Albeback52
-
Posts
2,954 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Media Demo
Posts posted by Albeback52
-
-
Its about £59.99 more than I would pay
Richard McC
"I'm kinda really disappointed with Italeri of late. Not so much the kits - I think they tended to get more of a bad rap than they ever really deserved - but more the pricing. The thing I loved about the Italero of old was that their pricing was really competitive, 19 years ago I remember their new Torando kit being half the price of the Airfix one which came out at around the same time, and stuff like the Hawk, Mirage 2000 and the helos were astoshingly good kits for the lower retail price. Ditto their reboxings of the old Trimaster kits like the FW190 - a tenner, genius! But now? A tenner for a repopped ESCI 1/72 armour kit from 40 years ago?
I guess their loss is Airfix and Revell's gain."
Inclined to agree.with the above quotes. I never had any issues with the generally good quality of the models. It's the prices!! A couple of years ago, I bought both the Italeri ME-323 Gigant and, Heinkel HE-111 Zwilling from a well known retailer of second hand & discontinued kits priced respectively at £23.99 and, £19.99. Now, the rrp of the ME323 & ME321 is around the £40 mark. Now, they are HUGE models & you get a lot of bits for your money but, even so.................!!! Kind of makes you worry about what the r r p of the forthcoming Sunderland kit will be.
As I said earlier, excessive pricing by some manufacturers has compelled me to make inroads into my stash - especially my little hoard of vintage Airfix! I really don't give a toss about whether they are accurate or not.If they look like the picture on the box, that's good enough for me! I simply enjoy putting my time to good use by getting the best I can just by using what comes out of the box. Simple pleasures!! Purists will doubtless shudder at some of these ( no offence lads & lasses!
) but, what the hell!! On my workbench as we speak are the Airfix DH-88 Comet & Mirage III. The former by the way is a year older than me!! -
you aving a larf!
That kits not too bad but its not too good either!
You can get the spanking Tamyia kit for £27!
Julien
It was a typo Julien - the price is actually £35.80 ( per review in this months Scale Aircraft Modelling). Even so, it's STILL more expensive than the Tamiya kit!! The reviewer also points out that the "kit is showing its age & has been outclassed by subsequent releases". You do get 6 decal options but, that hardly warrants the price hike!! Apologies to everyone for the error! Hope you didn't regurgitate your breakfasts upon reading my erroneous posting!
-
Every model company would be screwed if we stopped buying kits and actually built what was in our stashes - maybe they should consider that for a second!
Just got one of my regular email updates from Wonderland today. The Italeri B-17 is going for £34.99 ( r r p). Twice the cost of the Revell B-17. I like the Italeri Dorniers( I don't give a toss about the panel lines!! - I just sand them off!!
)I have 2 in my stash for a couple of World War 2 "what ifs" but, I certainly won't be paying nearly £30 for any more. I won't be paying nearly £35 for their B-17 either. I also noticed their 1/48 Skyraider is now nearly £45?? Looks like Italeri is now going to be added to my "banned" list!OK - Nobody is actually forced to pay these prices & it boils down to personal choice but, I agree the sentiments expressed by the above quote. Thank the maker for the likes of Airfix & Revell!!
I am actually now making inroads into my own stash so, I dont anticipate any new purchases for some time.( at least until the Revell Airbus A400 becomes available!!)
-
]Sorry folks for the incomplete previous post. I had attempted to add some photos of my TU-22 Blinder in non-airbrushed natural metal finish but, I am being SERIOUSLY f***** about by photobucket!! I thnk this bucket is about to be kicked!!!
Will try again later.However, in reply to the original question, I prefer to paint all my models the proper way so, I don't have an airbrush either. The colours used ;
Humbrol 56 Aluminium
Humbrol Chrome Silver 191
Metalcote Polished Aluminium
-
-
Yes, I did that on one of them, and it worked fine.
Thanks Jennings! Definitely going to give it try
-
While I generally agree that the fit of the parts is perhaps not as good as it might be !(
)I do not believe there is anything wrong with the kit that a bit of careful planning won't fix. It's worth the effort I reckon. On my own Vulcan kits, I used thin strips of plastic sheet on the top & bottom joining edges. Simples! It worked beautifully & all I had to do was sand down the excess. No filling required. I think the REAL problem is getting a seamless joint in the air intakes!! It's do-able but needs patience! It's also worth the effort. I took the easy way out on my Victor - intake blanks!!!While it's a challenge to build, I enjoyed building mine & I have 2 more to go!!. Be nice if Airfix did an upgrade/remould. I suspect that many of the fit problems are not necessarily due to poor engineering but more to do with moulding limitations at the time - 1983 was it?
There have been other useful tips here ( I didn't know about the freezer one!!). Stick with it & good luck!
