Note (boxart above): from left to right, we have the Heller F.1C (ex-Airfix), the (genuine) Heller F.1CR kit, and the Hasegawa F.1C kit.

Aircraft History

Although the Mirage III had only entered service in the early 1960's, both Dassault and the Armée de l'Air started to look for a replacement at the same time. One design was the Mirage F.2, a large and complicated aircraft with high delta wings, tail planes and VTOL lift jets. However, it was the scaled-down F.1 design that Dassault succeeded with. Compared to the Mirage III, the F.1 was a markedly superior aircraft. The F.1 had almost twice the wing loading of the earlier delta-wing design, but it had far better all-round manoeuverability due in no small part to the slatted drooping wing leading edges and double-slotted trailing edge flaps. Despite the reduced wing size and chord, internal fuel capacity was increased by over 30%, due mainly to the use of integral fuselage tanks. In addition, the F.1 needed a much shorter runway, and had better rough-field capability.

The initial prototype made its first flight in 1966, but the first production Mirage F.1 for the French did not fly until 1973. Primarily an interceptor, the basic F.1C (Chasseur) fighter version also had a secondary ground attack role. There was also a two-seat trainer, the F.1B (Biplace). Other versions included a simplified attack version (F.1A), sold to both South Africa and Libya, and the F.1E all-weather strike version. A tactical reconnaissance version was also produced. This was originally designated the F.1R, but was eventually produced as the F.1CR and entered service in 1983. Later Armée de l'Air F.1C's were fitted with a fixed refuelling probe ahead of the cockpit, and were designated F.1C-200's. Although the probe cannot be retracted, it can be easily removed. As the F.1CR aircraft were also fitted with this probe, they may also be referred to as the F.1CR-200. In more recent years the surviving French F.1C-200 fleet has been upgraded to the F.1CT (Tactical) standard, which is very similar to the CR variant. All versions are powered by the SNECMA Atar 9K-50 turbojet. Although the F.1 can be fitted with seven pylons, the outer wing pylons have not always been used, leaving the aircraft with just the centreline, main under wing and wingtip pylons. The wingtip stations were originally fitted with Sidewinders until the French introduced their own Matra Magic 550 short range AAM into service. For interceptor missions, the under wing missile was originally the Matra R.530, which was eventually replaced by the Matra Super 530F. Like the Mirage F.1, this missile bears no physical relationship to its earlier namesake.

The Kits - Overview

There have been four basic toolings of the F.1 in 1/72 scale that I am aware of: Airfix, Heller, ESCI and Hasegawa. The ESCI tooling is the only one to feature recessed panel lines, but it is also the only tooling not currently available. Perhaps Italeri will oblige us with a reboxed version, but this won't happen in 2005 at any rate. I have read some very negative comments about the accuracy (or lack thereof) of the ESCI 1/48th scale kit, but you cannot just assume that the 1/72 kit would have the same problems.

That leaves three toolings. The Airfix and Hasegawa toolings have never been anything other than dedicated F.1C toolings, but the Heller tooling is another story. Apparently, it was originally released as a dual version kit - C fighter and B trainer. In 1985, the F.1CR kit appeared as a new release, followed by the very similar (I assume!) F.1CT version a few years later.

So why are Heller reboxing the Airfix F.1C kit? The most likely explanation is that when Heller developed the F.1CR tooling, they trashed the F.1C/B tooling in the process. If so, that means that there is no longer any kit of the trainer version available. It would seem an odd thing to do, given that the 'generic' F.1C/B tooling would always offer mores sales potential than a kit of what was at the time a specialised reconnaissance version.

The Heller kits (regardless of origin) were unavailable for a long time, but the F.1C, CR and CT kits were all re-released in 2004. How long they will remain readily available is another matter. The F.1CT kit sold out very quickly from Hannants last summer, and has not yet been restocked. However, I already had the CR kit, having bought it in the early 1990's. The Hasegawa kit is readily available, having been reboxed a number of times in line with standard Hasegawa practice. All the Heller kits have a list price of just STG £6 at Hannants, and the Hasegawa kit was just STG £7. After discounts, that meant around 10 Euro per kit for me (more or less), which is very good value.

General points

To avoid repeating myself, it is best to discuss some general issues at this point. The first relates to cockpit and seat colours. There appear to be two 'standard' colours for French jet cockpits: black and medium grey. About the only safe observation that I can make is that black seems to have been the standard colour in the past, but was replaced by medium grey some years ago, perhaps during the 1970's. There may or may not have also been a period when both colours were applied to newly built aircraft. The two Heller kits both specify a black cockpit (as did the original Airfix instructions for the F.1C kit), but the Hasegawa kit gives the cockpit as medium grey. For consistency, I used black on all three kits. The seats were also painted (largely) black, although I was not completely consistent on this point.

The second issue is the silver-grey colour on the underside of many F.1's (and other French jets). This has always been a source of confusion for me, not helped by the many contradicting colour suggestions in various kits, or by less than conclusive photographic references! The Heller F.1CR and Hasegawa F.1C kits both called for this finish, but I chose a different solution for each kit, more of which later.

The third issue is the undercarriage configuration of the F.1. Its most notable feature is the unusual 'dog-leg' main strut design with double wheels on each side - a layout also found on the Jaguar, which is a contemporary of the F.1. There are three main undercarriage doors on each side of the fuselage, but usually only the rear door is open when the aircraft is on the ground. This is a feature of many modern aircraft. The nose door layout is complicated, with four parts:

• A forward central section which is attached to the nose wheel strut.
• Two small panels on either side of this section which open downwards.
• A large door panel covering the rear half of the nose wheel bay. This opens downwards to the starboard side. This door is also usually closed.

Each kit implements the undercarriage in a different way, and it is important to know the layout on the actual aircraft before discussing each kit. I built the Airfix kit with retracted undercarriage, and the other two with lowered undercarriage. For comparison reasons, it might have been better if I built all three kits the same way, but it's too late for that now. I will be building the Airfix kit again in the future, but the review can't wait for that!

The next issue relates to the commonality between the different versions - in other words, could an F.1C kit be built to represent an F.1CR/CT (or vice versa) with little modification beyond the cockpit layout and the stores? I suspect the answer is 'yes', as the basic airframe appears to be almost identical for these versions. Some F.1's have a dorsal fillet at the front of the rudder, similar to that fitted to some Mirage III's. That is not in any of these kits, and I am not sure which version(s) of the F.1 it has been used on.

Building the Kits

Heller/Airfix F.1C

The original Airfix kit was released in 1979, when Airfix were still very much at the forefront of the scale model business. This kit has 72 parts (mostly molded in light grey), and the mold still appears to be in excellent condition, with hardly any flash or mold seam to speak of. I still have the original Airfix instructions, and they tell you more about what you can do with the kit than the current Heller instructions. For example, the Heller instructions omit details of how to build an aircraft with retracted undercarriage - although it should be pretty obvious! Secondly, this is the only kit under review that comes with separate wingtip launch rails for the Magic missiles. However, only the Airfix instructions point out that it is an option to leave these off the aircraft.

The third point has to do with the stores provided in the kit. The kit comes with:

• 2 x Matra Magic 550 short-range AAM's.
• 2 x Matra R.530 medium-range AAM's.
• 2 x 1,200-litre fuel tanks with 'T-shaped' fins at the rear. I will refer to this type of tanks as 'T-finned' from now on. Although the F.1 can carry this type of tank on the centreline, the T-finned tanks provided in this kit are only for use on the under wing pylons. These tanks can also be carried by French Jaguars on both the wing and centreline stations, which is one of the reasons I have bought two more of this kit.
• 1 x 1,200-litre fuel tank with no fins. This is the only tank that can be carried on the centreline, with the pylon being molded onto one of the tank halves.
• 4 x 400 Kg bombs, complete with specialised centreline pylon. The Airfix instructions are again very helpful in that they supply information on each type of store.

The Heller instructions completely ignore the bombs and pylon, which is why the box says 63 parts instead of 72. This severely restricts the range of stores configurations that can be used. Apart from that shown on the box cover (All four missiles and one tank), the only other option is to replace the R.530's with under wing tanks, which would effectively result in a ferry configuration (3 tanks, 2 Magic missiles). I had decided from the outset to build the Spanish aircraft depicted on the box artwork, and I could not think of any reason why it could not carry the bombs on the provided pylon. Therefore, my configuration was: bombs on the centreline, T-finned tanks on the under wing pylons, and wingtip Magic missiles. I calculated that this would be just on the limit of the 4,000 Kg payload that the F.1C could carry. I should mention that the kit comes with different wing pylons depending on whether the tanks or R.530 missiles are fitted. The R.530 pylons are higher, presumably to allow for safe separation during missile launches.

This is the old Airfix box art - the kit had markings for a French Blue-Grey aircraft and this camouflaged South African aircraft. Note the centreline pylon, with just two 400 Kg bombs attached. Note also the fact that the wingtip pylons are not fitted, and that the under wing tanks appear to have a natural metal finish compared to the underside of the wings and fuselage. I have no firm idea how accurate the bombs in the kit are, having seen only a couple of pictures of the real thing. However, I would be willing to bet that they are quite accurate.

