HMSLion

The book isn't complete, not by several thousand rows of trees. Tom Wolfe did not talk to the Flight Directors. Chris Kraft's memoirs tell the story from that perspective. Then you have to start reading between the lines. The Mercury missions took place at the cusp of a major change in the way that flight test operations were run. During the Golden Age of the late 1940s and early to mid 1950s, there wasn't a lot of telemetry, a test pilot might have one flight test engineer, and the pilot was very much in charge. Starting with the X-15 program, telemetry became a lot more capable, the number of flight test engineers went up, and the complexity went through the roof. And with Mercury, there was a massive fight over who was really in charge of the mission...the astronaut or the flight director. Kraft won that argument. Another aspect that doesn't get paid enough attention was that the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps sent their A-team, the USAF sent their B-list. Four Mercury astronauts were Naval Aviators. Two were full Commanders with squadron command experience, one was the Class Desk for fighters at the Bureau of Aeronautics, and one was a Lt. Commander with a VP background. The USAF sent two Captains and a Major...one grade lower than their Navy/Marine Corps counterparts.

The word from the employees is that they no longer have employment. Although I agree that the molds will resurface. The O/100 is reported to be about 99% done...it would ideally get a final tweak but could be released now. Although the Triplane would be the big money-maker. That's a license to print money.

I agree 100%. Although I think the economy will recover more quickly than people may think, the truth is that a lot of plastic is molded in China, a lot of decals are printed in Italy...and those two countries were hit hard. We're looking at a 90 day slide in schedules, plus restart time for production processes, shipping time, etc. I would expect the total impact to be four to six months. WRT Wingnut Wings, I'm not certain about NZ laws and terms used. Here in the USA, many workers have been "furloughed" - loss of pay, possible loss of benefits, can apply for unemployment benefits...but there is a clear intent to rehire. Given the situation in NZ, I could see that happening to the WNW staff, easily.

I suspect you'll see it eventually. Even if WNW went under, the molds and CAD/CAM designs are worth money...and a WNW-quality Dr.1 would be a red-hot seller.

Complete with the Very Special Display Base, no doubt.

More than you might think. The Platz RQ-4N (sic) kit completely misses the reshaping of the nose section. A Triton has a significantly blunter nose (it was designed to house an anticollision radar), not to mention the EO/IR turret. About the only change they got right on that kit is the radome for the search radar.

There are a fair number of photos available online. Be sure you have the right version, though. The Global Hawk family has a lot of minor branches.

What...you want another Me-109? Or F-35A? At least this is different. I'll warn you - in 1/48, it'll be a big model. The actual aircraft has a 131 foot wingspan. I could wish for an RQ-4A, there are more potential marking variants (all-white test aircraft, "tuxedo" gray-and-white initial deployment scheme, U.S. Navy dark gray scheme, and NASA all-white scheme). And am eagerly awaiting a decent MQ-4C kit.

I built the original release from Skunkworks. It's a nice kit, goes together well with few problems. I've also got a 1/72 version, which makes an interesting comparison to kits of tactical jets in the same scale. Or parked next to an RQ-4. Those things are big. I just wish someone would release an injected RQ-4A (which is significantly smaller than the RQ-4B), and an MQ-4 Triton (which has a lot of OML changes, the Platz "RQ-4N" really doesn't capture the shapes).

Yup. The recon Firebees would probably be better sellers.

I'd buy one, preferably with VX-20 markings. It would go really well with a decent MQ-4C Triton kit.

Is that Tu-144 a new mold? Ah...no. ICM plastic.

Hopefully they will release one in U.S. Naval Test Pilot School markings. Which are pretty colorful.

Anything from the Dreadnought era is a Good Thing. Though I think a British battlecruiser would have made more sense.

That doesn't surprise me. Anything other than tactical aircraft has an uphill fight in the marketplace. Especially in the large, expensive scales. And the point about this year being flooded with high-dollar kits is true.

1/32 would be my bet. With Wingnut Wings in operation, it's become the default for First World War kits.

The big headache is that the 1/72 descent module of the LEM is badly out of dimensions vertically. The ascent module looks OK, but the overall proportions of the LEM are out of whack. Can't speak to the 1/48 version. That being said, I will buy at least one Saturn, probably two. One for myself, the other for a display at the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School.

It may be basic, but it is an AH-56. And the aftermarket needs something to do.

I'm also perplexed as to the absence of a Be.2. Not that it's on the top of my personal want list, but it's like the Lancaster...once you are building a full-scale replica, you have the data to make a kit. Especially with modern CAD/CAM methods.

I probably won't buy one. More like three or four.

I'm actually surprised WNW has not released a DH-5. Given the Australian connection, it would be a natural subject. Not that it would be my personal first choice, but it would suit WNW perfectly.

Nevertheless, the CSM Nieuport is superb. I'm not sure that WNW has all that much design capacity left over, between the Lancaster and the O/400. Which indicates that a single-seat aircraft is likely. I could easily see a Viper-powered Se.5a...a new engine sprue is all that is needed. Although I'd dearly love a Dr.1 or D.VIII.

I think that a reasonably strong case could be made for a prepaid subscription model. You pay your money up front, get the kit (or a refund if it falls through) if there is enough interest.

This is true. The questions I'd be looking at would be: 1. Can I crowdsource any of the research or CAD design? 2. Can the capital be crowdsourced?

No, you have to pick a subject that nobody else has done and will sell enough kits to turn a net profit. Or a subject that has been done, but which you can do sufficiently better to warrant tossing the old kits and buying yours. Kindly note that the Chinese makers have been doing truckloads of prototype and low-production AFVs.