Giorgio N

Well mate, then I'll stop bothering you with my moans, even if I have a feeling that may be common to many other modellers. In any case I've been on the forum long enough to know when it's time to stop wasting time in a discussion, better let others keep the thread going with information that may be of use to others

Designing a mould to allow different variants has pros and cons, for both the manufacturer and the modeller A "modular" mould is more expensive. Yes, the manufacturer could make more money by offering more variants, but does increasing the number of variants by X result in increasing sales by the same number ? Generally no because there are many modellers who would just be happy with a model of a certain type, regardless of variant. There's also the matter than making a mould for extra parts to change to a new variant may not necessarily be cheaper than making say a totally new fuselage., so much that some manufacturers have in the past preferred to follow this path. For the modeller modular moulds often lead to troublesome fit, see for example the Fujimi Spitfire XIV/XIX with their choice of high and low back. Such kits also often suffer from compromises, for example the need to fill panel lines in the same Fujimi kits. So we have companies that prefer to design modular moulds with extra parts for the different variants (Hasegawa and their 1/72 Phantoms for example). Others that prefer to make brand new parts for all main components (Eduard with their Spitfires, where each variant has different fuselage and/or wings). And those that don't bother with different variants at all

It's not that British modellers don't buy on the web, most of them do. These kits however appeared at a time when this kind of commerce was just starting for many and later the availability of these kits always seemed to be spotty. The fact that postage from Australia to Europe was often expensive didn't help. A number of large European shops had them or at least could get them, often not all variants though I lived for a good part of 2009 in NSW and have visited Australia for one or two month every couple years since, so whenever I was in the Country I used to order goods from the various local manufacturers to take advantage of the way cheaper domestic postage rates (and then HPM moved to Singapore... but postage to Oz was still better than to Europe). By then however I noticed how each time I wanted to order something there were only a few Canberra variants available each time. Nothing strange considering that these are afterall short run kits, made in smaller numbers compared to mainstream products. I should add that I always had great service from HPM, regardless of the Canberra availability situation, so it was one of the shops I was happy to buy from. I will sure build my B.2 and the other HPm kits at some point (well, maybe not the Havoc...), I built Ventura kits so I should have enough skills... still, I don't know if I'd have the nerves to build a whole collection of them... I do envy the patience of those modellers who build these kits without worries. I should add that there are several very nice builds on this same forum, of both Canberras and other types

Oh yes, forgot that one. A short run kit but a modern enough one. Speaking of which, the B.8 was also offered in short run form by High Planes in their wide range of Canberra variants They're often ignored because they were never easy to get. Add to this that the little more work they require is not little at all and many modellers would be put off by the look of the parts on these kits. I consider myself a decently experienced modeller but while I have several HP kits in my stash (including a B.2) I'yet to find the willingness to start one...

I wouldn't say that the PR.9 really was the most represented in kit form, afterall I can only remember 2 1/72 kits, from Matchbox and later Airfix. The B.8 also saw 2 kits, from Frog and again Airfix, so would be equally badly represented.... I would agree with Rich that the fortunes of the PR.9 as a model subject are due to this being the last variant to be used in "first line" roles, so maybe they were seen as more interesting compared to the earlier variants. Moreover, when Matchbox issued their PR.9 there were already a B.6 and a B.8 on the market, so it made sense for them to issue a variant not yet available. Regarding a new Airfix Canberra in the future, nobody knows yet, apart maybe from Airfix. For sure they have the numbers relative to the sales of their previous kits of the type, so they will be able to assess the potential of such a subject... or maybe the lack of such potential ! We all assume that a new Canberra would be a great seller, but maybe the market of people really interested in buying one at the kind of price that we could expect from a new kit is not as high as we think....

Mike, I fully agree that the SH kit is today superior to anything else and really for someone who wants to build a nice model it would be the one to suggest. When it comes to Hobbyboss easy kits however I generally give them the benefit of being aimed at a very different kind of enthusiasts, be it younger modellers or those who want to focus on painting without bothering with much assembly and want to build many models in different markings without too much expense. In this IMHO they can be a winner, although some are better than others. At the same time if the cost of such kits gets too close to that of "standard" kits of decent quality, like many from Academy, part of their appeal falls off the way I have similar views about the Zvezda's easy assembly kits, that are even nicer than HBs (actually much nicer...). As a Spitfire fan I'll always take an Eduard Mk.IX over anything else to build my favourite subjects but if Zvezda issued one similar to their previous kits I'd probably still buy a few to build in half a day to cover the many schemes I'd like to show...at least if the price is right. I'd probably do the same with the P-40 if I were particularly fond of this aircraft.. that in theory I'm not, although since I have 7 in the stash maybe in reality I am a P-40 fan without knowing it...