There are two subject options: the camouflaged Spanish aircraft (an F.1CE, naturally) based at Los Llanos in 1982, and a blue-grey French aircraft of EC 1/12 "Cambresis". This second aircraft was based at Cambrai in 1988, and sported 'Tiger' markings on the ventral fins for which decals are provided. It is questionable as to whether or not a French F.1C (or any aircraft) would still have been carrying the R.530 missile in 1988 - by then, the French should have switched over to the much improved (and completely different) Super 530F missile. Also, since this aircraft lacks the IFR probe, it cannot represent the F.1C 200 standard, except as an aircraft with the probe detached. In the context of this subject (i.e., the unit and the date), I cannot say if this is accurate or not. As for the Spanish subject, it's worth mentioning that the F.1CE force is now mainly painted in light grey, has the IFR probe fitted, and uses Sidewinder missiles instead of the Matra Magic.

Looking through my notes, I have very little to report about the building of this kit. In a burst of enthusiasm, I started it on a Wednesday evening, and had almost all the pieces in place by the Friday morning before I headed off to work. The only parts left off were the bombs and missiles, which were painted separately and attached once the kit proper was painted. It might have taken me a bit longer to build the kit if I had painted part of the fuel tanks before attaching them to the aircraft, or if I had built it wheels down.

As you can imagine with such a quick build, there were very few problems. The positioning of the instrument panel is a bit odd, as it doesn't go quite where you would expect it to. Just experiment a bit and you'll work it out. For some reason, the instructions say this is to be painted grey, while the rest of the cockpit is black. I painted the panel black. There is no cockpit floor (not that you would really miss it), and no side instrument panels, although there is some curious panel detail on the sidewall. From there to the completed airframe there were no problems to report. I did have to use small amounts filler to cover up some gaps - for example, at the base of the fin/rudder on the starboard side. This is understandable, as the fin is wholly molded onto the port fuselage half. The construction of the kit was not affected by the need to use filler - I simply built the aircraft, and applied the filler all at once after everything was set.

The wings have 5 degrees of anhedral, although in some photographs it seems to be more, even where the wings are completely clean. The ventral fins are angled 20 degrees off the vertical. The information on the angles applies equally to all three kits, but (again!) it is only in the old Airfix instruction that this very useful information is given. The ventral fins on are too far outboard in this kit, which among other things can lead to confusion when trying to work out the upper/lower delineation line on the paint scheme. However, it is easy to fix since, as you only need to remove two tiny alignment pins on each fin and then place them manually in the correct position. There is an open cap on the port intake fairing, which is molded closed in the other two kits. The fins on the T-finned tanks needed a small bit of cleaning up.

Had I built the aircraft with wheels down, I suspect I wouldn't have had two many problems - I should have at least dry fitted the parts. One reassuring sign is that the main legs are aligned to the fuselage using a notch, rather than a circular attachment point. This should help to keep the main legs securely attached at the correct angle, assuming that the kit is correctly designed. The main struts actually look a bit too thin, which is the reverse of what one might usually observe in this scale! The main and nose wheel bays have little or no depth, but as very little is visible with most of the doors correctly molded as closed, this should not be a critical issue. The dive brakes are very simple. The perforated detail is good, but the brake bays have no depth, and there is no extension strut supplied. I left these in the closed position.

The painting took much longer than the construction, due to the 3-tone camouflage on the Spanish subject. The colours given by Heller (Humbrol, of course) are: Hu 116 dark green, Hu 118 tan, and Hu 103 cream. The undersides are Hu 28 light grey. Using colour lookup tables, I could see that this scheme actually matches the USAF 'South East Asian' standard camouflage scheme, with medium green replaced by the cream colour. The box artwork depicts suggests a much darker shade of brown than Hu 119 tan, but judging from all the pictures that I have seen, I believe that the paint guide is much closer to reality. Some of the camouflage detail on the port side is obscured on the paint/decal guide, as the wing tank is shown on the port view. Thankfully, there are enough available photographs to get around this. Unfortunately, this is not an option for the fuel tanks, with some imagination being required.

I will discuss the paint scheme and colours of the French aircraft when I get to the Hasegawa kit, since I built that kit as a very similar subject.

Heller F.1CR

The Heller kit has the most involved construction of the three kits, because it has inherited the basic design of the earlier kit F.1B/C kit. This means that the F.1CR kit has a separate forward fuselage section, and a separate dorsal spine. Also, there are places where the kit uses two parts where the other kits only need to use one. There are 79 parts in the kit, which is quite a lot given that there are no real options provided. It has the most extensive and pronounced panel detail of all three kits, which is just what I would have expected.

