A330-200/300 Moulds in 1:400 Scale
|
Updated: April 2017
|
|
The 4 leading A330 moulds in 1:400 side by side
|
,The A330 began life as the poor brother of the A330/340 family being designed primarily for medium range high density routes typically operated previously by A300s - especially in the South-East of Asia. Unsurprisingly airlines like Korean and Thai were early customers as well as Air Inter, who optimistically expected to be able to operate such a large aircraft domestically. Operating widebodies on intra-French routes (or even intra-European services) now seems ludicrous but this was the early 90s before the low cost revolution.
It seems Airbus built major growth space into the A330 airframe and with the massive improvements in engine technology the A330 has grown into a true long range transcontinental airplane, which has replaced the need for the A340 as well as the 767 and 777-200ER. Certainly the growth in the A330's capabilities has been quite startling to the extent that its even giving new generation aircraft like the 787 a run for its money. Just look at the following table to see how the aircraft has changed: |
|
The success of the A330 is shown by the size of the order book with over 1,370 of the original A330 series ordered by June 2015. The type entered service in June 1994 with Air Inter and A330s will be seen in service for decades to come.
Unsurprisingly for such a major type in service with many of the world's largest airlines the A330 series has been a popular type for 1:400 model manufacturers. As of April 2017 the breakdown of models by maker in 1:400 is as follows - typically there has been a fair bit of mould sharing however:
Unsurprisingly for such a major type in service with many of the world's largest airlines the A330 series has been a popular type for 1:400 model manufacturers. As of April 2017 the breakdown of models by maker in 1:400 is as follows - typically there has been a fair bit of mould sharing however:
|
A330-200 - 310
Phoenix - 96 Aeroclassics - 74 Dragon Wings - 49 Gemini Jets / Schuco - 48 / 3 JC Wings - 29 Panda Models - 3 Hogan - 2 Herpa - 4 Socatec - 3 |
A330-300 - 363
Phoenix - 134 Aeroclassics - 103 Dragon Wings - 54 JC Wings - 34 Gemini Jets - 26 Panda Models / HYJLWings - 2 / 2 Hogan - 2 Herpa - 6 |
Before we begin looking at the moulds here is the real thing with the long-nacelled Rolls-Royce Trent engines:
|
|
|
|
|
And with the Pratt & Whitney PW4168 engines:
|
|
|
|
|
And with the General Electric CF-6 engines:
|
|
|
|
|
Onto the moulds in date order:
Dragon Wings Mould (2002) - Used 103 times
Dragon's moulds for modern aircraft types are rarely very good and their A330 is no exception to that. Obviously Dragon models come with all the usual provisos as regards plastic parts however that in itself isn't really a major problem. Considering its age it isn't a bad mould but in detail the shape of the nose, especially the underside isn't very good. In addition the chunky nosegear is always an issue. The mould has a small wing seam at front and rear. Early versions of the mould have a seam at the horizontal stabiliser too and the earliest have very simple maingear without gear doors.
The very early simple maingear
|
The later maingear with doors
|
In truth this mould has been obsolete for many years now but this hasn't stopped Dragon from producing quite a few models of both series 200s and 300s into 2012. Nowadays there is so much choice when it comes to A330s that rarely will you need to consider a Dragon Wings example although some, like Skyservice, still remain to be made on an updated mould.
Herpa / Hogan Mould (2003) - Used 14 times
In classic Herpa style they have dabbled with the A330 in 1:400 and produced a mighty ten examples of the type, which can hardly be a useful recoup of the development costs? Anyway we shouldn't be sad about that because their mould is pretty poor. Interestingly the nose area suffers from some of the same issues as the Dragon, being too curvy at the bottom. It may even be the same basic mould but its hard to say for certain without having seen them in person. Quite often it appears the tail fits rather poorly into the fuselage too. On the plus side the nose gear is at least a decent height so if it is the same mould they put on their own gear. The ten Herpa models are spread across four years until 2007 and cover all three engine options. The GE and PW engines appear ok but the Rolls Royce Trents on their Cathay Pacific and Premiair aircraft are far too small. Again this is a mould worth avoiding in my opinion. This Etihad is probably the best example they have made - it at least has decent cockpit printing which several of the others do not. Hogan don't seem to have any issues with the mould sadly as they have seen fit to use it four times since 2010.