Just a passing thought, has anyone tried gluing the upper & lower wing halves to their respective fuselage halves & THEN fitting the complete upper & lower assemblies together? I'm tempted to try it on my next Vulcan.
-
Yes, I'm sure I remember seeing this kit in an earlier Revell incarnation. Regardless of accuracy or otherwise I didn't buy it then & I won't buy it now. (In)accuracy has nothing to do with it. I don't do 1/144 tiddler scale.
-
For many years I built models of kits out of the box and from plans, but always just scale models of real planes, tanks, ships, to varying degrees of detail and accuracy. After a while it kind of all got boring. I was just copying in a smaller scale, what others had built in full size reality.
Then one day I visited a neighbor who was a medical doctor, He showed me some wood model airplanes he had made and they were to his design. He said just making a model of a real thing was boring to him. He liked the creative aspect of inventing his own designs.
That stuck with me and I ended up a sculptor but often I used parts of plastic scale models in my work.
I never forgot that meeting. Now when I make models, as opposed to sculpture, I make changes in the models to make them my own designs. That is what gives me the greatest pleasure.
Its a big wide hobby. Some make models as small scale copies as accurately as possible..
Some make model kits and add their own touches, or have fun making them without 100% accuracy.
Some, like me make models to my designs, or just kit-bash a model or two into what I like.
Its a hobby, enjoy it any way you like.
Stephen
Absolutely!
I have recently turned to the "dark side" ( what if modelling!) Don't know why I didn't do it earlier. While designing is beyond me, I can at least let my imagination run riot and add my own personal touches with my "what might have beens". Besides, nobody can EVER say that a "what if" is inaccurate as, the "real" subject does not exist! In addition to my B-52J ( currently undergoing major rebuild following an accident involving a vacuum cleaner!!) with its 6 CFM -56 engines, winglets & butterly tail AND, my TU-22 "Firestorm" (long range interceptor verion of the TU-22 "Blinder", I have the following projects on my "what if " list ;Boeing B-56 ( actually a B-47 with 4 J57 engines!!).Currently under construction, this one will be a British operated test aircraft assigned to the Aircraft & Armament Experimental Establishment. This beautiful aircraft will look really neat in the "raspberry ripple" paint scheme! (this is based on an actual proposal for a re engined B-47)
McDonnell XF-88 - this will be built as the F-88 Tactical fighter following cancellation of the F-84 Thunderstreak! ( I have 2 of the old Lindberg 1/48 XF-88 kits)
Westland/ Douglas Firedrake A1 ( a k a Westland Wyvern) - a licence built replacement for the Douglas Skyraider to be used by the USAF/ US Navy.
Boeing/ Airbus A380M Samson miltary transport - the replacement for the Lockheed C5B! (I'm sure THAT one will get a few noses out of joint!!
- no offence of any kind intended! It's just a bit of fun!)XB-70 Valkyrie with GTD-21 Drone
R R Trent engined Lockheed Galaxy C1 ( RAF)
Poetic licence or sheer insanity!!
Take your pick!! Personally, modelling has never been so much fun! -
Hi Keef.
I agree it isn't " All IPMS' fault". I, like very many others, have gained a lot of useful information and help from IPMS, in lots of ways. Some excellent and knowledgable folk are to be found in IPMS.
Sadly however, there are some rather, shall we say, overzealous types who get attracted to IPMS. They do tend to get more attention than they deserve and sometimes have much more impact than they ought. I think it would improve IPMS if they wound some of those guys (and they are always guys!) back a bit. If your local is more relaxed, great. A habit to keep on.
Personally I am more ineterested in overall look and feel than rivet counting perfection - partly because real aeroplanes have faults and oddities which crop up for various odd reasons, and anyway, I'm not that good a modeller.
I did have an amusing encounter with an IPMS accuracy zealot at a show recently. The undercarriage arrangement on his example of one type would have had any aircraft engineer wincing. I greatly enjoyed his criticism of a kit which I had also recently built, of a type which as it happened I had flown. It was so plain the poor chap had little understanding of basic aerodynamics, and I suspect he had never flown in his life. (Other than as a passenger) That's fine, but then a little caution and either doubt or humility would be handy. For some reason, the worst of the real 'rivet counters' tend not to have any of either.....
That does tend to upset non modelling pilots and engineers who come across these types. They then are apt to assume that all we modellers are obssessive and daft as brushes. (And, frustratingly, assume that modellers and reggie spotters are all the same thing)
The awkward squad of modellers aren't all IPMS by any stretch, but that is where the greatest concentration of zealotry seems to be commonly found ! Perhaps within IPMS is where it would be easiest to encourage a more relaxed approach from some ?
