Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) 1/72 Nieuport N.16 “Other Services”Reviewed by Brad Cancian
Item: KPM0452
Scale: 1/72
Price: 12.40 Euros each, direct from Kovozávody ProstějovReview kit kindly provided by KP Models at
https://www.kovozavody.cz/produkt/nieuport-ni-16-other-services//The More Powerful Bebe - the Nieuport 16The Nieuport 16 was an incremental development of the earlier Nieuport 11 “Bebe”, with a strengthened airframe powered by a more powerful 110 hp (82 kW) Le Rhône 9J rotary engine. Visible differences included a headrest for the pilot and a larger aperture in front of the "horseshoe" cowling. The Nieuport 16 was an interim type pending the delivery of the slightly larger Nieuport 17 whose design was begun in parallel with the 16, and which remedied the 16's limitations, as well as improving performance.
As with the Nieuport 11, no gun synchronizer was initially available, which meant the Nieuport 16's Lewis machine gun was similarly mounted to fire over the propeller. Some Nieuport 16s were fitted to fire Le Prieur rockets from the struts for attacks on observation Kite balloons. The fire from their rocket motors was inherently hazardous to the aircraft they were used on, due to the highly flammable nature of the covering used on almost all WW1 aircraft and protective metal sheeting was added to the lower wings, and the interplane struts that the rocket's eight launch tubes were attached to. The Nieuport 16 was used by the air forces of France, Belgium, Britain, Russia, and the USA.
KPs Nieuport 16KP have recently released three new kits of the Nieuport 11 and 16 variants. The plastic in this kit, as well as the instructions, is exactly the same across all three kits.
We have previously reviewed the Nieuport 11 boxing; accordingly, we recommend you have a look at the full review of that kit to understand what you’ll get in terms of the plastic and the instructions; see here –
https://forum.ww1aircraftmodels.com/index.php?topic=14477.0
As the plastic is the same, the same features apply. A mix of nice crisp detail in places, flash in other places, and some notable inaccuarcies with regards to the wing rib numbers and strut positions.
What we don’t get is a set of rockets, sometimes seen fitted to the wing struts of the N.16.
As such, the main differences between the Nieuport 16 kit is in the decals. In this boxing, we get the following three marking options:
1. N.16 N.1407, “Fox-Trot”, flown by Egide Roobaert (incorrectly spelt “Alber” on the box), Belgium, 1916
2. N.16 A.134, flown by Albert Ball (incorrectly spelt “Baal” on the box), RFC, 1969
3. N.16 N1290, “Rum”, flown by Lawrence Ramsay, Escadrille N.124, France 1916
The decals look crisp and well printed.
Accuracy
The same accuracy aspects on this kit carry over from the Nieuport 11 boxing, as above, which is a bit of a mixed bag in some regards. We do get some optional parts for the N.16 (engine and headrest).
In terms of accuracy of each of the marking options, the following observations are offered.
N.16 N.1407, “Fox-Trot”:This machine is identified on the “Belgian Wings” website (
https://www.belgian-wings.be/nieuport-11-c1-16-c1) as a Nieuport 11, not a Nieuport 16, which is supported by the below photograph (note the lack of headrest and the earlier 80hp engine).
This machine has been previously identified elsewhere as a N.16, so this appears to be a mistake that has perpetuated over time (fear not, the correct N.11 can be made out of the box). The machine is identified as N1497, but the serial is not clear. In the photograph, this aircraft carried Le Prier rockets, but these are not included in the kit. It does not look like the rudder carried the “N” motif above the serial number, so this aspect may be up to the modellers discretion (Belgian aircraft often carried the number without the “N”, or the “N” without the number and weight table, and so on, so check sources where you can, or take your best guess).
Of note, the font for the “Fox-Trot” motif isn’t quite right; it’s a tad too narrow in comparison to the photograph (though not too bad).
The only other thing to note is that Belgian N.11s (indeed, most camouflaged N.11s/16s) also carried a thin light (clear linen) outline / edging to the wings and horizontal stabilisers. This is not represented on the marking scheme on the box, but can be seen on many Belgian N.11s, such as below:
N.16 A.134, flown by Albert Ball:There is one well known photo of this machine:
KP looks to have the general scheme about right, noting it is likely that this machine also carried the lighter edges around the flying surfaces as per most camouflaged N.11/16s. Some errors are apparent however; most notably, the decals don’t have the correct white edging around the serial number, and the upper wing roundels carry the white ring seen on machines from mid 1917 onwards (which this machine would not have carried).
N.16 N1290, “Rum”:There are some well known photos of this machine also:
We see no headrest here, which indicates an N.11 vice an N.16, but it may have been removed and overpainted. Without seeing the engine, it is hard to tell (so the modeller may use discretion here). KP have gotten the general arrangement correct, noting also the same comments regarding the edge colours for the flying surfaces. The above photographs don’t show the full serial number, so it is unclear if this is the correct number or not (again this number looks to be referenced from other sources and kits). The photographs above show the aircraft at various times in its life; we observe different wear and tear, and possibly different wheel covers (so the lighter depiction is also not unreasonable). I am unsure the source for the lower surface light blue colouring, so this may be correct.
It is noted again that the font for the “RUM” motif is not correct in style when compared to the photograph:
Some careful painting / modification may be able to assist.
BuildabilityThis model looks to be a relatively straightforward build, thanks to the smaller parts count, and generally simple layout.
ConclusionsThis is a very welcome release of the N.16. What is presented may be considered by some as a bit of a mixed bag; we get some very nice crisp details in places, and nice surface details and representations as positives. As negatives, we get some flash, and some accuracy issues, including with the colour schemes as provided. As per the N.11 boxing, none of the issues are insurmountable by any means. The model should build up into an attractive little representation of this important fighter, and KP should be commended for its release.
Our very sincere thanks to KP for the review samples!
