[Hornchurch]

Well I finally did it...... bought a cheap "point & snap" Digital-Camera

Though the shots came out well, initially - I found that the 'Image-Stabiliser' that kicks-in several-seconds after the 'shot' has been taken......DOESN'T seem to translate, to the 'Memory-Card' - which seems to send the stuff to the P.C. (computer) 'Raw' (as-is).

Many shots that look 'sharp', in 'Macro-Mode' - now look 'naff'

Anyhow, BASICALLY-SPEAKING these P.40-shots seem to be 'ok' (I hope) ?

As long as they don't suffer "Tank-Nut" syndrome - they'll give you SOME idea of how-nice 'F.M's RAF- No.112 Squadron 'Sharkmouth' Curtiss P.40 Kittyhawk is represented........

Not sure if anyone's posted shot's of this particular-model before, but here goes...........

Oh yeah-; Ignore the silly 2005 'date' - I forgot to 'set-it' !!!!!!

[dilligafocau]

The pics look great, what do you think of FM's RAF P-40 Hornchurch?

Ive seen these FM P-40 diecasts in 1/48 but wondered how one would go along side the new HM 1/48 Spitfires?? Recently got the 21st Century 1/32 plastic RAF P-40 & am quite happy with it

Found a photo of the real thing from this site PlaneLosses

[Hornchurch]

Originally Posted by dilligafocau

The pics look great, what do you think of FM's RAF P-40 Hornchurch?

Ive seen these FM P-40 diecasts in 1/48 but wondered how one would go along side the new HM 1/48 Spitfires?? Recently got the 21st Century 1/32 plastic RAF P-40 & am quite happy with it

Found a photo of the real thing from this site PlaneLosses

Many, many thanks dgfcu , for posting a picture of the actual aircraft involved.........

Glad to see ya done a bit of research & came up 'trumps' with this cracking photo' - it's a beauty !!!!!!!!


Yeah, I'm only too aware that the actual 'Squadron-codes' on 'AK-772' were REALLY in 'White', instead of 'Black', as they are on the 'F.M.' model of the very same aircraft........

Funny-enough, it doesn't bother me really, as it doesn't look too outta-place & is easily-fixed with aftermarket-decals.

What IS VERY INTERESTING to note - is that they "nailed-it" right, with the 'painted' section under the front of the tail-plane, exactly where the serial No. 'AK.772' is, with a different shade (Green, probably the 'base' colour it left the Curtiss factory in ?)

Also, they got it right, with the painted 'Logo/Emblem' - "London's Pride", which appears both on the model, & in the photograph above - You can clearly see it, on the upper-rear fuselage, behind the RAF-Roundel & above the individual code-letter "Y" .

Thanks for your comments on the pix - as for my opinion of the model - I honestly think it's Great, really do.... & is yet another example of an under-rated Die-cast offering in 1/48th from 'F.M'

However the 'other' colour-scheme choices that 'F.M.' made for their remaining P.40's looks rather 'sad' by comparison.

This RAF 112 Sqdn Kittyhawk is a really-nice example of one of those unsung 'Western-Desert' Warbirds that the RAF, RAAF, RNZAF & SAAF fought against the Germans in such adverse-conditions & opposition, before finally overcoming the tide - & 'turfing' the Germans out of North-Africa altogether !

I'm very suprised more of these don't get snapped-up as they look nice - & good value for money, at the moment !

[Ara1]

Nice model HC. I am glad you posted pics and are happy with it.

I own Cleopatra III and the main complaint is the shape of the nose cone. My tailplanes wer also a bit out of true, wich were gently fixed with pliers and a soft cloth.

See ya around.

[flyXwire]

That's actually guite an agreeable looking P-40 Kittyhawk model there, HC. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and pictures of it. I may have to indulge
myself for one of those.

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by Ara1

Nice model HC. I am glad you posted pics and are happy with it.

I own Cleopatra III and the main complaint is the shape of the nose cone. My tailplanes wer also a bit out of true, wich were gently fixed with pliers and a soft cloth.

See ya around.

If you could match the paint of the spinner, I wonder if some light sanding to reshape the nose (Loose the point) might improve the looks a bit.

[ZS-VAN]

Anyone care to comment on the colours of the sharkmouth? In the Corgi and GMP models they use yellow and red. The model looks good but I'd prefer the white lettering.

[jim]

GOOD MAN HORNCHURCH, we need more P40 photos and reviews on here.

Ah yes the FM P40, overall not a bad piece of diecast viewed from a few feet away, that durn spinner stands out like a sore thumb as do those black codes, (how did they get that wrong)?
This is one P40 I wouldn't buy because of the black codes.
I have 3 FM P40s and because of their particular schemes I like them a lot.

The worst FM I have seen is the Spitfire, yuk!


Cleopatra is probably the best of the bunch, the example I have is well put together and the quality of the paint is certainly an improvement on previous attempts.
Like collectors of Mustangs, I am still searching for the perfect P40, I wonder if the Dragon version will delight us, thats if we ever see it.
Gmp made an "almost perfect example" and the Corgis efforts are very good imho so the for the P40 fan theres a lot out there to collect.
But we need more and early marks if possible.



