Airbus A330-200F in 1:400 Scale
|
Modified: February 2017
|
|
The A330-200 Freighter had a long development period spanning a decade. Production of the A300-600F ceased in 2007 but Airbus first declared a freighter variant of the A330 in 2001. This was killed by the needs of the resource intensive and much delayed A380 programme and the A330F didn't resurface until 2006. It was finally launched in January 2007 but further delays meant the maiden flight wasn't until November 2009. Deliveries began in July 2010 to Etihad Cargo though it is fair to say sales haven't met Airbuses expectations! By the end of 2016 only 36 aircraft have been delivered and there are only 6 remaining orders unfulfilled. Perhaps it is just too much plane for its market being rather uncomfortably placed between Boeing's 767-300F and 777-200F. For more on the A330F's development see: A330 Freighter: The Right Aircraft Right Now?
Anyway from a design perspective the obvious difference between the 200F and the 200 passenger variants is the blister under the front fuselage. This was the chosen method of dealing with the A330's standard nose-down angle. The standard A330 gear is used but it is attached lower requiring the blister for successful undercarriage retraction. The French call the blister "La boufiolle' in reference to a chemist's apothecary jar, which its shape resembles. Otherwise externally the A330-200F resembles a standard A330-200. Obviously this feature is problematic to the 1/400 manufacturers, however 2017 appears to be the year of the 200F in model form at least as two manufacturers are simultaneously attempting new 200F mouldings.
So let's look at what has been made in 1/400 scale.
Dragon Wings (2008-2011) - 2 models
The only civil models Dragon have made since the mid-2000s are Airbuses - usually for Airbus themselves it seems. This is a shame because Dragon had potential and their Airbus moulds were easily their worst! Their A330 is not impressive. As I say in my A330 review:
"For me with the A330 it is the fuselage ahead of the wing, especially the nose, and the forward undercarriage which ruins the model. The A330 has the typical attractive rather symmetrically curved nose however the Dragon model has a much stronger curve to the underside of the nose than the cockpit downward curve giving the whole aircraft a quite odd look. In addition the chunky nosegear appears too short and the whole plance has a rather dumpy appearance not befitting the real thing."
The oddness of the moulds means their freighter version (only two models made both in Airbus house colours but with different engines) successfully fails to solve the problem the blister was added for. The model still has a nose down attitude. On the plus side the blister is part of the fuselage moulding meaning no unsightly joint lines. The wing / fuselage join however is just plain wrong and let's face it the mould is just damn ugly.
The only civil models Dragon have made since the mid-2000s are Airbuses - usually for Airbus themselves it seems. This is a shame because Dragon had potential and their Airbus moulds were easily their worst! Their A330 is not impressive. As I say in my A330 review:
"For me with the A330 it is the fuselage ahead of the wing, especially the nose, and the forward undercarriage which ruins the model. The A330 has the typical attractive rather symmetrically curved nose however the Dragon model has a much stronger curve to the underside of the nose than the cockpit downward curve giving the whole aircraft a quite odd look. In addition the chunky nosegear appears too short and the whole plance has a rather dumpy appearance not befitting the real thing."
The oddness of the moulds means their freighter version (only two models made both in Airbus house colours but with different engines) successfully fails to solve the problem the blister was added for. The model still has a nose down attitude. On the plus side the blister is part of the fuselage moulding meaning no unsightly joint lines. The wing / fuselage join however is just plain wrong and let's face it the mould is just damn ugly.
Aeroclassics (2012) - 1 model
Given the small number of series 200Fs built it is surprising that the mould has got any attention in this scale. Having said that with such an obvious difference to a standard series 200 it is down right cheeky to make an A330-200F using the same mould as the passenger. That didn't stop Aeroclassics though in 2012 who made a single Turkish Cargo example. I guess at the time it was a case of 'better than nothing' for some though there was plenty of justifiable criticism too. AC does fairly often blur the boundaries between aircraft variants by reusing moulds across them (DC-6s, Convairliners, Comets, Caravelles for example). Mostly this seems reasonably justified however in this case I don't think it was especially as both Panda and JC Wings have found the funds to do the type justice subsequently.
A330 passenger aircraft pretending to be a freighter
Panda Models (2017) - 1 model so far
So onto the main event. Panda have shown a willingness to produce obscure moulds and to surprise the market with them. Thus it was so with their A330F, which appeared with almost no warning in early January. Panda had only just announced they were even making A330s at all. I'll look at Panda's A330s separately however in general they are excellent. It is hard to fault the general A330 areas of the mould. It has aerials and a satnav dome, but is otherwise pretty much a cheeky copy of the excellent Aeroclassics mould. The RR engines do however appear to be a better shape than those on the AC Turkish above. Certainly Panda models printing is usually more detailed than Aeroclassics on things like engines, doors and radomes.
Hong Kong Airlines Airbus A330-200F B-LNY
Panda Models 1:400 Scale Model Airliner
|
Looking at this version specifically it appears Panda have taken the understandable route of using their A330 passenger mould and adding the gear blister to it. This avoids the expensive task of creating a bespoke moulding but does come with the issue of the attachment of the blister. As you can see below it is ok but far from perfect. The shape is fine but the attachment especially at the front is a little poor, meaning there is a small gap when seen nose on. With a bit more work I'm sure they could have made the blister fit better so it's a shame they didn't. Overall it would obviously have been better to take the Dragon Wings route with the blister part of the fuselage, however I understand why they have not done that. It is still the best A330F on the market - for the moment at least.
|
Hong Kong Airlines Airbus A330-200F B-LNY
Panda Models 1:400 Scale Model Airliner
JC Wings (2017) - 2 models announced
JC Wings have done what they always do and announced models well before they are released. So we know they also have two A330-200Fs coming but not when or what they'll look like. One will be exactly the same aircraft as the Panda release i.e. B-LNY with the HongKong Air Cargo titles whilst the other will be the same livery but B-LNV with HongKong Airlines titles. Will they be any good? I'm not sure. I don't want to pre-judge but JC Wings has had horrible problems with their A330 mould's wings pointing skywards and shown little to no interest in fixing it. I suspect their A330-200Fs will have the same issue. Obviously the other question is whether it'll be a new mould or a retrofit of the existing A330-200. I guess we'll see, hopefully soon. When we do I'll update this mould review.
JC Wings A330-200F mould
A330-200F Wishlist
Now with only 36 aircraft built the number of liveries that can be done is obviously limited. In addition both Panda and JC Wings are obviously angling towards the Chinese market so who knows if they'll make others. I guess it is possible Gemini may be able to use the JC Wings mould - probably for some of the Middle Eastern possibilities. Anyway here is a list of what could be done. What would you like to see?
Now with only 36 aircraft built the number of liveries that can be done is obviously limited. In addition both Panda and JC Wings are obviously angling towards the Chinese market so who knows if they'll make others. I guess it is possible Gemini may be able to use the JC Wings mould - probably for some of the Middle Eastern possibilities. Anyway here is a list of what could be done. What would you like to see?
|
|
Tampa Cargo (now Avianca Cargo) Yangtze River Express
|
|
Avianca Cargo Hong Kong Airlines old clrs
|
|
Etihad Cargo MAS Kargo
|
|
Qatar Cargo MNG Cargo