Construction of the main fuselage/fin unit looks as if it could cause problems, with the partial fuselage halves, dorsal spine and two fin/rudder halves. However, the parts are very well engineered, and I had no difficulties. I would suggest cementing the spine to one fuselage half before joining the two halves together. French F.1's only got a HUD in early 1990's, but that would not apply to the 1984 subject of this kit. It may or may not be included in the F.1CT kit.

Little needs to be said about the addition of the ventral fins or jet pipe, except to say that the fins are too thick and may be just a tiny bit too far inboard. This is the only kit that has circular attachment points for the all-moving tail planes, which allows them to be attached at any angle. Each main wing is in two parts, with the front and rear edges molded into the upper wing parts. The lower wings are obviously too thick, and I had to sand down the upper surfaces of these parts for several minutes before they fitted flush with the upper wing parts. Even with this work having been done, the completed wings still look noticeably thicker than the single-piece wings in the other two kits. The wing-to-fuselage attachment looks odd at first. The other two kits use the 'standard' design of a vertical face at the wing-to-fuselage join. Because of the drooping shoulder-mounted wing of the F.1, this means a small section of wing root protrudes from the fuselage. Here, the wings are full, and they join to the fuselage over a much wider area at an angle, almost in a conformal way. The join is along a panel line, so it looks very realistic. Better than that, it is structurally much sounder, and therefore makes it easier to get the wings to set and stay at the correct angle.

This is the box art for the F.1CT kit. Note the palm trees in the background, suggesting a deployment either in North Africa or during the 1990/1991 Gulf War. The centreline store appears to be different from the reconnaissance pod supplied with the F.1CR kit - perhaps this is a newer type of fuel tank? A ferry configuration would certainly be plausible for the overseas deployment hinted at here. However, it might also be a new type of sensor pod, although I doubt it.

The forward fuselage section is where the problems are in building the airframe. The cockpit bath (with side panels) is molded as one part with the enclosed nose wheel bay behind it - something that Heller also did with their Mirage III kit. There is an unusually shaped main instrument panel, ejection seat and control stick. For some reason, the instructions say the instrument panel should be painted grey, even though the rest of the cockpit is to be painted black. The nose is in two halves. There is no recommendation on how much ballast is required, but I made sure to use more than enough. The entire sub assembly seemed to go together without much difficulty, until I tried to 'plug' it into the main fuselage and found that it was too narrow. I had to crack open the sub-assembly and separate the bath nose wheel bay from one side of the forward fuselage, allowing the forward fuselage to expand outwards slightly and thus fit properly. I believe the instructions have mixed up the intake fairing parts (28 and 29), which would hardly be a first for Heller. As usual, use dry-fitting and references to confirm which part goes on which side.

There are a couple of extra details in this kit that are not in the F.1C kits, and these details are presumably peculiar to the CR and possibly CT variants. The most obvious one is the fairing under the forward fuselage, which I first thought was a navigation radar (as used sometimes on the Mirage III), but it is more likely part of the CR sensor fit.

I put all the stores in place before tackling the undercarriage, which turned out not to be the best decision I have ever made, given the problems I would later have with the undercarriage. The kit represents an F.1CR equipped with a 'standard' load a centreline reconnaissance pod, two 'T-finned' 1,200-litre tanks, two Phimat pods, and two Magic AAM's on the wingtips. There is a small rectangular opening on the front of the reconnaissance pod, which is probably either a sensor window or a generator intake. The fuel tanks have the pylons molded into one of the tank halves, and the tops of the pylons are sloped to match the anhedral of the wing - each tank is designed for one side only. The same treatment has not been applied to the small pylons that are molded onto the Phimat pods. These pods are to be painted Humbrol 5 grey, which has a gloss finish. I had never used this paint before, yet it would also turn up in the Hasegawa instructions - via paint translation tables, of course. In latter years, Phimat pods have been painted in the same scheme as the fuel tanks, with the 'wave' delineation between the upper green colour and the underside grey/silver-grey. The rear fins of the Magic missiles are very inaccurate, but it was easily corrected by cutting away part of the front of these fins to give a steeper leading edge. The nose section of each missile was deformed slightly by sink marks.

This is the box art from the presumably now defunct F.1B/C kit. The black box cover style and long rectangular format means that this example dates from the mid-to-late 1970's, which would make sense given the date of service entry of the F.1. Note that the wingtip missiles are Sidewinders. Also, the centreline tank appears to be the large 2,200-litre unit.

