Ahoy mates!
Cyber-Hobby has announced the upcoming release of their latest 1/700 ship offerings. Interested? To find out more, click on the link below.
Link to Item
If you have comments or questions please post them here.
Thanks!
You are viewing the archived version of the site.
Go to modelshipwrights.com for the current dynamic site!
Go to modelshipwrights.com for the current dynamic site!
New Content
Announcements on new content additions to the site.
Announcements on new content additions to the site.
Hosted by Jim Starkweather
NEWS
New 1/700 Kits from Cyber-HobbyPosted: Thursday, March 29, 2012 - 02:21 AM UTC
hakkikt
Joined: March 11, 2007
KitMaker: 10 posts
Model Shipwrights: 3 posts
KitMaker: 10 posts
Model Shipwrights: 3 posts

Posted: Thursday, August 23, 2012 - 07:53 PM UTC
Reports are appearing in online forums that HMS Antelope is grossly overscale and measures out at about 1/600. Can anyone confirm this?
warshipbuild

Joined: June 06, 2006
KitMaker: 222 posts
Model Shipwrights: 207 posts

Posted: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 - 10:44 PM UTC
Hard to know where to start, but yes - this one is FUBAR.
It's not as if Dragon are new to 1/700 scale (even then it would be a strange mistake to make)
Yes , I can confirm that whilst it is advertised as 1/700 it is , in fact , 1/600. When compared against my Airfix (Amazon) they are identical in length, beam, whatever.
The first thing I did was measure the ship from bow to stern. Using my 1:700 scale it measures 445 feet or 136 meters. Checking the internet this ship is 384 feet or 117 meters. Oops! That would make the hull roughly 1:600 scale and not 1:700 as advertised
The Type 21's were 384 ft long, 41.8 beam, the Batch 1 and 2 Type 42's were 412ft / 47ft and Batch 3, were 463ft / 49ft.
Put Antelope next to them and it is larger than the Batch 1/2 , and nearly the same length as the Batch 3. Somewhat noticeable!
There is also a problem with the deck house in front of the foremast which has been moulded solid instead of open and the shape is not correct.
I'd take a close look at that waterline too.. looks down at the bow to me, also the keel looks like it is not parallel to the waterline.
The hull looks okay when glued together, just the split is wrong.
So if you want a waterline model, you'd have to glue the hull together and split along the correct waterline.
It really does look like they copied the Airfix kit or the Pitroad resin kit (which was recreated from the Airfix kit), minimal features, same Triangular solid yardarms (without an Etch alternative),
Weapons from the same old over sized Pit-Road NATO weapons sprue. Not impressed as an ideal chance to create correctly sized Exocets cannisters, Torpedoes, 20mm guns, Corvus launchers (with shield and ammo lockers) and either a decent Lynx or Wasp.
So its a new hull, with nearly the same details level as the 35 yr old Airfix kit, with the standard sprue NATO sprue from the original Type 42 kit from the 80s' but still an eye watering price.
Basically, It is a well made but utterly useless (PoS) model as per the rest of their recent British releases, they waste fine engineering on producing expensive kits that show a woeful level of research and understanding of the subject.
It's not as if Dragon are new to 1/700 scale (even then it would be a strange mistake to make)
Yes , I can confirm that whilst it is advertised as 1/700 it is , in fact , 1/600. When compared against my Airfix (Amazon) they are identical in length, beam, whatever.
The first thing I did was measure the ship from bow to stern. Using my 1:700 scale it measures 445 feet or 136 meters. Checking the internet this ship is 384 feet or 117 meters. Oops! That would make the hull roughly 1:600 scale and not 1:700 as advertised
The Type 21's were 384 ft long, 41.8 beam, the Batch 1 and 2 Type 42's were 412ft / 47ft and Batch 3, were 463ft / 49ft.
Put Antelope next to them and it is larger than the Batch 1/2 , and nearly the same length as the Batch 3. Somewhat noticeable!
There is also a problem with the deck house in front of the foremast which has been moulded solid instead of open and the shape is not correct.
I'd take a close look at that waterline too.. looks down at the bow to me, also the keel looks like it is not parallel to the waterline.
The hull looks okay when glued together, just the split is wrong.
So if you want a waterline model, you'd have to glue the hull together and split along the correct waterline.
It really does look like they copied the Airfix kit or the Pitroad resin kit (which was recreated from the Airfix kit), minimal features, same Triangular solid yardarms (without an Etch alternative),
Weapons from the same old over sized Pit-Road NATO weapons sprue. Not impressed as an ideal chance to create correctly sized Exocets cannisters, Torpedoes, 20mm guns, Corvus launchers (with shield and ammo lockers) and either a decent Lynx or Wasp.
So its a new hull, with nearly the same details level as the 35 yr old Airfix kit, with the standard sprue NATO sprue from the original Type 42 kit from the 80s' but still an eye watering price.
Basically, It is a well made but utterly useless (PoS) model as per the rest of their recent British releases, they waste fine engineering on producing expensive kits that show a woeful level of research and understanding of the subject.
viper29_ca

Joined: October 18, 2002
KitMaker: 2,247 posts
Model Shipwrights: 54 posts

Posted: Thursday, September 06, 2012 - 03:29 AM UTC
Yes, definitely disappointed with the Antelope kit, and I was so looking forward to it.
Really other than the one piece hull vs the 2 hull halves in the Airfix one and slightly cleaner details....this kit has nothing else going for it.
Where is the 1/700 Enterprise they were flogging about a year ago?? Thought it would have been out by now.
Really other than the one piece hull vs the 2 hull halves in the Airfix one and slightly cleaner details....this kit has nothing else going for it.
Where is the 1/700 Enterprise they were flogging about a year ago?? Thought it would have been out by now.
![]() |












