Need an old trainer?

[YoYo]

I notice than Just Flight put the new model in his "incoming" section - DHC-1 Chipmunk.






http://www.justflight.com/product/dhc1-chipmunk

[Ferry_vO]

Just saw it on Facebook too; great news!

coming next week!

[Oliver]

AHEM! "Old Trainer"?

Less of the old please!

I learnt to fly in a Chippie!

[Ian Warren]

Another superb cockpit and external details

[noddy]

At last, great news.

[Roger]

Yes...at last

[YoYo]

AHEM! "Old Trainer"?

Less of the old please!

I learnt to fly in a Chippie!

Lucky man!

[Naismith]

It'll be a sad day when I have to retire my Rick Piper Chippy, but seeing this she will have to go. :-(

[bazzar]

Civilian and military versions with removable pilots.Ground starts, Detailed engine...a few more shots

[srgalahad]

It looks lovely!

The RCAF-painted version is actually a Chipmunk 22 (demobilized Chipmiunk T.10) of the Shuttleworth Collection.


For those who are less familiar with the a/c here's a pic of the prototype:


Now, Baz, I imagine you expect the following comment (and someone HAS to say it), so....

What, no Canadian version with the blown-perspex 'bubble' canopy???

Attachment 8564
DHC-1B-2

Sigh....

(Not released? then there's still time...)

OK, before everyone gets all excited, I certainly understand the modeler's right to make what they want and to balance time/effort. On the other hand there are those of us who are really proud of the Canadian aircraft industry and will be sad to see 20% of the Chippy production ignored.

BTW, today -May 22 is the 68th anniversary of the Chipmunk's first flight (1946). Interesting that HRH Prince Philip is touring Canada this week - his first training flight was in 1952 - in a Chipmunk.

[stiz]

looks good, bout time someone did one of these

[Martyn]

(Not released? then there's still time...)

Yes

[T6flyer]

I for one, am looking forward to this as only last week flew a Chipmunk and I hope that we will be able to install this on our Museum simulator as give rides to the public in the real thing and then replicate the learning experience on the sim.

Martin
Classic Air Force
www.classicairforce.com

[guzzi]

Yep should be a Canadian version - after all it is a Canadian designed aircraft! Would be nice to see a Supernunk (180hp Lycoming engined) -the RAFGSA and a few civilian gliding clubs use them in the UK as glider towplanes and believe the Portuguese airforce re-engined their Chimpunks with the Lycoming. Of courses there's the heavily modified aerobatic versions with even bigger engines, like Art Scholl's. I believe their was even a Chippie on floats - I know Rick modelled one but don't think it was ever released.

Have been towed by standard and 180hp Chipmunks- on a very hot day (we sometimes get them in the UK) I have know the standard Chipmunks to be incapable of towing out of a 900 yard grass field, and had one or two marginal tows myself.


Sadly looks like Rick's might be going to the back of the hangar?. However the wings as pointed out over at CBFS don't seem quite right - look a bit too ribbed and wooden! Hope the developer realises they are not!

However it has my favourite paint scheme on a Chippy included in this pack!

[Paul J]

Well, I guess I am the only nit-picker here! While I love the Rick Piper version, you're all correct - it is a "dated" aircraft model, and it shows - and it is about time someone did an updated version. I dislike that blurry, dented and worn instrument panel intensely - believing Rick could have found a much better VC panel than he did. However - it is what it is, and has given hundreds (thousands?) of simmers some great hours of Chippie experience - especially those who have the Bernt Stolle FDE.

If this new one had been produced by A2A - I would have been raving over it's realism, it's textures, it's documentation, and its flight model, and so on; however...this one is so typical of a Just Flight product - all the advertising would indicate an aircraft of A2A quality, but instead we are treated to another aircraft which is constructed almost entirely from graphic art instead of actual 'photos of the real thing.

Does Just Flight think we are blind? That we have no knowledge of airfoil sections? Or experience of the full-sized Chippie? The airfoil on the original (and on Rick's) is very different to the boxy "effort" they have created: the r/w (and R. P's) Chip has washout-out - and - undercamber - at the tips. If Rick P. et al could create this wing (FSX version) some eight years ago - why cannot JF achieve the same - or better?