The nose undercarriage was trouble-free. The big main door at the rear of the nose wheel bay is a separate part, and can be assembled in the open position. In fact, this is the only position that the instructions mention, even though it is normally closed. Again, there is no mention of a retracted undercarriage option. This can be done, but you should have all the part in place before joining the forward fuselage halves. The main undercarriage was a nightmare. Firstly, the kit comes with fully exposed main wheel bays with lots of detail - but they are obviously too shallow. The two forward main door main sections have to be attached in the closed position, which is not made absolutely clear in the instructions. The parts are too small, so I had to expend much time in applying filler underneath and around the two parts to get them into position and eliminate all the surrounding gaps.

Each main wheel bogie is attached to the wall of the undercarriage bay by a semi-circular attachment notch, so as to ensure attachment at the right angle. The problem is that although the main struts are very thick (possibly too thick), the attachment points are very small, and it is very easy to shear off the attachment notches, which is precisely what I did. After several attempts, a tube of superglue and a few expletives on my part, I finally got both units in the required position.

However, I was not out of the woods yet! There is a second strut - a hydraulic jack. The kit instructions show two additional struts on either side, which is surely wrong. The second 'extra' struts appears as if they are actually the hydraulic jacks for the dive brakes - although the instructions make no reference to having the brakes in the open position. I attached the brakes in the closed position anyway, so I discarded these parts. The undercarriage hydraulic jacks are in themselves confusing. Physically, they look similar to those in the Hasegawa kit, but in the instructions they look like those supplied in the Airfix kit, although Heller would have had nothing to do with Airfix at the time this kit was released. The difference between the illustration and the actual physical parts is such that it just puts more doubts into your mind as to whether you are doing things correctly or not. Eventually, I did attach these jacks in what I thought was the correct position, and moved swiftly on.

The main problem with painting was deciding what colours to use. After much experimentation, and repeating viewing of literally hundreds of photographs of various French jets, I decided to use Hu 102 medium green and Revell 57 medium blue-grey for the upper camouflage scheme. Humbrol 102 is indeed the green colour recommended in this and several other kits, although much newer instructions (for the Mirage 2000N) give a darker shade of green (Hu 116). The wealth of photographic evidence does seem to suggest that the camouflage green colour has become somewhat darker over the years, but it's hard to be certain on this point. If I were to build this kit again (or the CT kit), then I might use a darker shade of green than Hu 102. The recommended shade of grey is Hu 27, which is also widely quoted in Heller instructions for French jets, but which I decided was too dark. I found that Revell 57 gave a seemingly more realistic 'weathered' finish with the blue tint that I wanted - bear in mind that not all paints weather at the same rate, so the contrast between camouflage colours will often change over time. I used the same camouflage finish on a Heller Mirage III that I was building at the same time, and that looked far more realistic based on photographs. From this, I can only conclude that a lot more research on French paint schemes is required.

The underside brings us face to face with what the Hasegawa instructions call 'silver-grey'. Most other kits (unless they are very old) specify an aluminium finish. This kit specifies a 50:50 mix of Hu 56 aluminium and Hu 64 medium grey (although this is really a light grey). Based on seemingly endless analysis of available photographs, I decided that for this subject, I wanted (rightly or wrongly) to use a pure grey finish. Thus, I used one of the lightest shades of grey I could, namely Hu 147. Incidentally, French F.1CR's and CT's would now appear to have wraparound green/grey camouflage. One anomaly on the painting instructions in this kit is that the inwards facing surface of the ventral fins appear to be painted green, but I am quite sure that they should be painted in the under surface colour. The delineation between the camouflage and the underside colour appears to be quite accurately shown in the paint/decal guide, although it is (again!) partially obscured by the fuel tanks.

Hasegawa F.1C-200

In this artwork, the outwards-facing surface of the ventral fins are painted the same colour as the aircraft underside. This is incorrect - they are painted the same colour as the aircraft upper surfaces, which the painting guide correctly shows. The painting guide for the Heller F.1CR kit makes the reverse mistake, in that the inside of the fins are painted a main camouflage colour!

In his review of this kit here on SMAKR, Mark B wondered if this might actually be a reboxing of someone else's kit, as it did not seem to him to be a typical Hasegawa mold. While Hasegawa have been known to rebox kits, I don't believe that is the case here. It looks like a typical Hasegawa mold from the late 1970's, not that I have a vast amount of experience with Hasegawa kits to draw on. It is technically an F.1C-200, as it has the refuelling probe. Like the Airfix mold, it is strictly a single-version kit, and is thus very simple. There are not even 50 parts in the kit. For many years, Hasegawa kits were notable for their modest part counts, and this kit is a good example. In more recent years, Hasegawa have concentrated a lot on producing multipurpose toolings, and the numbers of parts in these kits has sharply risen as a result. This kit has been reboxed a number of times, sometimes with different markings. The only currently available kit is the one that Mark B reviewed, and that is also what I am reviewing. Despite it's age, it is almost completely free from 'flash', as are the other two kits - although the Heller F.1CR kit that I had is quite old, and may not be indicative of current production quality standards.

