AZ Model

[kitnut617]

I think I'll get one of those with the Mk.3 tail, to go with the Airframe vacuform I built years ago.  Mind you, I've got four of the Falcon kit to build too --- (think Sabre, Centaurus engines and a possible F-82 competitor)

It's a big plane though, bottom pic shows the size well

[The Big Gimper]

I have four unbuilt MB.5s in the stash: Skybirds 86, Planet, and 2 from Pegasus.

I'll use the Skybirds 86 and Pegasus kits as WHIF material. I will use the AZ and Planet for stock builds.

[The Big Gimper]

Coming in 2017. 1/72

[The Big Gimper]

Camouflage schemes for the "coming soon" 1/72 Bf 109H-0 and H-1.

[GTX_Admin]

You're just doing that to rub in my inability to get a 1/48 kit/conversion aren't you...

[The Big Gimper]

You're just doing that to rub in my inability to get a 1/48 kit/conversion aren't you...

Nooooo ..... it just was a coincidence Greg. 

Actually the images were just posted today,

[The Big Gimper]

MB.5 is almost here ....





Can easily replace wings and tail with other designs.

[The Big Gimper]

I see AZ model has been hacking my home PC. I have in my ideas spreadsheet the "Sea Stinger" which is a navalized MB.5

[GTX_Admin]

You and me both...and maybe they are reading our forum.

[kitnut617]

I like that RCN version ----  hmm!

[The Big Gimper]

Hannants has now in the Future Releases page the "Sea Baker".

Link to kit is here.

I opened my Prototype MB.5 kit and I found on one of the the sprues the arrestor hook.

On the left side between the upper wing and the large horizontal stab.



Buy the "Sea Baker" only if you need the decals which are nice in their own right.

[kitnut617]

Carl, if you're not going to use the hook, I can find a place for it. I've got four of the Falcon vacuform kits to make, one will have a Sabre 7 engine, one a Centaurus and the other two will be a F-82 JMN mind-blower look-a-like. The hook would look good on the Centaurus one I think ---  RCN of course --- 

[The Big Gimper]

Carl, if you're not going to use the hook, I can find a place for it. I've got four of the Falcon vacuform kits to make, one will have a Sabre 7 engine, one a Centaurus and the other two will be a F-82 JMN mind-blower look-a-like. The hook would look good on the Centaurus one I think ---  RCN of course --- 

PM sent Robert.

[The Big Gimper]

Box art for the "Sea Baker" kit.

[Buzzbomb]

Ooh.. I just went all.. ooooohh like.

Terrific scheme

[GTX_Admin]

Oh, that is spectacular.    Almost makes me want to buy it....except that it is 1/72!

Remove the guns and teeth and you have the basis for a cool Reno style racer as well.

[Kerick]

So tempting!!!!!

[Volkodav]

I understand why it didn't enter service but but but but.............

[Old Wombat]

Be interesting to do a Sea Fury, a navalised MB.5 & a navalised CA-15 all lined up together in RN/RAN FAA colours (maybe same markings), as a what was & what might have been display.

[elmayerle]

Be interesting to do a Sea Fury, a navalised MB.5 & a navalised CA-15 all lined up together in RN/RAN FAA colours (maybe same markings), as a what was & what might have been display.

Would the navalized CA-15 keep the 4-bladed propeller of the prototype or go to a 5-bladed one or a contra-prop like the navalized MB.5?  I could make a good argument for either of the last two options in practice.  Might be fun to do both.

[Volkodav]

I have often wondered how to justify multiple platforms filling similar roles, great for whiff but not much good for real life.  What I was thinking was, in particular with the light fleet carriers and their limited space, that the fighter selected for each air group/wing would depend on the other aircraft.  For instance I imagined a Merlin group, a Griffon group and a Centaurus group, or perhaps a long range strike group with Sea Hornet, Sea Mosquito and/or Sturgeon, a tactical strike group with Fury and Firebrand/Firecrest (or Anglicised Skyraider etc.) and a sea control group with Seafire, Firefly (NF & ASW), maybe even an ASW version of the Seagull.

For the MB5, Fury and CA-15, it could perhaps be even simpler with the MB5 and the CA-15 being tailored to complement each other, say one as an interceptor and the other as a fighter bomber or escort fighter.

[The Big Gimper]

Just posted on their Facebook page:

[GTX_Admin]

Already have one of their 1/48 Ki-48s - plan to do it as a RAF bomber.

[KiwiZac]

It would be nice to see the Chipmunk released. I think it was announced some time back.

[Weaver]

I have often wondered how to justify multiple platforms filling similar roles, great for whiff but not much good for real life.  What I was thinking was, in particular with the light fleet carriers and their limited space, that the fighter selected for each air group/wing would depend on the other aircraft.  For instance I imagined a Merlin group, a Griffon group and a Centaurus group, or perhaps a long range strike group with Sea Hornet, Sea Mosquito and/or Sturgeon, a tactical strike group with Fury and Firebrand/Firecrest (or Anglicised Skyraider etc.) and a sea control group with Seafire, Firefly (NF & ASW), maybe even an ASW version of the Seagull.

For the MB5, Fury and CA-15, it could perhaps be even simpler with the MB5 and the CA-15 being tailored to complement each other, say one as an interceptor and the other as a fighter bomber or escort fighter.

One way you can justify it is to cite production issues. Sometimes it gets you more planes sooner if you let two factories build what they already know, rather than forcing one of them to build the other's design in the name of standardisation. This is particulary true if one of the factories is geared up for a an unusual design or construction technique that would take the other one a long time to switch to. Vickers' geodesics and De Havilland's wooden composites spring to mind as examples.