After donating Tamiya a lot of money for two boxes of s**t, - the Centurion and the Chieftain, - I thought I might try a 1/48th aircraft. However I would like to think it will at least be 95% correct OOB.

As my old man was with 616 when they went to Europe with the Gloster Meteor I thought I might give one a try. Is it in fact a plastic model of an early Meatbox or would I be faced with another major conversion job to get it close to what I am supposed to be buying?

Alternatively can anyone recommend a post war 1/48 British aircraft model? Especially something that Tamiya have not had a hand in!

Regards Dave :-)

Hi Dave

Tamiya replaced the wings of their F1 (no airbrakes) and I think it's accurate now... but the cockpit is still very empty...

I think Classic Airframes are doing a Meteor F8 soon... in the meantime, how about their de Havilland Hornet? If you want that F8 sooner... Aeroclub do a vacuform :-)

Academy do a Hunter and Dynavector do a range of post-WW British subjects as vacuforms.

All the best

Rowan

Thanks Rowan. I have read that the Academy Hunter is not much chop. The Meatbox only appeals because of the connection with my father. Maybe I will stay away from aeroplanes after all!

Regards Dave

Hi Dave

Ive haven't built the Hunter, but I've also read that it's got a few problems - cockpit and tail mostly... if I remember. I think Aeroclub do a correction set for it...

As I say, I think Tamiya sorted their Meteor F1 out (and should be praised for doing so - a lot of companies wouldn't bother!!), but you'd still have to do a lot of work on the cockpit... Markings are included for three 616 Squadron a/c - EE216, 219 and 222/G.

All the best

Rowan

I was under the impression that both of those armour kits were reasonable...far from poo-pooboxes. Anyhow, the Meteor kit is nice, as long as you get one of the newer kits as the earlier release had a Mk 1 wing.

The cockpit and the decals are weak...but you'd probably be swapping the decals anyhow. Other than that, it is a very nice kit.

Try:
Quick review of the F.III

Cheers,
Linz

Thanks for your replies, the link was great Linz.

Re the Cent and Chieftain Phantom Major - first read my Cent review in 'Reviews'.
The Chieftain is sold as a Mk5, however it is in fact a Mk3. Built OOB it is OK as a very basic model but really needs a lot of detailing to make a decent model. I am currently building one as a Mk5/12c using the Castoff Mk5 conversion and much scratchbuilding. So far I have spent over 200 hours on it and anticipate maybe getting it finished in about two months from now!

Check my Castoff review as well!

Both models suffer from being designed as motorised toys, plus the Cent has worn out moulds resulting in out of register sprues. Further the Cent is modelled on a pre-1950 Mk3 and to build it as a later Mk requires considerable surgery for accuracy.

My biggest gripe is Tamiyas underhand marketing. If they dropped the price of these kits and labelled them as old models I would buy several and do lots of conversion work quite happily and recomend them as a good deal. Instead they price them at the same level as the latest kits and do not reveal to the unsupecting buyer what is actually in the box.

Oh, and I don't consider myself a rivet counter. I choose to build scale models and expect the result to be a scale model, not a crude toy.

So maybe I better start doing my Meatbox research and get back to aeroplane modelling which is where I started!

Regards Dave

Dave to let the ancients of armor ruin your enjoyment of Armor building is a greivous mistake, Yes these are old and if you look you'll see they are price below the other kits in price. Alas those outside of Japan are making them more expensive due to import taxes and theur own desire to make a profit!!! I find the challenge of the old tamiya kits is to make them accurate, AA has an extensive inventory of kits to go with both of those kits. AA even sells them at a resonble price when purchasing their combo kits. Hope you stick to armor STUG

question about the earlier mentioned meteor mk 1 wing - are the airbrakes the only difference between the incorrect and correct wing? I have an old edition of the mk 1 with the airbrakes - can i just glue them shut, fill the gaps, and scribe new panel lines?

Vance, that is the most common fix to that kit. I t realy does build into a nice model, with or without the airbrakes. STUG

Dropped prices and Tamyia, and Italeri do not fit in the same sentence. Issue one new kit, and raise prices on all the other old kits fits better.

While combing the net for a review about the Gloster Meteor F 1, i came across this statement,
" As a point of interest, the airframe measured by Tamiya is at the museum at RAF Cosford, which is an F1 fitted with F3 wings. Apparently the airframe suffered an engine fire which destroyed the wing, as a replacement, an F3 wing was fitted this being the current production wing at the time, so strictly the kit was accurate in its first incarnation for the aircraft at the museum ! Many thanks to the Museum staff who passed on this information on a recent visit. " This is written by Roy Caunce on Hyperscale. He still thinks the cockpit is a bit spartan though.
Now what should i do with my kit, shall i do the RAF Cosford version or the prototype version with out the air brakes :-) .
Andy (++)

I'm a prototype kind of guy myself - and i actually filled in the airbrakes last night anyway!

interesting point there though Andy.