G'Day Peter - cool review of a very cool aircraft. The kit is a joy to build, with practically no filler required. Couple of things I found - 1) the intakes are completely open so you can see right through the body. You'll either need to blank them off or grab a set of AM resin intakes with the compressor faces.2) The huge tail decal for the Provence scheme doesn't fit- it will either align correctly to the leading edge of the tail and be out on the trailing edge, or vice versa, And lots of setting solution is needed. 3) Although not called out in the instructions, there is a laser designator targeting pod the goes under the starboard intake (if you do the French version). Otherwise, I found it to be a great kit to get the mojo back. Cheers 👍
Hi Peter, I built the Ravell Rafale twin seater a few years ago now and you are quite right, to me this is the best kit they have made. Fit is great, loads of ordnance, great decals, can't recommend it enough. I have a single seater waiting in the stash.
If it's the old Revell kit the chances are it's the Monogram kit which if I recall was one of and quite likely the last model under that brand to get released. I bought it many years ago and was stunned at its quality at that time. It broke all the rules of previous Monogram kits and Monogram did some terrific kits back then!! Revell bought Monogram so the chances are this is indeed that very kit which stunned me back then!! Looking at it I'm now convinced of it too!! Enjoy!!
I got the Revell offering some 15 yrs ago, and I found it a delightful kit, one of the company's best offerings. But it's nice to have the confirmatory review yrs later--my perspective was on mark! Since the Rafale sort of evolved out of the 70s/80s Eurofighter design consortium, I'm just gonna go with the sentiment that the side-swinging canopy was the MBB (Messerschmitt) contribution. LOL! That, and the 29° reclined seat angle, another Messerschmitt/Luftwaffe favorite. : ) 13:54
I give you 12 out of 10 for this review. You are absolutely right - Rafale is the sexiest French aircraft, very ellegant and deadly at the same time. Secondly I totally aree the kit instruction should give the basic information about the plane. It is the best way to involve people in subject, to make people hungry for more information. It worked years ago, why shouldn't it be useful now. It also may be helpful with a thoughtful choice of the version or camouflage scheme.
Playing catch up but the upside is that l now have a few videos to watch 😄nice looking aircraft the box art reminds me of an F16 and the kit has lots of detail, l have never done a fast mover but l wouldn't mind doing the Grumman A-6 Intruder and l did in enjoy the film of the same name so have you done a review on one as l do listen to your reviews so you get a 10/10 from me 👍
I have the initial offering from wayyyy back. Never really inspected it. Just bought it because it was marked way down. Always preferred the 2000N in looks to all the modern jets. Do have a soft spot for the Gripen because it followed my all time favorite the Viggen.
I fully agree with you regarding companies providing us information on the aircraft. In my humble opinion, if I see that the manufacturer provided information on the aircraft, it tells me they have researched the subject and you'll find that these far eastern companies who don't provide us with any information are often the ones that produce the kits with noticable inaccuracies. Back to the Rafale, I hope will one day see a repop of the M boxing by either Revell or Academy. However, I wouldn't be surprised if we get a retooled one soon enough. One 4.5 gen aircraft we need a decent kit of is the Gripen!
I agree on the lack of info regarding the kit. Back in the days without Internet or PCs, made the info regarding the subject vital to us all. The sense of history, global strategy got us looking for more information. Now the younger people have it all around them and they just dont care...
Not particularly into modern jets but I do like this aircraft and I'm quite tempted by this one! Damn you Peter and your excellent reviews!! 🤨🤣 You've given me another element to my modelling and I'm really enjoying watching your reviews and seeing kits that you probably wouldn't get chance to under normal circumstances. Fantastic as always Peter, thankyou 👌👍
The first tool was for the M version with the dedicated landing gear, this is the C version hence the extra la ding gear. I built two of these first boxing before stepping out of the hobby (ah the student life!) and your review shows that they improved some part. It had only 4 Micas, 2 Magic II and tanks because at the time it was ts first standard so only air-air capable. At the time the Mica IR missiles didn't have the clear part and I think all these air to ground and clear parts are entirely new compared to the original kit. This may be the best kit on the market but it still does require some (lots of) filing and sanding on some parts. Otherwise at the time I was very happy with it, not much with my brush painting technique. 😅
Nope nope nope, times up Peter too hip gotta go. I am glad to hear this is one worth snapping up. I have had some poor experiences with Academy. There P36 pearl harbor comes to mind. No location provided for the cockpit. Their line of M3 and M5 Stuart/Honey's tracks and lack of positive locations again.
Frozen-out Steve? No Sir...what happened? I said hello in chat buddy but you then seemed to go quiet? Was there a techy problem? Edit: I can't see my typed greeting to you now, I wonder if I didn't hit send! 🫢 I saw you and thought I had responded...I thought it was odd when you sent a sad face? Anyway apologies, 100% unintended foul-up it seems! The workload is very high for me sometimes in chat so missing someone or mistyping is easily done. Sorry for any misunderstanding or unintended offence. 😖 Hope to see you again later today. 😃
Peter: Be aware that exactly the same as the Revell instructions, the SCALP missile is shown assembled incorrectly on page 8 - If you do it as they show, the top panel that holds the wings in place (part 129) is the wrong way round. It needs to be rotated 180 degrees so the pointy end faces forward, with the little pin locating in the hole on top of the main body. NOT over the wings. This way, it fits flush onto the body and holds the wings in place, and has the 4 pylon mounts in the correct place, (the square dimples in the plate, and formed by the square notch in the wings). It's almost as if in the last 20 odd years, no one from Revell (or Academy) has bothered to make the kit. PS The
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab PS Ignore my last PS. (senior moment). I think I was going to mention that this being a NAVY model, that the hook is a lot beefier than in the B version (Air Force), and I suspect that the "spare wheels" are for that.
To be honest I've never, even when I was a kid, read the aircraft description/history on kit instructions. I thought the seam down the center of canopies was because they slide mould the canopy to get the shape more accurate when it can't be done from a normal mould. Not exactly something you do to save money.
G'Day Peter - cool review of a very cool aircraft. The kit is a joy to build, with practically no filler required. Couple of things I found - 1) the intakes are completely open so you can see right through the body. You'll either need to blank them off or grab a set of AM resin intakes with the compressor faces.2) The huge tail decal for the Provence scheme doesn't fit- it will either align correctly to the leading edge of the tail and be out on the trailing edge, or vice versa, And lots of setting solution is needed. 3) Although not called out in the instructions, there is a laser designator targeting pod the goes under the starboard intake (if you do the French version). Otherwise, I found it to be a great kit to get the mojo back. Cheers 👍
Hi Peter, I built the Ravell Rafale twin seater a few years ago now and you are quite right, to me this is the best kit they have made. Fit is great, loads of ordnance, great decals, can't recommend it enough. I have a single seater waiting in the stash.
Thanks for the info!👍🏻
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Labfun fact...i have a transformers action figure that turns into a Rafale and when it jet form its pretty much 1/72 scale .
@@jaws848 really? 😆
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab yep....fits in with my 1/72 jet collection perfectlly...
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab "robots in disguise" and "more than meets the eye"... the 2 tag lines associated with the transformers,lol🤣🤣🤣🤣
If it's the old Revell kit the chances are it's the Monogram kit which if I recall was one of and quite likely the last model under that brand to get released.
I bought it many years ago and was stunned at its quality at that time. It broke all the rules of previous Monogram kits and Monogram did some terrific kits back then!!
Revell bought Monogram so the chances are this is indeed that very kit which stunned me back then!!
Looking at it I'm now convinced of it too!!
Enjoy!!
I agree, even think Rafael is the BEST looking fighter of this generation!🥰
I would agree, but the Saab J39 comes very close! The Saab certainly takes 2nd place by a mile.
just got mine...really nice looking kit so far, and love the box art...what a beautiful bird...
Thanks Peter I have just bought this kit on your recommendation I look forward to building it cheers 👍
I’ve spent a pretty penny on Peter’s recommendation. Adding this one to the wishlist.
I got the Revell offering some 15 yrs ago, and I found it a delightful kit, one of the company's best offerings. But it's nice to have the confirmatory review yrs later--my perspective was on mark!
Since the Rafale sort of evolved out of the 70s/80s Eurofighter design consortium, I'm just gonna go with the sentiment that the side-swinging canopy was the MBB (Messerschmitt) contribution. LOL! That, and the 29° reclined seat angle, another Messerschmitt/Luftwaffe favorite. : ) 13:54
I give you 12 out of 10 for this review. You are absolutely right - Rafale is the sexiest French aircraft, very ellegant and deadly at the same time. Secondly I totally aree the kit instruction should give the basic information about the plane. It is the best way to involve people in subject, to make people hungry for more information. It worked years ago, why shouldn't it be useful now. It also may be helpful with a thoughtful choice of the version or camouflage scheme.