There are three subjects represented in the kit, all in French service, all with the blue-grey overall upper surface, and differing mainly in the unit markings and decorations. These are: an aircraft from E.C 1/5, an aircraft from E.C 1/12 "Cambresis", and a second aircraft from that unit with "Tiger Meet" markings from 1979. There are no stores options, in the sense that there is only one possible fit supplied. That is the basic interceptor loadout shown on the artwork, comprising of 2 x R.530 AAM's, 2 x Magic AAM'S, and a T-finned centreline fuel tank. The fact that R.530's are supplied instead of the later Super 530F is a good indication of the age of the kit, just as it is with the Airfix mold.

The cockpit looks to be the best of the three kits, and is the only one with instrument panel decals - both for the side panels and main panel. Fitting the seat was problematical, due to a raised line on the cockpit floor. This is presumably designed to help in aligning the seat properly. However, try as I might, I could not work out a suitable position for the seat as long as this line was there. Eventually, I got rid of it, which allowed me to attach the seat flush against the floor of the cockpit and the rear cockpit wall. The assembled cockpit bath is designed to attach to the starboard side of the fuselage only, which it does very well. However, that still left a gap on either side between the fuselage and the rear cockpit wall. I used plastic card to cover up these. I also filled in the drill-out holes on the port cockpit sidewall, which have to be opened up if the supplied ladder is to be fitted.

Before assembling the fuselage halves, I tackled the nose undercarriage. The nose strut assembly is supplied as one part, including the front central door panel. The two small front side panels are molded onto the fuselage halves in the open position. The large rear panel is molded in the closed position, and there is no separate part for it. Curiously, the kit depicts this panel (on each fuselage half) as being not quite flush with the fuselage underside - it sticks out slightly below the line of the fuselage. The rear part of the cockpit floor also represents the forward, very shallow part of the nose wheel bay, just as it does in the Heller CR kit. Only a small part of the deep rear section of the bay is visible, and with the large rear door shut, there was no need for Hasegawa to include a bay roof and rear bulkhead as Heller did. The nose undercarriage unit appeared to fit very well at first, until I realised that the top of the integrated door panel was preventing the unit from being inserted fully. It was a simple matter to trim the top of the panel to get the part to fit snugly. If you do not do this, then the nose undercarriage unit will slope backwards very noticeably. Even when fixed, the unit still appears to slope backwards slightly, but this is just an illusion caused by the upwards sloping profile of the lower fuselage at this point, and by the 'nose-up' attitude of the F.1 when on the ground.

According to the Hasegawa instructions, practically the entire undercarriage structure, bays and doors are to be painted 'Silver Gray'. This is also the main underside colour, and the instructions specify a mixture of 80% silver to 20% medium grey. For this kit, I took the opposite approach to what I had done with the Heller CR kit, and I used pure Humbrol Dull Aluminium Metalcote wherever 'Silver Gray' was required.

The rest of the airframe assembly was simple - there isn't even a separate nose radar cone, as it is molded into the fuselage halves. The fin antennae on the rudder are molded onto the rudder halves, which are in turn part of the fuselage halves. The trailing edges of these antennae are straight in the kit, whereas they should be swept, albeit at a lower angle than the leading edge. The other two kits are correct on this detail. A few other antennae are also molded in place, although a couple of these on the leading and trailing edges of the rudder must be removed for one of the three subjects. The attachment slots for the tail planes are a bit tight, so a small bit of sanding was required first. Care needs to be taken when letting the main wings set, as they have a slight tendency to droop more than they should. The engine splitter intake parts are keyed to ensure that the correct part is used on each side. The intake fairings are another matter. The instructions say one thing, but this is contradicted by 'L' and 'R' markings on the inside of the fairings. The markings on the fairings are correct, which is confirmed by dry-fitting and checking the panel line detail. The IFR probe is noticeably smaller than the one in the Heller F.1CR kit. As with the Heller kit, there is no attachment point as such on the fuselage, so you have to manually position it.

The central fuel tank has the pylon integrated into one half, just as in the other two kits. Mark B said that this was a 2,200-litre tank, but I believe it is a 1,200-litre unit. The loadout chart gives the correct size (albeit in Imperial gallons), and it is also just about the same size as the 1,200-litre tanks supplied in the other kits. It is an easy mistake to make, as the larger tank would only have to be about 22% larger in all dimensions. Actually, the larger tank is slightly more elongated in relative terms. The box artwork on this version of the kit is also ambiguous, as it does seem to show the larger tank. The tank was painted silver as per the instructions. I also fitted the under wing pylons at this point, but the R.530 and Magic Missiles were not attached until the rest of the kit was built and painted. The Magic missiles had a bad case of mold seam, something that also affected the undercarriage legs. I was able to clean up all this without damaging the parts in question. I had problems attaching the Magic missiles, as the fins got in the way.