Still on the wing - r/w fabric looks nothing like that depicted on the yellow liveried aircraft. Only by moving in close to the wing should one actually perceive any weave. On top of this - there's sag between the ribs???? What the devil?? There should be zero fabric sag anywhere on the wing; indeed - the only part where ribs are somewhat pronounced - is on the rudder. Other noticeable points - the square(ish) noses.... the not-very-round rear fuselage... the "Lift here" hole, missing from all fuselages - all picked out from eight or nine small pics.

In it's defense - I have to say the interior shots look pretty good - better than Ricks, in fact, and will do for me until I see the finished product. The exteriors, however - are abysmal.

I love the old girl: she was my first back in 1957, and went on to both scare the pants off me, and to most often amaze and delight me. Truly a Pilot's aircraft.

For me, this offering is a disappointment; Just Flight could - and should have done much better. Or maybe this is just me?

Apologies for being a wet blanket - I would have much preferred warm and cuddly, for sure.

pj

[ThinkingManNeil]

It's always puzzled me as to why DH UK and the RAF chose to go with that framed canopy when the blown Canadian bubble version is clearly superior (forgive the pun). I can't see any advantage in it and, not to trash anyone, it just ruins the look of a very smart, clean looking aircraft IMO. I do hope Just Flight includes the Canadian bubble version; I think I'll pass if otherwise...

N.

PS. I noticed that the FSX version of Rick Piper's superb FS9 Chippie lacked the bubble version as well. Pity...

PPS. Speaking of canopies, I would love to know why Lockheed never opted for bubble canopies on later models of the P-38 Lightning (J-model on...) or why Republic fitted heavily framed ones to their early F-84's. It's not like blown canopies were new technology by that point. If any one knows the reasoning behind those I'd like to hear...

[Martyn]

I do hope Just Flight includes the Canadian bubble version; I think I'll pass if otherwise...

Yes, a Canadian bubble version will be available.

[Paul J]

It's always puzzled me as to why DH UK and the RAF chose to go with that framed canopy when the blown Canadian bubble version is clearly superior (forgive the pun). I can't see any advantage in it and, not to trash anyone, it just ruins the look of a very smart, clean looking aircraft IMO. I do hope Just Flight includes the Canadian bubble version; I think I'll pass if otherwise...

PS. I noticed that the FSX version of Rick Piper's superb FS9 Chippie lacked the bubble version as well. Pity...

My source folder includes an RCAF Chippie, Neil: I thought it was included in my original d/l from Rick's site? Do you have his Chip?

pj

[ThinkingManNeil]

My source folder includes an RCAF Chippie, Neil: I thought it was included in my original d/l from Rick's site? Do you have his Chip?

pj

I do have the Chipmunk, Paul, but it appears to be a civilian, framed-canopy British version painted up as an RCAF machine, not an actual bubble canopy Canadian version...

Thanks,

N.

[Paul J]

I do have the Chipmunk, Paul, but it appears to be a civilian, framed-canopy British version painted up as an RCAF machine, not an actual bubble canopy Canadian version...

Thanks,

N.

You're right Neil; I only fly the '60 RAF DayGlo/Aluminium version, and I never see the RCAF livery. I thought it had the blown canopy, sorry.

pj

[Roger]

I've checked all the screenshots and I belive it will be credit to the jF stable!

[JimmyRFR]

I'm watching this with some interest. It's good to hear the bubble version will be available, as the inclusion of the Canadian models will surely help sway me to purchase!

[peter12213]

This is certainly looking good, looking forward to it.

[guzzi]

Yes, a Canadian bubble version will be available.

and what about the other 'shortcomings' people have pointed out? Will they be addressed before release?

Hope the FDE is accurate as well.

[guzzi]

It's always puzzled me as to why DH UK and the RAF chose to go with that framed canopy when the blown Canadian bubble version is clearly superior (forgive the pun). I can't see any advantage in it and, not to trash anyone, it just ruins the look of a very smart, clean looking aircraft IMO. I do hope Just Flight includes the Canadian bubble version; I think I'll pass if otherwise...

N.

PS. I noticed that the FSX version of Rick Piper's superb FS9 Chippie lacked the bubble version as well. Pity...

PPS. Speaking of canopies, I would love to know why Lockheed never opted for bubble canopies on later models of the P-38 Lightning (J-model on...) or why Republic fitted heavily framed ones to their early F-84's. It's not like blown canopies were new technology by that point. If any one knows the reasoning behind those I'd like to hear...

You'll find the answer in here. http://www.dhc-1flyer.com/ Brillant book if you can afford it. Hope the developer has a copy!