Sea Vixen whatif...

[ysi_maniac]

Pathetic?  You wot? Ye knaa, Aah'm getting really, REALLY pissed off with modellers today slagging older kits because they are so utterly f*cking spoilt now.  What, with the latest wonderkit from Hasegawa or Tamiya  which has them practically cumming in their pants because all they have to do is put a bit of glue in the box, shake it and out comes finished kit.  That's not modelling, it's laziness. 

Which is fine if all you're doing is a lineup of identikit grey, dull boring F16s or glorifying the evil of the Third Reich with umpteen different variants of the Bf 109G6/U2/R3 or Fw 190A8/R11.  Model owt British apart from a select few and you're treat like scum by the manufacturers.

So yes, you'll have to put up with the Frog/Novo Sea Vixen. You're a modeller aren't you?  Have you actually looked in the box of either kit or do you rely on the siren voices of the Joyless Modelling Numpties on The Site I'm Not Allowed To Mention who can't build anything without their wankfest of extra detail bits and their "wealth" of informed knowledge?* "Oh boo hoo, this kit has dimension issues with the radome as it's three scale millimetres too short!"

So what? The Frog Sea Vixen is a 1970s kit - one of the last before they went under - but there's nowt wrong with it that a bit of hard work and a few detail sets can't put right.  In fact, apart from a new u/c and bang seat (both from Aeroclub), it looks every inch a Sea Vixen - you can get away with the lack of cockpit as it's black anyway.


*Yes, I know that's a gross simplification, but it remains a fact that The Site I'm Not Allowed To Mention is home to a right bunch of know nothing f*ckwits who slag kits off without actually looking at them.

Wooksta,

I whole heartedly agree with your sentiments.  I have read ad infinitum in 'respected magazines' and 'knowledge websites' about how wonderful the latest P-51/Bf-109 is... I mean these peope think nothing of buying a 72nd scale fighter for equivalent prices to a fleet of B-52s.... combine that with their disdain for anything non-mainstream and their anally-retentive desire for rivet counting & voila, a wankfest to be had.  I think the funniest thing i ever heard was some whacker going on about this one kit (can't remember the type) tell all & sundry how it was one degree off this way & .5 microns off that way and then blurbing on about the 'history' of the type only to start parrotting some load of crap that anyone with even a hint of references would know was complete poo-poo (with an english accent).  Something along the lines of this sqn using this type blah blah which was a myth from the 50s.  Add to that another article about some tosser who thought that the paint supplied by one of the more reputable firms wasn't right because it was a 'scale tone' of the colour and you have the AGM of the JMN/Rivetcounters of the world.  Instead of bleating about a given subject, here's a thought, build something that looks similar to the original, it's a model at the end of the day not a 1:1 replica.

Rant Off

Maverick

Hi Wooksta and Maverick

I agree with you. Take the frog model, a tube of cement, a knife, sand paper, putty and some colours.
If you have a 3 view drawing, evergreen styrene and a ruler, you are a professional. What are FS codes?, light grey is light grey, green is green, and so on ...

In my opinion this is modelling, this is enjoiment. No matter the result, it is rewarding.

An exact replica is out of the reach of humans. Modelling is just fun.
 

[rallymodeller]

My main point is that whilst some Frog kits may be out dimensionally, when they are built they look the part.  In some cases, the Frog kits are more enjoyable to build than more modern kits which are far better in terms of accuracy.  The DH Hornet is a perfect example.

What really bugs me are those siren voices who whinge on about "total accuracy" and are so utterly dull that they suck the enjoyment out of the hobby.  Just build it and have done with it, you miserable twats!

Which is why I enjoy Eastern Bloc kits. The old VEB airliners and OEZ fighters may not be 100% accurate, but where the hell else you gonna find a kit of a Tu-154, Yak-40 or Tu-126? Sure you have to shave off panel lines that are big and sharp enough to cut you (seriously!) but at the end of the day you've got a kit that was fun to build, a unique subject and is tough enough to survive a cat-induced fall off a shelf.

[Ian the Kiwi Herder]

What really bugs me are those siren voices who whinge on about "total accuracy" and are so utterly dull that they suck the enjoyment out of the hobby.  Just build it and have done with it, you miserable twats!

Hey Lee, can I sponsor you for the next presidency of IPMS(UK).....

Ian - Running for cover, cos he's only two-and-half hours from Lee's place !

[Zen]

My gods thats good!!!!!!


Hmmm..... there are all sorts of improvements the DH.110 could have had, from simple reheat (not without problems) to a new wing. My preference is for the single Gyron powered version.

Though looking at it I wonder if the main gear might be replaced by units that retract into the Booms?

[The Rat]

..... there are all sorts of improvements the DH.110 could have had, from simple reheat (not without problems) to a new wing. My preference is for the single Gyron powered version.

Though looking at it I wonder if the main gear might be replaced by units that retract into the Booms?

Well, looks like we won't be landing in Havana after all.  

I was thinking single-engine too, but that 'gear-into-the-booms' idea is neat!