It's not the speed of the aircraft compared to that of the missile that matters, what's important is how much time the aircraft gives to the fire control system of the missile launcher to achieve a good firing solution. Of course this at the same time means that the aircraft has less time to properly aim its weapons, so decreasing hit probability.

The Hobbyboss E and M seem to be based on the Academy kits, so seem to share the same shapes. In addition they are simplified kits compared to the competition... that is not necessarily a bad thing if the modeller likes this kind of kits. The problem is that the Academy kits can be found at prices only slightly higher than the HB ones, so I wonder if the latter are today decent value for money or not....

The auxiliary blow-in doors on the front fuselage were not present from the start on the G but were introduced during production. I've often seen reference to aircraft in Block 20 being the first with these doors, however other documents state that the modification was introduced with serial number 51-1067 in Block 10. You can see here that 51-1065 did not have the door: https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Upcoming/Photos.aspx?igphoto=2000544586 However... I have a picture of 51-1066 with the blow-in doors,.. so it could be that the first was actually 51-1066 or this was one of the aircraft on wich the blow-in doors were retrofitted. As the picture I have shows the aircraft in service in Turkey, this would have been taken later in her career. And then I have a picture of 51-1077 without blow-in doors! And more... most pictures of aircraft from Block 11 do not show the doors, meaning that most likely this block did not have them, see for example 51-9997 here in Belgian service: https://www.belgian-wings.be/republic-f-84g-thunderjet-part-2/fz-48 And then, from the same website, here's 51-10238 from the same Block 11, here with blow-in doors... https://www.belgian-wings.be/republic-f-84g-thunderjet-part-2/fz-70 And pictures of 51-10071 and -10074 do show them too, that could mean that they were introduced at some point during the production of Block-11 aircraft So really it's a matter of selecting an aircraft and trying to get as much reference on this aircraft as possible, at least for blocks 10 and 11 when some aircraft show them and some don't. Aircraft from block 20 on seem to all have the doors, block 5 and lower don't.. but I can't tell if none were retrofitted at some point.

If the "new" AZ kits are the same they sold under the Legato brand, I'll leave them on the shop shelves.. my memories of these kits are soft details and lot of flash, making some parts very hard to clean to an acceptable level

There's no such thing as a printed price guide so if you want to sell your kits your best bet is to look at what others ask for the same. With kits that are currently in production it's easy, look at the current price and take something off this. With OOP kits things are a bit more difficult, you can check Ebay and shops like Kingkit, that specialise in pre-owned kits, to get an idea and then decide for a price depending on box and parts conditions etc. Keep in mind that value of an OOP kit may change over time, if the kit has not been reissued in some time then price may increase. If the kit represents the only way to build a certain subject its price may skyrocket, but if a new modern kit of the same appears the price will drop immediately. There are also "regional" factors, the same kit that in Britain is worth little may be worth a lot in a different country because represents a subject of some particular interest. The exception may be old Airfix kits, for which I seem to remember having seen a website with some price guides depending on year of issue, style of box etc. These "classic" kits suffer less from the price variations I mentioned above as generally they are spighe after by collectors more than modellers

I used them for a while in the past and found them very good, with a nice smooth finish. The only thing I didn't like was the glass container with metal cap: once the jar is opened, it's hard to keep it properly closed and the paint quickly becomes unuseable. I always liked their FS matched colours for accuracy, don't know about others. IIRC they have not been exported outside the US for some years, so becoming hard to find in many countries

In that case the only option is to wait and hope for a Hasegawa reissue. Or move up to 1/48 scale.. the prices I've seen for the Hasegawa kit are often higher than the cost of a new Hobbyboss 1/48 kit. This suffers from some accuracy issues but can sure lead to an impressive model.. and is currently available

If you just want an Australian 111, then an FB-111 or F-111G (same variant, different designation) would work from the box as the RAAF used a number of these. Just add decals

We have to keep in mind what the world was like when the GPU-5 was developed: the cold war was still in full swing and the enemy the A-10 had to face was very different from the machine gun armed Talibans they ended fighting against for most of their career. The 30 mm gun was acknowledged as being an effective tank killer but by the mid '80s there were serious (and founded) doubs about the capability of the A-10 to survive in the Central European theatre. The Soviets were developing more and more advanced light SAMs and fighters capable of tracking low flying objects and against such threat the A-10 armour would have been useless while the low speed was seen as a serious disadvantage. The GPU-5 was seen as a way to get the GAU-8 gun in the air under faster and ideally less vulnerable platforms, so maintaining a tank-killing capability without the A-10 drawbacks. As seen, the concept just didn't work and since by the time the pod was tested in action the Cold War was over, it was abandoned.