MiGs went away in 1989.

Don't be so sure of that. Many of the NATO deployments I've seen recently in
eastern europe appear to be designed to deliberately provoke a hostile
Russian response. The powers that be are trying to fight the cold war all
over again. Let's face it, it's a damn site easier than fighting Muslim
insurgents :o)

(kim)
Eddie Bermuda - 17 Jun 2007 22:03 GMT
By the way, Rufus is right...I was airside when we flew the first German
pre-production jet, and it made the F-4s they put up as chase 'planes
look pedestrian.

>> Depends on what you mean by serviceable?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> and green paint, so I have to wonder whether the Typhoon is really the huge
> advance that it is hyped to be.
Rufus - 18 Jun 2007 01:45 GMT
We used to chase Harriers with an F-4 on occasion...the F-4 had to be in
min burner to keep up with a Harrier in the climb...

...and that was a -406 engined Harrier.

Signature

     - Rufus

> By the way, Rufus is right...I was airside when we flew the first German
> pre-production jet, and it made the F-4s they put up as chase 'planes
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>> with speedtape and green paint, so I have to wonder whether the
>> Typhoon is really the huge advance that it is hyped to be.
Rufus - 18 Jun 2007 01:38 GMT
>>>You should get up-close and personal with a full scale one
>>>sometime...and then see it fly.  You'll take back your second
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> When they can actually get one serviceable...

They generally bring two at a time into my back yard, and other than a
blown main tire (tyre?..) on one occasion, they seem to be pretty
servicable to me.

Signature

     - Rufus

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.