In classic Herpa style they have dabbled with the A330 in 1:400 and produced a mighty ten examples of the type, which can hardly be a useful recoup of the development costs? Anyway we shouldn't be sad about that because their mould is pretty poor. Interestingly the nose area suffers from some of the same issues as the Dragon, being too curvy at the bottom. It may even be the same basic mould but its hard to say for certain without having seen them in person. Quite often it appears the tail fits rather poorly into the fuselage too. On the plus side the nose gear is at least a decent height so if it is the same mould they put on their own gear. The ten Herpa models are spread across four years until 2007 and cover all three engine options. The GE and PW engines appear ok but the Rolls Royce Trents on their Cathay Pacific and Premiair aircraft are far too small. Again this is a mould worth avoiding in my opinion. This Etihad is probably the best example they have made - it at least has decent cockpit printing which several of the others do not. Hogan don't seem to have any issues with the mould sadly as they have seen fit to use it four times since 2010.
Gemini Jets / Schuco / Phoenix Mould 1 / JC Wings (2003) - Used 144 times
Gemini's early A330 appeared soon after the Dragon and Herpa versions and is an improvement on both of those though pales in comparison to the newer moulds. Possibly the only superior points of the other early moulds is that they are seamless which can't be said about this Gemini mould. There is a clear crescent shaped seam running in front of the wings, which is a bit distracting but roughly matches the natural fuselage contours so isn't heinous. At least this mould does a passable impression of an A330 nose though it appears there may have been some modifications to the early mould. Originally the nose wasn't very pointy but soon a much sharper nose appeared. This is almost too pointy I think but depending on the printing can look pretty decent. Gemini have worked to improve the mould adding rolling gears in 2012 and antennae in 2014. It was interesting that they stuck with a seamed mould (especially as JC has recently abandoned it) for so long however in December 2015 their Delta release switched to using the new JC wings mould. Personally I avoid this mould but that's as much because not many aircraft that interest my collecting criteria have been made on it as because I have issue with it. It is ok and I would acquire models on it if there were no later Phoenix, JC or Aeroclassics versions available.
The mould has been used quite prolifically as follows:
Gemini - 70 examples (including three made for the French firm Socatec)
Schuco - 3 examples (re-released Gemini models)
Phoenix - 42 examples (used from 2005-2010)
JC-Wings - 30 examples (used from 2010-2014)
Gemini's early A330 appeared soon after the Dragon and Herpa versions and is an improvement on both of those though pales in comparison to the newer moulds. Possibly the only superior points of the other early moulds is that they are seamless which can't be said about this Gemini mould. There is a clear crescent shaped seam running in front of the wings, which is a bit distracting but roughly matches the natural fuselage contours so isn't heinous. At least this mould does a passable impression of an A330 nose though it appears there may have been some modifications to the early mould. Originally the nose wasn't very pointy but soon a much sharper nose appeared. This is almost too pointy I think but depending on the printing can look pretty decent. Gemini have worked to improve the mould adding rolling gears in 2012 and antennae in 2014. It was interesting that they stuck with a seamed mould (especially as JC has recently abandoned it) for so long however in December 2015 their Delta release switched to using the new JC wings mould. Personally I avoid this mould but that's as much because not many aircraft that interest my collecting criteria have been made on it as because I have issue with it. It is ok and I would acquire models on it if there were no later Phoenix, JC or Aeroclassics versions available.
The mould has been used quite prolifically as follows:
Gemini - 70 examples (including three made for the French firm Socatec)
Schuco - 3 examples (re-released Gemini models)
Phoenix - 42 examples (used from 2005-2010)
JC-Wings - 30 examples (used from 2010-2014)
Phoenix Mould 2 (2010) - Used 188 times (still in production)
Phoenix broke away from the old Gemini A330 mould in 2010 with a real stunner. Their A330 is excellent - perhaps even better than the later Aeroclassics, though its a very close run thing. Personally I prefer the Phoenix cockpit windows and think that the overall shape reproduces the real thing very well. As with their other moulds (except Aeroclassics) they have added satnav humps and antennae in recent years. Although this is a very good mould it isn't perfect. The undercarriage is an inferior area. The nosegear doors are too large and the maingear is chunky and poorly detailed. The crease after the wing is also missing and the fuselage underside is poorly detailed. I think whether you prefer the Phoenix or Aeroclassics mould is a matter of quite subjective opinion but its hard to be harsh with either of them.
One thing to be aware of are Phoenixes' recurring quality issues. With the A330 that can mean poorly fitted wings especially at the rear where they join the fuselage.
