Airfix 1/72 Avro 504K

AIRFIX 1:72 AVRO 504K

Reviewer: Steve Hedworth (rec.models.scale)
Kit Review submitted: 9 November 2008

Aircraft History:

The Avro 504 first flew in 1913 and served with the RFC and RNAS throughout WW1 and then with the RAF. They served as recce-bombers during the early part of the war, their most famous raid was the bombing of the Zeppelin sheds, at Friedrichshafen, in November 1914. Later versions were turned into single seat anti Zeppelin fighters but by late 1916 the types performance was deemed inadequate for frontline duties on the Western front. It had however proved to be an excellent training aircraft and it was to excel in this role for many years to come. The Avro 504J was the first version specifically built as a trainer and was powered by a 100hp Monosoupape rotary engine. It was superceded by the 504K that had modified engine mountings which enabled a wider variety of engines to be used. The K was resurrected as an anti Zeppelin home defence fighter in 1918, powered by an 110hp Le Rhone rotary, and six squadrons received the type which served until the armistice.

Over 8,300 of all types were built during the war and many were exported post war. Many others ended up on the civil register. A reverse engineered version was built in the USSR as the U-1, and Australia, Belgium, Dutch East Indies and New Zealand built small quantities after the war. The last batch of Avro 504K’s were delivered to the RAF in January 1927. By this time it’s successor the 504N had entered production. This replaced the wheel and centre skid design of the landing gear with an N pattern semi oleo type similar to the Siskin. Production of the N began in 1925, totalled 598 and ended in March 1932. It was replaced by the Avro Tutor and the Tiger Moth.

The Kit:

Cream plastic with no flash. Raised detail, particularly the wing ribs but the parts look OK. Have had this kit for over twenty years. It was intended to be mated with the rear section of an Airfix RE8 fuselage to make a Sopwith 1½ Strutter as outlined in the Airfix magazine of Feb 1981. As this conversion is no longer required I decided to make the kit as it was intended. I originally built this kit over 35 years ago and to my eye nothing has changed.

Instructions:

Potted history in English, French and German. There are five steps of exploded views. It is easy to follow and a small inset shows the strut angles.

Construction:

It has long been held as an item of faith that the fuselage of the Airfix 504K is too shallow and a scale foot short. I first came across this phenomena in a magazine called Wings. An article by Ray Rimell gave a step by step solution and photographs seen in various publications seemed to confirm that the fuselage required greater depth. I accepted this as fact and it was always my intention to modify my next attempt with this kit. However, recently I have had to question my faith. A few months ago I visited a second hand bookshop nearby. Here I came across a pictorial history of the RAF by, I think, Chaz Bowyer. Forgive my vagueness because the shop has since closed due to the owner retiring and I am unable to return to check my facts. Anyway, there was a photograph of a 504N in flight, complete with blind flying hood. My immediate reaction on seeing this photo was “That’s an Airfix fuselage”. The rear section appeared to be considerably shallower than others, the norm, that I had seen in photographs. This set me thinking. Nearly all of the other photos I had seen were of WW1 aircraft or war surplus civilian types. Was it possible that late production models, possibly from only one manufacturer, were built with a shallower rear section and that Airfix may have got only the length wrong? I had another article on a 504 night fighter conversion and looked it up. This appeared in May 1981 and was written by Chris Ellis who had also written the Strutter conversion mentioned above. Here he spoke of lengthening the fuselage but made no mention of depth. A 1/72 scale side elevation was produced as a guide and it also lacked any major increase in depth. So what are we to do? I decided to use the Ellis method to tackle the length issue and modify the Rimmel method to increase the depth. As I intended to build the kit as a 1920’s version and the photograph that had began the crisis of faith was of a 20’s model I reasoned that the end result would be more likely to have seen service after the war than during.

Construction is straight forward. The cockpit insides are painted, the crew, seats and instrument panels and the engine and prop. They are all located onto one fuselage half and the two are brought together. Concentrate on getting the top deck flush as there is a slight misalignment resulting in a slight step. Let it dry and then cut off the rear half an inch of fuselage. Ellis recommends this is replaced by a section three quarters of an inch long taken from another 504 or plastic card can be used. I had the rear section of a 504 in the scrap box and fitted it and let it dry, finally reinforcing the joint with superglue. There is now a step on the underside which Ellis filed out to taper the fuselage as before. I left it and cut a section of 10 thou plastic card to fit the fuselage from the lower wing to the step. The section beneath the rear cockpit was filed flat to assist the blending of the plastic card into the fuselage. Once this was done and set I filed out any imperfections and filled any gaps remaining.

The rest of the kit is completed as per the instructions. The only other additions were small windshields. As usual care is needed when aligning the top wing, a fact that this kit proved in no uncertain terms. Maybe I became complacent but after locating the centre section struts and letting them almost set, as I have done for years and checking the wing for position, for some reason I assembled the main struts and set the wing onto them. I usually let the centre struts set over night and reinforce them with superglue. Next morning there was a set but twisted top wing and struts. I managed to rescue the situation by pushing the starboard wing forward and applying superglue to the struts as they were held in this position. A reminder not to take liberties with biplanes.

Rigging was guided by the box art and I limited myself to the wings as usual.

Colour Schemes:

I have to confess that I have thrown the box out but have acquired a blister pack kit from e bay recently so I’m going to quote the colours from it. There are two schemes regardless of box or blister. In the box you get a 1920’s trainer based in Egypt. This is aluminium doped. There is a WW1 version which I think was the example preserved at RAF Museum, Hendon. The blister pack has two WW1 types. One is clear dope and it looks like it was intended that clear varnish would be the order of the day as the kit plastic is cream. The other aircraft is a khaki colour which is designated M3.

Decals:

The kit was over twenty years old but they were perfectly useable. I’m no expert but they look all right to me. The comma rudder was a little difficult to get right but I touched it up with paint.

Accuracy:

You tell me. Wingspan and chord are spot on and, for length, so is the modified fuselage. Tailspan is correct and the height seems OK. As for the fuselage I think we can only hope some dedicated researcher comes up with something.

Overall Recommendation:

Currently out of production but readily available on E Bay at reasonable prices. Recommended because it is a relatively simple build, with care, and it looks OK to me. I have another which I intend to turn into a 504N and thanks to Richard Stracey for his conversion review. There are alternatives to Airfix now but I haven’t seen the A Model versions that are available in the UK so am unable to compare. I think Academy did a version and there are resin kits on the market too.

web hosting • domain names
web design • online games