A photograph of a completed kit, from the side of the Hasegawa box. Note the nose-up attitude (which may be too great in this completed kit), and the angle of the nose wheel strut relative both to the ground and the aircraft underside. The upper/lower delineation line looks to be slightly too high toward the rear of the fuselage. Note the colour of the radome compared to the panel ahead of the windscreen. The positions of the bands on the Magic missile are different to those actually marked out on the missile parts. Also worth noting are the different angles (attitudes) of the missiles, and the natural/polished finish of the fuel tank. I could go on, but I won't - even a simple photograph such as this can reveal a lot more than you might think.

The main undercarriage looks as if it will be straightforward, but as with the nose unit, there is an unexpected problem. The attachment holes are circular, with raised lines on either side to help position the single-piece leg units correctly. The actual fit is nowhere near as clean as you might think. At several points during a bout of dry-fitting, I thought that it would be impossible to attach the legs at anything like the correct angle. Eventually, I got it right, which I was able to confirm when I attached the hydraulic jack struts. As with the Airfix kit, the two forward door sections are molded in the closed position, but for some reason the surrounding panel line for one of these is recessed instead of the normal raised type. The airbrakes are also a bit odd, in that there is a square hole (at the rear of each brake bay) for a round peg (the hydraulic hack). Trust the parts design, as it works. The open airbrakes lean out to either side, which I assume has to be correct - there are not too many pictures of F.1's with their airbrakes open, whether on the ground or in the air. You cannot build the kit with the air brakes in the closed position without doing some surgery on the airbrakes and/or the fuselage, but it shouldn't be too much work.

On to painting. For the main upper aircraft colour, I used Hu 145 medium blue. The Hasegawa instructions give a mix that I was not able (or willing) to translate into something else - I do not use Hasegawa paints (i.e., Gunze Sangyo). The Heller instructions for the French subject in the reboxed Airfix F.1C kit suggest using Hu 144 (aka Intermediate Blue), a paint with which I am very familiar. Hu 145 has a slightly darker, greyer hue than Hu 144, and I judged this to be more realistic. There are numerous pictures of F.1's with this basic paint scheme, but due to all the different light conditions and camera angles, it can be hard to make a definitive call. As already mentioned, the undersides were painted with Humbrol Dull Aluminium Metalcote. The radome is given as a grey colour, instead of black as in the other kits and in most photographs - on some current French CR/CT aircraft, it appears to be painted green, which might be a base coat.

Mirage F.1 Stores Options

The Hasegawa instruction leaflet includes, as Hasegawa instructions sometimes do, a loadout chart for the F.1C - and the Jaguar A, for some reason. Maybe this is because the Hasegawa Jaguar Gr.1/A/International kit has loadout charts for the first and last versions, but not the A version. Anyway, that does not concern us here. This is the F.1C chart:

The Hasegawa kit, of course, does not even have the outer wing pylons (6 and 2). I am not aware of any Hasegawa weapons set that includes such goodies as the Durandal anti-runway weapon or the BL4 bomb. Heller apparently released a 'Hi-Tech' Weapons Set some years ago, probably around the same time as the Airfix 'Hi-Tech' NATO Weapons Set. This probably includes the Durandal and many other French weapons (such as the Matra Super 530F), which means it would be very high on my wanted list - if only I could find it! For what it is worth, the Durandal is physically just a long cylindrical tube, so it might be easy to scratchbuild your own. The four-point central pylon is only available in the Airfix-tooled F.1C, to the best of my knowledge. One item that is readily available from a number of kits is the LR155 rocket pod, AKA the Matra rocket pod.

Note that the '320 gallons' capacity of the fuel tank is US gallons, which equates to roughly 1,200 litres. The actual capacity of the tank is apparently 1160 litres, which is no surprise. The rounded figures for many stores are generally just that - for example, a 1,000 pound bomb will not be that exact weight.

Accuracy and Detail

A lot of accuracy/detail issues will have already been covered in the build review sections for the three kits, but there is a lot more to look at! In no particular order, here is a list of areas that all three kits have done a good job in reproducing:

• The drooping wing leading edge.
• The perforated spoiler panels on the upper wing surface.
• The 'area ruling' on the fuselage.
• The subtle 'area ruling' effect which is visible on the T-finned fuel tanks.

