The Ship Model Forum

Great comparison review. Thx, Vladi.

[quote="FFG-7"]how close to scale dimension wise & to each other?[/quote]
Wingspan (19,9mm) and length (16,4mm) are spot-on for both, exactly as translated from the original ([url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Walrus#Specifications_(Supermarine_Walrus_I)]Wikipedia[/url]). As far as height is concerned, the profile on Wikipedia comes out at approx. 4,4 meters = 6,28mm in 1/700 (measured from mid upper wing; less undercarriage) . Flyhawk´s 6,1mm is closer than Yao´s 6,0mm.

[quote="Timmy C"]Thanks for this, Vladi! I'd add that it seems the Yao version's main wings lack the dihedral that Flyhawk captures nicely, while the horizontal stabilizers have a floppy appearance.[/quote]
Exactly :thumbs_up_1:

Thanks for this, Vladi! I'd add that it seems the Yao version's main wings lack the dihedral that Flyhawk captures nicely, while the horizontal stabilizers have a floppy appearance.

how close to scale dimension wise & to each other?

[b]Conclusions:[/b]

As expected, both options have their advantages and disadvantages:

[b]Yao´s[/b] version does not require assembly, but it´s removal from printing supports is really difficult and quite a lot of careful work is needed to remove all the marks from the aircraft. Also the wing rigging is even way more overscale than Flyhawk´s PE version, so I decided to remove it for my trial (I´d replace it with rigging wire if I decided to continue with this version) – actually I can´t imagine how one would paint the camo scheme on the lower wing with the rigging in place! The underwing floats look unrealistically bulky, OTOH the depth charges on underwing racks are a nice touch. Hull sides look uneven, I can´t tell if these are print layers or a completely vain attempt to show rivets (which is what the box illustration suggests).

[b]Flyhawk[/b]´s molded Walrus is way sharper than the 3D printed version (compare e.g. canopy framing) but I disliked the PE parts for inter-wing struts which have a “boxy” appearance and their lower “bars” distort the look of the lower wings and all of that simply did not fit, as can be seen on the comparison photos. Interestingly enough, after my newly ordered Flyhawk set (i.e. FH 1130 WW2 Royal Navy Aircraft II) arrived I discovered that these “boxy” PE struts were specific to the version I received as a gift, perhaps originating from one of the earlier Flyhawk ship kits. The WW2 RN set II´s PE is much better, with “bars” only going under the upper wings; where these are mostly invisible. I indeed decided to go on with this version.

After cross-checking photos of both versions (below - before touching up the camo) I concluded that Yao´s did not stand up to it´s “old-tech” competitor and I decided to continue with Flyhawk. Compared to other 3D prints I´m working with Yao´s took no advantage of the possibilities of either 3D modelling (e.g the floats are clearly flawed and the whole a/c appears unlike the real thing) or state-of-the-art hi-tech 3D printing. I can´t recommend it even to modellers with lower standards due to the difficulties of removing the model from supports.
[attachment=3]20250624_EOS_0853_cr.jpg[/attachment][attachment=2]20250624_EOS_0856_cr.jpg[/attachment][attachment=1]20250624_EOS_0858_cr.jpg[/attachment][attachment=0]20250624_EOS_0859_cr.jpg[/attachment]

The Flyhawk version now waits for weathering, I´ll post the final photos soon.

Now to the comparison between Yao´s 3D printed Walrus (after sanding off the remnants of printing supports) and Flyhawk´s version that I received from a friend. Flyhawk´s plastic parts are better defined and crisper, and the PE rigging is thinner and more consistent than the 3D printed one. Assembling Flyhawk´s is, however, more demanding and time consuming. Most importantly and unfortunately, the "boxes" of PE struts & rigging between the wings clearly suck and would deserve modification, which I plan to try.

Despite the Yao´s Walrus´ shortcomings mentioned above it looks like an acceptable alternative. Some more work was needed than expected but the result is not bad "out of the box". Replacing the heavily overscale rigging with a thinner one may be a good idea for a more ambitious modeller though. Let´s see how will they compare after painting.

[attachment=3]20250228_EOS_0704.jpg[/attachment][attachment=2]20250228_EOS_0705.jpg[/attachment][attachment=1]20250228_EOS_0706.jpg[/attachment][attachment=0]20250228_EOS_0707.jpg[/attachment]
(BTW the Yao´s Walrus included a really nice tail wheel which unfortunately was lost during sanding off supports)

Originally, I started to work on the Flyhawk 1/700 Supermarine Walrus only to lose one float part of the PE to the carpet monster. As I´ve got no spares (got this one from a friend of mine as a leftover) I had to order the full kit new and wait. As an alternative I wanted to cross-check the 3D printed alternative:

[url=https://mry-sfw.com/products/lyr-144006?variant=41111501733950]Yao's Studio LYR006 Fighter Aircraft Military Model Kit British Supermarine Walrus amphibious aircraft[/url]

[i](Note: the following part + the next post have been posted earlier within another review, I decided to move them here so that a comparison with Flyhawk makes more sense)
[/i]

This set contains 6 aircraft plus their separate propellers. Interestingly, their count was not obvious on the producer´s website – actually it said „1part“, so getting 6 Walruses in the package was a positive surprise :)

[attachment=5]20250224_Walrus_0670.jpg[/attachment]
[attachment=4]20250224_Walrus_0674.jpg[/attachment]
The planes have nice details like bombs/depth charges under wings:
[attachment=3]20250224_Walrus_0675.jpg[/attachment]
The large number of relatively thick printing supports connected to each other make it a bit difficult to remove, cutting the (thick) base with a Proxxon/Dremel saw would be recommended.

Unfortunately, the same overly thick printing supports leave unwanted marks on the wing´s leading edges that will have to be sanded – not easily done with such a small aircraft. Also the rigging looks far too overscale and the wires do not originate in the same places like on the original aircraft (on wings, not on struts). I was hoping for a better reproduction.

[attachment=2]20250226_Walrus_0690.jpg[/attachment][attachment=1]20250226_Walrus_0700.jpg[/attachment][attachment=0]20250226_Walrus_0701.jpg[/attachment]