Scale model kit FROG F256 Westland Lynx

Westland Lynx

FROG 1974 Green series logo

FROG F256 Lynx Mulri-Role Helicopter, Rovex Models & Hobbies, 1975

Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956
Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956 Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956 Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956 Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956 Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956 Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956 Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956 Коробка FROG 323P English Electric Canberra PR.7, IMA, 1956

We have always been amazed at how different two manufacturers' products can be when they come to tackle exactly the same model. The final result looks the same, if accuracy is ensured, but the way in between can be very different.

It was with this in mind that we set about the latest Frog model of the Westland Lynx having only a few weeks previously completed the Lesney Matchbox model of the same machine.

Sure enough both look like two peas out of a pod, when complete, but there's a lot of difference when you look closely at the detailing and the method of construction.

From a purely personal point of view we preferred the Frog model and cannot tell you why apart from the fact that it seemed to handle better. This is no criticism whatsoever of the Lesney example as this, apart from the inaccuracies on the undercarriage of the Naval version, makes up into a fine model.

Frog have chosen to produce the cockpit and cabin area as a separate entity to the tail boom. Both FAA and Army versions are supplied in the kit and like the Lesney one, a torpedo armament has been provided for the Navy machine.

Construction is straightforward providing the instruction sheet is carefully followed. Our choice was to make the Army aircraft as we had completed the Navy one when building the Lesney kit. The tail boom fits very well and so do all the other parts. There was a little body putty necessary under the fuselage where the skids fit and also at the tail boom joint but the quantities used were very small and, in fact, it could well have been left undone.

The biggest fault we could fine in the Frog model was in the main rotor blades. They are so finely moulded that the slightest heavy handedness caused one of ours to break off and resulted in a lot of bad language and time spent in the repair.

We were well pleased to see that Frog had not fallen into the same trap as the Lesney Naval Lynx. Frog have provided a hole right through the sponson which contains the undercarriage leg so that the model can be built as in-flight or static. Look at our pictures when we reviewed the Lesney model and you will see that the oleo leg extends almost a foot when the machine is in the air. Most enthusiast modellers prefer to discard the stand provided with the kit, but Frog have quite rightly given the choice of either position — a wise move.

The two sets of decals in the Frog kit are both for prototype aircraft unlike the Lesney one which tries to produce the 'in-service' markings. As the Lynx has yet to reach squadrons in either the Army or Navy, the, Frog idea is probably the best though they will have to make some changes later on if the kit is to remain fully saleable. Their Navy version has very interestingly been produced as the French prototype coded FZKCV (ex-XX911) which has a blue and yellow colour scheme. The Army alternative is XX907 having red, white and blue roundels and black and green camouflage.

We often wonder if it is a good thing to produce a model in prototype markings before it gets into squadron service. Admittedly, there's great prestige in getting the first one out but would it not be worth waiting a while until some definite colour scheme is evolved by the Service users and the variety of markings becomes apparent. Perhaps the manufacturers have the idea that they can launch the model all over again with new decals but there has been scant evidence of this, apart from the case of Revell, in recent years.

The Frog Lynx is a good model if you are a helicopter enthusiast. The top of the box art leaves much to be desired and in our opinion is a very poor drawing of the actual aircraft. On the other hand the enthusiast does not really concern himself with these particulars; all he wants is an accurate model. Yet if we are to believe all that we are told by the manufacturer concerning the greater percentage of their sales being to children, then we are of the opinion that Frog ought to change their artists and go back to some of those they used a few years ago as the present box art will not sell models! We may be wrong, but at 65p, would want a lot of convincing that we ought to buy a Lynx.

Aviation News Vol 4 Num 1 13-26 June 1975

Feline chopper from Frog

Very recently Lesney issued a kit of the Westland W.G.13 Lynx helicopter to 1/72nd scale and now comes a competitive kit from Frog. A comparison of the two kits is by no means easy because of the differing approaches of the individual kit designers. In fact, no true comparison may be made until the models are completed when one can say that, despite the varied construction, the result is satisfactory in both cases. Whereas the Lesney kit moulds the tailboom with the fuselage halves, that of the Frog kit is moulded separately; the Lesney kit offers separate cabin doors while those of the Frog kit are integral with the fuselage; each cabin window of the Lesney kit is a separate moulding, the cabin windows of the Frog kit are grouped in threes, and so on.

Both kits offer alternative parts to permit construction of either an Army or a Navy version of the Lynx, the former having a skid undercarriage and the latter wheels, and in each case alternative nose sections are provided. Both kits offer a pair of homing torpedoes for application to the Naval model. Despite having fewer component parts — 63 as compared with 70 — we feel that the small detailing of the Frog model is the better of the two and particularly so with regard to main and tail rotor assemblies. Frog scores further points as a result of its superior surface detailing, that of Lesney's "Matchbox" kit being somewhat coarse in places. On one point there can be no question of which kit is the superior — Frog's decal sheet being by far the better of the two. This excellent little sheet offers markings for an Army version of the Lynx (XX907) that was used at Filton in 1973 for engine development purposes in an olive and black camouflage scheme, with, as an alternative, the second Aeronavale prototype (F-ZKCV) which sports a dark blue-grey and yellow scheme. Both the Frog and the "Matchbox" kits are good and a choice between the two is difficult. Perhaps the solution is to buy both, completing one in naval form and the other in its Army version and using the Frog decals for both. The Frog Lynx retails in the UK at 65p.

Air Enthusiast 1975-08 vol.09 no.02

Westland WG. 13 Lynx Prototype
F256 1975-1977 H(G) 45000 1xFrenchNavy&1xBritishArmy

Back in 1970, this kit was originally intended to have been an Aerospatiale Puma in the Orange series.

FROG model aircraft 1932-1976, R. Lines, L. Hellstrom

NOVO logo

Novo Cat.No.78083 Westland Lynx, NOVO Toys Ltd, 1980

Novo Toys Ltd., Maxey, Peterborough, England PE69HQ
Period: 1976-1981
78083 Westland Lynx Prototype 90000

FROG model aircraft 1932-1976, R. Lines, L. Hellstrom

Krugozor logo

Кругозор МГ-85-01-5283, 1982

  • 05.01.Z0Z3