THE EYE OF THE STORM! Revell Hurricane

[VMA131Marine]

2 hours ago, Radub said:

 

Please come back when the kit is out.

Radu

I certainly will. I have one on order with the Big H.

[Rick Griewski]

Cockpit?   Wings?  I will wait for

my kit.  I have one MDC Hurricane cockpit set left in my stash as backup.  Wings? If I reeely hate them then one of my club mates will take it off my hands.  

[Archimedes]

I have the Arthur Bentley drawings of the MkI (so we need to treat this observation with some caution). Arthur's drawings are the only ones I trust of any airframe. These drawings show that, after the centre section, outside of the wheels, the wings taper to their ends with the top surface remaining parallel to the horizontal plane and the bottom surface at 3ish degrees to it. 

 

So, to describe the Hurricane Mk1 at least as having any dihedral is probably not quite correct: the wings have a taper in thickness. (In deference to Arthur's copyright for his drawings I am not showing a bigger picture than that below nor the entire sheet this is from). 

 

Kind regards,

Paul

 

[Smokeyforgothispassword]

To be honest the dihedral issue isn't a deal breaker for me, that won't be too hard to fix, but that cockpit is poor by 1990's standards, so if thats the final version, I'll either have to pass, or wait until a good aftermarket replacement is available.

[VMA131Marine]

1 hour ago, Archimedes said:

So, to describe the Hurricane Mk1 at least as having any dihedral is probably not quite correct: the wings have a taper in thickness.

Dihedral is the angle between the horizon and a line drawn between the CENTERLINE of the wingtip and the CENTERLINE of the wing root. So, yes, the Hurricane wing does have dihedral.

[Archimedes]

1 hour ago, VMA131Marine said:

Dihedral is the angle between the horizon and a line drawn between the CENTERLINE of the wingtip and the CENTERLINE of the wing root. So, yes, the Hurricane wing does have dihedral.

Weeeeeelllll if we are getting technical then it really has polyhedral as the short centre section has zero dihedral but the outers do...

 

Best regards,

Paul

[ivanmoe]

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my characterization of the wing and how it appeared to be rendered.

 

There are numerous line-drawings of the Hurricane available via the search image of your choice.

 

A casual observer who examines the drawings can reasonably reach the conclusion that the wing of the aircraft evidences no dihedral.

 

However, I'd suggest that's because they're focusing on the top of the wing, rather than the middle or bottom, both of which

6 hours ago, Kagemusha said:

Could be that the wing "issue" is an optical illusion.

 

Airfix Hurricane

 

 

Italeri Hurricane

 

 

Looking forward to seeing the kit, and it's contents, will it include bomb racks..?

 

Your Airfix example looks fine, the Italeri model far less so.

 

Wouldn't an examination of real aircraft be more useful:

 

 

useful?

 

IMO, the confusion surrounding the subject at hand is a function of the Hurricane's unusually thick wing. If you look at the top of the wing in a 3-view drawing, like those already posted, the wing appears all but flat. On the other hand, the underside gives the impression of considerable dihedral. However, as was just mentioned, the dihedral is established technically by the center section of the wing. My problem with the wing depicted in the pics of the Revell kit, is that there's NO dihedral on the wing's center, whatsoever. It appears flat as a pancake:

 

[Kagemusha]

1 minute ago, ivanmoe said:

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my characterization of the wing and how it appeared to be rendered.

 

There are numerous line-drawings of the Hurricane available via the search image of your choice.

 

A casual observer who examines the drawings can reasonably reach the conclusion that the wing of the aircraft evidences no dihedral.

 

However, I'd suggest that's because they're focusing on the top of the wing, rather than the middle or bottom, both of which

 

Your Airfix example looks fine, the Italeri model far less so.

 

Wouldn't an examination of real aircraft be more useful:

 

 

useful?

 

It's about perspective, one thing to take a photograph of the real thing using say a 200mm lens fifty metres away, another of a model from a few feet away using a 38mm lens. Who would compare Cathy Freeman with Michael Johnson?

[KiwiZac]

IIA wing? I'm in!

(photos by my dad Dave Yates)

 

(photo by me)

[Tony T]

I think I can see what appears wrong with the Revell: the gunports are depicted parallel to the ground rather than angled up, following the mid line of leading edge wing dihedral. This throws the whole wing off.

 

Tony 

[D.B. Andrus]

Deja Vu ...Z-M 109G-14 all over again......

[Pup7309]

Dihedral-gate. Looking forward to the first build

[VMA131Marine]

1 hour ago, Archimedes said:

Weeeeeelllll if we are getting technical then it really has polyhedral as the short centre section has zero dihedral but the outers do...

 

Best regards,

Paul

Well, there you go bringing facts into the discussion 

[LSP_Ray]

2 hours ago, Kagemusha said:

 

It's about perspective, one thing to take a photograph of the real thing using say a 200mm lens fifty metres away, another of a model from a few feet away using a 38mm lens. Who would compare Cathy Freeman with Michael Johnson?

I think you are right. If you take a closer look at the buildup, the top of the wing looks very flat, which sounds like is correct. Also, you can see the outer wing sections thins as it goes to the tip. Therefore, the bottom of the wing must have some dihedral, at least on the outer halves.

[Dpgsbody55]

The picture shown in the announcement does look poor if it's supposed to be a Hurricane MkIIb.  I'd agree the wing dihedral looks wrong and the cockpit looks a bit like one of those photos taken through thin linen, but I'd like to wait until it's finally released before passing further comment on that.

 

The one thing that is unarguably wrong is the lack of guns for a MkIIb which should have twelve guns.  This one looks like a MkIIa, which was the fastest production Hurri, and perhaps the nicest to fly.  More power than a MkI, but about the same weight.  The Hurricane had a slow rate of roll, and sticking two more guns in the outer wings wouldn't help that.

 

Personally, I hope all the criticism of this kit is not actually warranted and that the kit matches the standard of Revell's Me-262.  Something better than the Fly kit is needed and if it is up to the same standard as the 262, then it should do well for them.  And I hope the aftermarket chips in too.  Lots of options for MkII Hurricanes.

 

 

Cheers,

Michael