The number of personal markings are endless and there are some really cool ones still to do

Facts,
the P40 had the highest serviceability rate of any Allied fighter aircraft in the North Africa campaign.
It could carry up to 750lbs of bombs.

The P40 was used for almost every task in imaginable and many a pilot owes his life to its rugged construction.

It was said to be inferior however some one forgot to tell the pilots so they went out and kicked .ss!
Heck some pilots thought it better than the P47 and others said it was only bettered by the Mustang!
As one guy said, the only people that said the P40 was no good never flew one!

I like the story of the pilot that landed his stricken plane in the desert and had it towed back to base by a camel!

So first of all Corgi you have to make a Skulls head version P40N of the 80th fighter group.
Carousel you job is to make a nice pre war CU version, maybe from the 20th or 8th groups. How about a red white and blue stripped tail with big black USAAC markings on the wing under surfaces. That would be a cool looking bird.

Any suggestions from you gentlemen on schemes you would like to see, there must be hundreds.

[Hornchurch]

Originally Posted by Ara1

Nice model HC. I am glad you posted pics and are happy with it.

I own Cleopatra III and the main complaint is the shape of the nose cone.

My tailplanes wer also a bit out of true, wich were gently fixed with pliers and a soft cloth. .

Originally Posted by flyXwire

That's actually guite an agreeable looking P-40 Kittyhawk model there, HC.


Thanks for sharing your thoughts and pictures of it.


I may have to indulge myself for one of those.

Originally Posted by Cruver Collecter

If you could match the paint of the spinner,
I wonder if some light sanding to reshape the nose (Loose the point) might improve the looks a bit.

Love the responses to the thread - keep 'em coming, as I LOVE to hear (others) subjective-opinions on what is an admittedly 'Good-Looking' aircraft such as the Curtiss P.40.......

(I've loved 'em EVER-SINCE I built my 2nd-ever Airfix model - around 1967-'68 which just happened to be this VERY-SAME aircraft......."GA * Y" - "AK.772" made in Silver-plastic; with the 'Paper' instruction-sheet, clipped/STAPLED to the 'plastic-bag' full of loose-parts swimming around a few (rough-looking) 'sprues' - as indeed ALL "Airfix" series-1 kits were, at that stage in time......

I STILL remember accidentally smothering the 'oval'-type rear-windows with (Airfix-tube)-Glue !!!!!!!!!!

Back to the comments - Ara, yes, I'm very happy with it - & for the silly amount of money I paid for it, very happy indeed.

Gotta be honest, & say that the ONLY 'gripe' I reckon anyone should have on this particular-model - is/are the 'Black-Squadron-codes' which are easily-fixed, with a decent det of aftermarket Decals, such as 'Superscale/Microscale'.......
But, for me - for the daft price I paid for this P.40 - I'll bear it.....

Ara & Cruv' - you both point out about the 'pointy'-spinner (nose-cone)

Maybe on 'Cleopatra', it might matter - I don't know ?????????

But; take a GOOD LONG LOOK at the Excellent picture, that dgfcu posted (i.e.-"AK.772"'s spinner)

IT MOST CERTAINLY IS LONG & 'POINTY'.......

ok, so there's a (very)-slight 'curvature' too - but NOTHING worth griping-about

I honestly reckon, that seen from a different angle (most, even) that THAT spinner looks good.

We've had this "discussion" (at IPMS-clubs) over a million times........

that latter-day/current-day models are a 'subjective' opinion & 'representation' of what the "real" wartime examples 'looked-like'

Take for example = German Armour......most were supplied in a 'base'-colour ('DunkleGelb', after 1943) & then, upon arrival to their units, the individual-crews would camouflage them with WHATEVER came to hand.....(varying paint stocks, sometimes 'captured' - invariably "watered-down", with 'Kerosene' or petrol; & THEN = applied with Rags, Brooms, brushes, or, whatever came to hand........)

The final-product (Real-Life) might look "$*it" = & NO MODEL-MAKING manufacturer would wanna put out something that looks 'cack' (well, except things like 'B.24' "Little-Gramper" - LOL !!!!!!!!)

I ain't cracking-out a tape measure, to 'stress' over a few millimetres on a 'Kittyhawk'-spinner........

To me, it looks good & I'm happy - & given what I've said (above) that's been discussed by 'model-makers' before;- I think that we've got a "tidied-up" version of the "Shark-mouth" here, too, on "AK.772" - but 'Hey', I ain't complaining........

FlyX - 1/2 the reason I posted these pix, is to encourage those that HAVEN'T seen it/ or, to those that MAY like it; to "pull the trigger" on the 'F.M' P.40 Kittyhawk, whilst it's being 'knocked-out' cheap !!!!!!!!!!!

At £14.95 over here, in the UK..... it's a 'steal'

Remember the 'old-adage' = "Ya snooze-Ya lose"

I'm even toying with the idea of picking up one or two more - & doing a "no4mkit" type spray-conversion, at a later-time ?

[Cruver Collecter]

Just curious, but can the canopy be displayed in open postion?