Phoenix broke away from the old Gemini A330 mould in 2010 with a real stunner. Their A330 is excellent - perhaps even better than the later Aeroclassics, though its a very close run thing. Personally I prefer the Phoenix cockpit windows and think that the overall shape reproduces the real thing very well. As with their other moulds (except Aeroclassics) they have added satnav humps and antennae in recent years. Although this is a very good mould it isn't perfect. The undercarriage is an inferior area. The nosegear doors are too large and the maingear is chunky and poorly detailed. The crease after the wing is also missing and the fuselage underside is poorly detailed. I think whether you prefer the Phoenix or Aeroclassics mould is a matter of quite subjective opinion but its hard to be harsh with either of them.
One thing to be aware of are Phoenixes' recurring quality issues. With the A330 that can mean poorly fitted wings especially at the rear where they join the fuselage.
Aeroclassics Mould (2011) - Used 177 times (still in production)
Aeroclassics followed up its BabyBus range with BigBus A330/340s in 2011 and they are superb. The mould is excellent being completely seamless and perfectly proportioned. The nose is perhaps not quite as well defined as the Phoenix and the detailing of the cockpit windows not as nice but these are minor points. For me the cockpit windows are just a bit too small and on some models they have a heavy outlining also. One of the moulds strongpoints is the undercarriage. Be aware that Aeroclassics doesn't believe in aerrials in 1/400 scale so if that is an issue for you buy elsewhere. Aeroclassics continues to release A330s and has also released a couple of American Airlines aircraft under the BlueBox brand.
Aeroclassics followed up its BabyBus range with BigBus A330/340s in 2011 and they are superb. The mould is excellent being completely seamless and perfectly proportioned. The nose is perhaps not quite as well defined as the Phoenix and the detailing of the cockpit windows not as nice but these are minor points. For me the cockpit windows are just a bit too small and on some models they have a heavy outlining also. One of the moulds strongpoints is the undercarriage. Be aware that Aeroclassics doesn't believe in aerrials in 1/400 scale so if that is an issue for you buy elsewhere. Aeroclassics continues to release A330s and has also released a couple of American Airlines aircraft under the BlueBox brand.
JC Wings Mould 2 (2014) - Used 37 times (still in production)
JC Wings ditched the Gemini A330 in favour of their own mould a few years ago and finally in December 2015 Gemini released its first A330 using this mould too. Many wish they hadn't done so. Initially this looked like a great mould and overall it isn't bad compared to the competition, although in detail it is inferior in most ways. One of the issues is the undercarriage. The nosegear is a little misplaced and too short, whilst the maingear is too short and rather chunky. Even so the mould would be ok if the manufacturer could fit the wings correctly, which often they cannot it seems. As a new slot in wings mould there have been major issues getting the wings to not arrive as if the aircraft wants to take off. The results can look bizarre - like this:
JC Wings ditched the Gemini A330 in favour of their own mould a few years ago and finally in December 2015 Gemini released its first A330 using this mould too. Many wish they hadn't done so. Initially this looked like a great mould and overall it isn't bad compared to the competition, although in detail it is inferior in most ways. One of the issues is the undercarriage. The nosegear is a little misplaced and too short, whilst the maingear is too short and rather chunky. Even so the mould would be ok if the manufacturer could fit the wings correctly, which often they cannot it seems. As a new slot in wings mould there have been major issues getting the wings to not arrive as if the aircraft wants to take off. The results can look bizarre - like this:
|
|
Then again it isn't always an issue. As you can see the two China Eastern's below don't have this problem. So choose carefully. Even when the wings are fitted properly it is the worst of the 4 current in use moulds but is ok.
Panda Models Mould (2016) - Used 6 times (Still in production)
Panda models continue to go from strength to strength and not only are they growing their relationship with Skywings and HYJLwings they are bringing new moulds to the market. Since the end of 2016 these have included a selection of new A330s:
This mould is very good, as good and sometimes better than the competing Phoenix and Aeroclassics moulds. Check out the link to the detailed A330 mould review below to see how all 4 compare to each other.
- A330-200 with Rolls Royce engines
- A330-300 with Rolls Royce engines
- A330-300 with CFM engines
This mould is very good, as good and sometimes better than the competing Phoenix and Aeroclassics moulds. Check out the link to the detailed A330 mould review below to see how all 4 compare to each other.
Mould Vs Mould
For a really detailed comparison of the four active A330 moulds in 2017 use the button below to take you to a detailed review: