Regarding the Revell and Airfix Mayflowers - the two companies' interpretations of the ship are quite different. Both Revell kits are based on the Mayflower II, the only difference between them being the scales. (The smaller one is about 16" long overall; I don't remember just how long the larger one is. Woodburner - are you there?) I'm not sure what the origin of the Airfix design was. It bears some resemblance - but only some - to the reconstructed version done by R.C. Anderson back in the 1920s or thereabouts.
All three kits are quite good. The Airfix one doesn't have quite the level of detail of the Revell ones; the planks don't have "wood grain," and the gunports are represented as countersunk squares, with "dummy" gun barrrels plugged into holes in their middles. (The Revell kits have their gunport lids molded shut.) If I had all the time in the world I'd consider building both, as a demonstration of how much variation there can be in interpreting the shapes of old ships about which so little hard information is available.
Regarding Mondfeld and the Revell Golden Hind - I don't have Mr. Mondfeld's book in front of me (it's in the workshop, which is in the back yard, and it's pouring down rain at the moment), so it would be improper for me to offer any really specific comments. I did, however, dig up a review of the book, by the late Dana McCalip, in the Nautical Research Journal. (Dana was a friend of mine; he knew what he was talking about.) He gives the publication date of the book as 1985. (That's the English-language edition; the original German one may have appeared a little earlier, but not much.) The Revell Golden Hind kit was originally issued, according to Dr. Graham's book, in 1965. I think we can rule out the possibility that Mr. Mondfeld's book had anything to do with the origin of the kit. (I suppose it's conceivable that things worked the other way around: that Mr. Mondfeld based his drawing on the Revell kit. But I doubt it. He seems to have had little if any interest in plastic models.)
Revell seems to have been rather secretive, for some reason, about the historical sources on which that kit is based. In another Forum thread another member, Papillon, matched it with a set of plans in a book published by a German author, Rolf Hoeckel, in a book entitled Risse von Kriegschiffe des 17th Jh, which apparently was originally published sometime in the 1940s. I got hold of a copy of that book; the plans in it do indeed match the Revell kit quite closely. I remain uncertain whether Mr. Hoeckel drew them himself, or based them on some other source. (A couple of British authors, Clive Millward and Stanley Rodgers, published plans of Elizabethan ships at about the same time; I haven't compared their plans and Mr. Hoeckel's closely. Nor can I say for certain how, if at all, those plans relate to the ones in the Mondfeld book.)
What's most important, I think, is that the plans - whatever their origin - are good. I continue to put the Revell Golden Hind (along with the same company's two versions of the Mayflower) high on my personal list of the best plastic sailing ship kits.
This brings up another general topic: the reliability of the Mondfeld book, which seems to be pretty popular (and recently appeared in a new paperback edition). I'm not really familiar with Mr. Mondfeld's credentials; he seems to know a good deal about ships and ship models. But scarcely any of the illlustrations in that book are original. Dana McCalip's review of it makes the same observation I made the first time I looked at it: most of the drawings are copied out of other secondary sources. Dana comments that "it was quite obvious that Mondfeld had copied or traced the works of these other authors and made slight variations to avoid copyright infringement," and calls it "puzzling...that there are no acknowledgments as to the sources of information in the book or whom the illustrations were based on." He goes on to note that, while the book is useful as a highly generalized introduction to the subject, it is not to be relied upon for information about specific ships.
My opinion of the book is about the same. There aren't a lot of "beginner books" on ship modeling - and few of the ones that are available are much good. (Many of the "beginner book" authors, I fear, never got beyond beginner status themselves. And veteran ship modelers tend to write books and articles that show off advanced techniques, which beginners are likely to find either confusing or discouraging.) When people ask me to recommend books for newcomers to the hobby, Mr. Mondfeld's book is always high on the list I give them. (Others include George Campbell's Neophyte Shipmodeler's Jackstay and Ben Lankford's How To Build First-Rate Ship Models From Kits.) Dana McCalip says that the errors and omissions from Mr. Mondfeld's book are "a shame, because what could have been an outstanding compendium on the subject can only be considered average. I would still heartily recommend this book to any serious minded beginner as a book to use as a foundation on which to build a more comprehensive liberary." I agree.