1. Home
  2. Scale modeling discussions
  3. Airfix Spitfire 24 availability

Airfix Spitfire 24 availability

Does anyone know if there are any plans to withdraw the Airfix 1/48 Spitfire

24 in the near future? What about the Seafire 47? Has that gone for good or is it likely to be reintroduced?

I've recently had a Bf109G frenzy, which has given way to a Spitfire frenzy. I'm currently quite fascinated by the Griffon engined Spits and I have plans to build a selection. I have built the Academy Mk XIV and although it is a nice kit, to my eyes it doesn't look quite right, with the fuselage being too deep.

Here is where I might cause a bit of controvery! I have recently built another Mk XIV by grafting the nose and tail from an Aeroclub conversion fuselage onto a Hasegawa Mk VIII. That looks a *lot* better than the Academy kit even with the mistake in the length of the Hasegawa fuselage. I have noted that the Aeroclub fuselages are around the same price as a complete Airfix Spit 24 kit, but they need a lot of work to bring them up to the detail standard of the Airfix kit. So, for my next trick (don't try this at home, kids) I intend to put an Airfix fuselage onto Hasegawa wings, hack the tail around a bit and - hey presto - produce a Mk XVIII. Comments, anyone?

So... as I intend to build a number of Griffon engined variants in this manner over the next year or so, would it be worth my while stocking up on the Airfix kits or are they likely to stay available so that I can buy them on a case by case basis?

Reply to
Enzo Matrix
Loading thread data ...

Couldn't agree more Enzo - the Academy kit is well produced, but not much of a Spitfire. In my case, I decided many years ago for my occasional Spitfire assembly line, to standardise on the Airfix MkV fuselage/wings for all versions. Apart from being still the most accurate (Tamiya and Hasegawa look nice, but don't come close to it imho) it gives a consistent shape to the main structure for all versions, with changes to noses and tails added as required.

In my case I used resin copies of the Falcon XVIII to make the Griffon noses, and the Otaki MkVIII nose for the big

60/70 series Merlins. The Airfix 22/24 (and Seafire 47) Griffons look well in keeping with the Falcon renditions, whereas the Academy one - forget it. Somehow they almost made it look as bulky as that captured DB605 version in comparison.

If I was starting again today, I might use the Tamiya MkV as a base, using the Airfix Griffon nose for hi-back models (and I'd still use the Airfix MkV for the short Merlin noses). I have read somewhere that re-release is due - at least it should be cheaper than the special edition (Aeromaster?)put out a while back with the resin parts.

Chek

Reply to
Chek

Couldn't agree more Enzo - the Academy kit is well produced, but not much of a Spitfire. In my case, I decided many years ago for my occasional Spitfire assembly line, to standardise on the Airfix MkV fuselage/wings for all versions. Apart from being still the most accurate (Tamiya and Hasegawa look nice, but don't come close to it imho) it gives a consistent shape to the main structure for all versions, with changes to noses and tails added as required.

In my case I used resin copies of the Falcon XVIII to make the Griffon noses, and the Otaki MkVIII nose for the big 60/70 series Merlins. The Airfix 22/24 (and Seafire 47) Griffons look well in keeping with the Falcon renditions, whereas the Academy one - forget it. Somehow they almost made it look as bulky as that captured DB605 version in comparison.

If I was starting again today, I might use the Tamiya MkV as a base, using the Airfix Griffon nose for hi-back models (and I'd still use the Airfix MkV for the short Merlin noses). I have read somewhere that re-release is due - at least it should be cheaper than the special edition (Aeromaster?)put out a while back with the resin parts.

Chek

Reply to
Chek

FWIW I have heard one reviewer refer to it as a "Spitfire on Steroids"!

Bill Shuey

Reply to
William H. Shuey

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.