Then there is a whole list of issues that affect at least one the kits in some way or another. Here are just some of these:

• At the front and back, the fuselage profile has a distinctive curve, especially on the underside. If pushed, I would say that the Airfix kit is marginally the least accurate.
  
  
• The nose looks different on each of the three aircraft. The Heller CR nose looks a bit too thick, and doesn't seem to have the correct profile - it isn't tapered properly at its base. The Airfix nose looks slightly too thin. The Hasegawa nose looks just about right.
  
  
• The engine intakes should slope backwards slightly from top to bottom, but the effect is not pronounced enough on the Hasegawa kit. I also think that the intakes are too large on the Hasegawa kit, as the intake fairings are not tapered sufficiently towards the front. While the Heller and Airfix kits are both very good, I think the Airfix kit has the edge.
  
  
• After looking at numerous pictures, I think the IFR probe in the Heller kit is more accurate than the one in the Hasegawa kit.
  
  
• Only the Airfix kit has the DEFA cannon barrels visible, which seems to be the correct way.
  
  
• The Airfix kit is missing some small ventral fairings and intakes that should be on all F.1's. It is also missing small intakes on the upper rear fuselage to either side of fin/rudder.
  
  
• The Heller and Hasegawa molds both have a tailpipe that is very deep and has a detailed face, something which the Airfix kit lacks. The rear nozzle on the Heller kit is flared, compared to the other kits where it closes in slightly. I have seen both settings on various versions. The most obvious explanation is that this is related to different engine power settings. There should be three sections visible on the exhaust tailpipe. All kits have the rear nozzle and a large smooth, shiny area in front of it, but only the Heller kit has the narrow, darker band in front of that - and with the correct internal segmented panel detail too. This extra band is illustrated in the Hasegawa paint guide and can be seen on the photograph of the completed model shown above. It is also shown in the Heller paint guide for the Airfix kit. However, neither of these two kits actually have a panel line to show the delineation.
  
  
• There should be a small pitot head near the base of the windshield on the starboard side, which is not in any of the kits. Actually, a diagram of the F.1 that I have shows it on the port side, but all photographs appear to show it on the starboard side only.
  
  
• All three kits have centreline tanks with the pylon integrated into one of the halves. This means that on one side, there is no gap at all between tank and pylon, which might be regarded as unrealistic. On the other side, there is a gap, as the fit is not perfect - although it has no effect whatsoever on construction.
  
  
• The Hasegawa and Airfix missiles are both quite accurate, although neither is perfect. The Hasegawa kit is the only one with the missiles correctly angled slightly downwards. The Heller CR kit has the worst missiles, but on the plus side, the missile bodies do not have the deep attachment grooves used in the other two kits. To some extent, all three kits have overly thick Magic fins, and the tooling effect usually means that the fins are thicker along one axis than the other.
  
  
• There is a nozzle protruding from the back of the R.530 missiles in the Hasegawa kit, but not in the Airfix kit. I suspect, but am not sure, that the Hasegawa kit is correct. Assessing the accuracy of these missiles is difficult, as there were different heads depending on seeker type: heat-seeking or SARH (Semi-Automatic Radar Homing). I have also read that the French used to carry one of each type, after the Soviet practice. If that was ever actually the case, then it is not evident in these kits, as each kit has pairs of identical missiles.

Final Comments

And the winner is ... none of the above! If you have read through the review, you will see that all three kits have their good and bad points. This is not a cop-out. None of the kits is fatally (or even badly) flawed as far as I can see, and none of the kits is clearly ahead of the other two when everything is taken into consideration. The different versions and/or subject matter also makes a definitive ranking difficult. I will build each of these kits again, probably representing foreign operators in the case of the 'C' kits, but that is a long time away in the future. In the meantime, the kits are all recommended. For my own part, this project proved again how rewarding a multi-kit build can be, even though you end up gathering so much information about the aircraft and the kits that the review can be a daunting prospect!

References

I looked far and wide for printed references on the F.1. I found several entries in some issue of an old magazine called War Machine from the early 1980's. A couple of Salamander Illustrated Guides from the same period were also used - one on Modern Fighters and Attack Aircraft, and one on Modern Airborne Missiles which was a good source of information and pictures relating to the Magic, R.530 and Super 530, and Durandal. Both titles were written by Bill (now Sir Bill) Gunston. An extensive cutaway diagram came courtesy of An Illustrated Anatomy of the World's Fighters.

I don't know of any web site dedicated specifically to the Mirage F.1. There are a lot of web pages to be found, each with some information, although a lot of it probably comes from the same basic sources. Here are some of them: