# Airfix's great 1/72 Defiant - done at last!



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

When I was learning about WWII planes, a long time ago, I was fascinated with several aircraft that just seemed strange compared to what I’d seen before. One, of course, was the Boulton Paul Defiant; it was a part-Hurricane/part-Spitfire concoction WITH A TURRET!! I grew up with the 80’s GI Joes, so I had a Rattler, which was a VTOL A-10 ripoff with a turret on it. So it didn’t look out of place because I wasn’t used to turrets, it looked out of place because I didn’t realize anyone had ever done that!

I, of course, wanted a kit of it, but the only kit at the time was the old Airfix one, and even 25 years ago I knew that kit was a piece of, well, “history”, shall we say. I’ve had to wait a long time for a decent, affordable Defiant in 1/72, but now that Airfix’s new kit is here, I can say it was worth it! Check out my completed Defiant, and be amazed at how far Airfix actually has come from the old days!

*https://adamrehorn.wordpress.com/model-kits/planes/airfix-172-boulton-paul-defiant-mk-i/*


----------



## Milton Fox Racing (May 27, 2014)

I can see the Spitfire parts, but dont remember a turrent on a fighter plane. :cheers2:


----------



## Xenodyssey (Aug 27, 2008)

Mine is still in the stash waiting for a new burst of WW2 aircraft building. Yours looks great.


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

There were only two real "turret fighters", the Defiant and the Blackburn Roc, which was a Royal Navy bird. 

Turns out it's a bad idea. Who knew? Oh, wait... yeah... everyone else... Huh.

Thanks for the compliments. It's an excellent kit and it does build pretty darn well!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

The turret fighters were sort of a natural progression from the WWI observation planes, where the observer in the back seat had a ring-mounted machine gun to defend the plane with. Eventually somebody figured, hey, why not make that the main armament? You can shoot Jerries down by flying next to them, around them, under them... Well, they found out why not pretty quick.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

out of curiosity, just why is it a bad idea, other than the weight penalty and the like. Just not able to really hit targets while the fighter dodges?


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

Steve H said:


> out of curiosity, just why is it a bad idea, other than the weight penalty and the like. Just not able to really hit targets while the fighter dodges?


Not only the weight, which is a big problem, but ever since the Fokker Eindecker of WWI, it's been accepted wisdom that it's more effective for a pilot to turn aim the plane than a mobile gun, and it's harder for two operators to co-ordinate movements than one guy.

Now, what's even worse, is that the Defiant's ENTIRE armament is the turret. There are NO fixed forward guns. Much fighter combat takes place head on, so that's a big liabililty...


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

The Defiant did ok at first before the Germans knew what it was... Which was about two missions. The Russians had some somewhat similar single engined light bombers with clunky turrets on the back.


----------



## Faust (Dec 1, 2012)

djnick66 said:


> The Defiant did ok at first before the Germans knew what it was... Which was about two missions. The Russians had some somewhat similar single engined light bombers with clunky turrets on the back.


You're right, it did. If it had had a few wing guns, it might have fared quite well, or at least better, or for a bit longer!

Oh, you're talking about the Su-2, among others, right? Don't forget the failure that was the Breda Ba-65; also similar, except it was fat and underpowered not to mention clunky.


----------



## finaprint (Jan 29, 2006)

Post #7 has it right............


----------