Playing catch up but the upside is that l now have a few videos to watch 😄nice looking aircraft the box art reminds me of an F16 and the kit has lots of detail, l have never done a fast mover but l wouldn't mind doing the Grumman A-6 Intruder and l did in enjoy the film of the same name so have you done a review on one as l do listen to your reviews so you get a 10/10 from me 👍
I have the initial offering from wayyyy back. Never really inspected it. Just bought it because it was marked way down. Always preferred the 2000N in looks to all the modern jets. Do have a soft spot for the Gripen because it followed my all time favorite the Viggen.
I fully agree with you regarding companies providing us information on the aircraft. In my humble opinion, if I see that the manufacturer provided information on the aircraft, it tells me they have researched the subject and you'll find that these far eastern companies who don't provide us with any information are often the ones that produce the kits with noticable inaccuracies.
Back to the Rafale, I hope will one day see a repop of the M boxing by either Revell or Academy. However, I wouldn't be surprised if we get a retooled one soon enough.
One 4.5 gen aircraft we need a decent kit of is the Gripen!
I agree on the lack of info regarding the kit. Back in the days without Internet or PCs, made the info regarding the subject vital to us all. The sense of history, global strategy got us looking for more information. Now the younger people have it all around them and they just dont care...
I think that Revell outsourced the tooling to Academy. I have an origional Revell Rafale M boxing and it says made in Korea.
I see Academy have released a model of the new Korean mini raptor.
Not particularly into modern jets but I do like this aircraft and I'm quite tempted by this one! Damn you Peter and your excellent reviews!! 🤨🤣 You've given me another element to my modelling and I'm really enjoying watching your reviews and seeing kits that you probably wouldn't get chance to under normal circumstances. Fantastic as always Peter, thankyou 👌👍
Thanks Bobby! 😄
is Hasegawa still in business ?
Yes, though they rarely release new items.
The first tool was for the M version with the dedicated landing gear, this is the C version hence the extra la ding gear.
I built two of these first boxing before stepping out of the hobby (ah the student life!) and your review shows that they improved some part. It had only 4 Micas, 2 Magic II and tanks because at the time it was ts first standard so only air-air capable. At the time the Mica IR missiles didn't have the clear part and I think all these air to ground and clear parts are entirely new compared to the original kit. This may be the best kit on the market but it still does require some (lots of) filing and sanding on some parts. Otherwise at the time I was very happy with it, not much with my brush painting technique. 😅
Nope nope nope, times up Peter too hip gotta go. I am glad to hear this is one worth snapping up. I have had some poor experiences with Academy. There P36 pearl harbor comes to mind. No location provided for the cockpit. Their line of M3 and M5 Stuart/Honey's tracks and lack of positive locations again.
Hi Peter. Was there some reason I got frozen out today? 🤔
Frozen-out Steve? No Sir...what happened? I said hello in chat buddy but you then seemed to go quiet? Was there a techy problem? Edit: I can't see my typed greeting to you now, I wonder if I didn't hit send! 🫢 I saw you and thought I had responded...I thought it was odd when you sent a sad face? Anyway apologies, 100% unintended foul-up it seems! The workload is very high for me sometimes in chat so missing someone or mistyping is easily done. Sorry for any misunderstanding or unintended offence. 😖 Hope to see you again later today. 😃
Peter: Be aware that exactly the same as the Revell instructions, the SCALP missile is shown assembled incorrectly on page 8 - If you do it as they show, the top panel that holds the wings in place (part 129) is the wrong way round. It needs to be rotated 180 degrees so the pointy end faces forward, with the little pin locating in the hole on top of the main body. NOT over the wings. This way, it fits flush onto the body and holds the wings in place, and has the 4 pylon mounts in the correct place, (the square dimples in the plate, and formed by the square notch in the wings).
It's almost as if in the last 20 odd years, no one from Revell (or Academy) has bothered to make the kit. PS The
Thanks for the tip off! 😨👍🏻
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab PS Ignore my last PS. (senior moment). I think I was going to mention that this being a NAVY model, that the hook is a lot beefier than in the B version (Air Force), and I suspect that the "spare wheels" are for that.
To be honest I've never, even when I was a kid, read the aircraft description/history on kit instructions. I thought the seam down the center of canopies was because they slide mould the canopy to get the shape more accurate when it can't be done from a normal mould. Not exactly something you do to save money.
...But...Are you really telling me you never read the lovely Matchbox info on the front of the box?
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab no, I always just wanted to get into the kit and start building when I was a kid.
@@DarrellThompson47 Now, Now Darrell, as Master Obi-Wan said: "PATIENCE!" 😑
@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab 😂 No time for that, to many models to build 😉
.....симпатичная модель,однако,линии расшивки слишком жирные....