But hey - it is only a hobby. If it pleases them to be so precise and so 'right', I gues it doesn't hurt - and gives the rest of us some quiet amusement.
Back to the topic - yes I think 'poetic licence' is a good thing. Most of us are making, or trying to make, 'impressions' of the real thing. To me, some licence is essential, since we are not using the same materials as the real beasts. And it can be a bit of fun - like that Vulcan B3. I reckon that must be the planned USAF version, with that tandem cockpit.
Cheers,
John B
Than you John.That was a nice compliment about my Vulcan . I appreciate it! You know, it never occurred to me to build a USAF version!. I think you have just inspired me to build another!! It would look good in S E Asia Camouflage!! Actually, it's a 4 seater - the rear crew situated behind & slightly below the tandem cockpit . I have since drilled out a couple of windows to show where the rear cockpit is!. -
Would have thought there'd be a ready market for flap sets as accessories.
-
Given the wisdom & common sense approach of our present government in regard to defence spending, I suggest the likelihood of these aircraft ever reaching UK service is about zero squared. More chance of seeing pigs fly so, why don't we just paint our models pink!
-
Its a shame that some stuff I would love to see in kit form will probably never see the light of day. Probably due to a limited interest. Sadly Airfix most likely wouldnt get their money back due to insufficient sales. If Airfix produced any of the following I would be delighted.
Argosy
Hastings
Tri Star
Belfast
VC10
We can but dream.
...and if I could just add
Beverley
Brittania
Andover
York
Belfast ( yes, I know you listed it but, I'd like to list it again!!
)Comet (all versions)
Avro Tudor
Argonaut
and also, how about a new
B-47
B-52
Short Stirling
Hampden
Whitley
1/72 Scale please - none of this 1/144 tiddler scale nonsense!!
Not that I ask much!
I sometimes despair at the often unimaginative & repetitive "new" subjects that are foisted on us . Mere mention of yet more Spitfires,Mustangs, F-16s etc etc just sends me on a trip to Yawnorama City. As for "limited interest" in certain subjects? Well, if Revell can justify producing 2 versions of a kit for the Junkers JU-290 ( only 25 or so real ones built!) and, the Blohm & Voss BV-222 ( another splendid kit!) or, Italeri can kit a large GLIDER!! ( Messerschmitt ME-321) and, its powered version ( ME-323) then surely there is a place for many of the items listed by myself and others?
Enough of the fantasies! Time to take my pills!
-
::
Keep in mind:1. Distances are measured in hundreds, if not thousands of miles, so it's cost prohibitive in most cases. Many US states are physically larger than the entire UK, and things are much more spread out. Some of my UK friends were astounded that I'd never seen an SR-71 outside a museum. The only places you could see one fly (when they were flying) were at Beale AFB and Edwards AFB, both of which are at least a five day drive from where I live. Imagine driving from the UK to Afghanistan and you get the idea...
2. There is no US equivalent of Hannants other than Squadron (+/-)
3. About 99.999% of Americans wouldn't know a P-51 from a Sherman tank, unlike the UK, where just about everyone has at least heard of a Spitfire, a Hurricane, a Lancaster, a Vulcan, and knows which of those is jet powered.
4. To most Americans, an air show is an excuse to put a cooler of beer in the back of the car and get sunburned.
If you haven't experienced both, it's impossible to describe the cultural difference in the mindset around air shows in the UK vs. the US. Enthusiast shows like the EAA's big shows at Oshkosh and Lakeland (Florida) are different, but your average military base open house or local air show are totally different affairs in the US vs. the UK. The UK is *much* more "air-minded" than the US ever has been.
Fair comments. I suspect that many of us on this little island DO tend to forget just how vast the USA is! I think I am just as guilty of that myself. As far as the SR-71 is concerned, I am fortunate enough to have seen this magnificent beast at Mildenhall, Farnborough & Fairford. All flying! Unforgettable. Only thing better than a Vulcan!! ( or Valiant!!)
-
I can see a downside to adding that interior detail. It might well encourage scroats to pick up the model for a 'peer' into the interior. Best not to encourage 'em.
Anyone want to start a pool as to how amny Valiant builds end up on here?
W
Or, how many end up in the "what if " forum!!
-
Well I just checked the site and it is listed under 1/72 releases, kit number 04800. No mentiont of a 1/144 kit.
Cue- sigh of relief!!. A 1/72 C-17 would be nice as well!!
-
I think this thread demonstrates one of the main problems with talking about the Valiant. At some point the conversation is going to drift off to the far more spectacular Vulcan. I wonder what proportion of people who buy a Valiant will have already got a Vulcan and Victor?
Have 2 Victors & 2 Vulcans. Need at least 3 Valiants!! ( possibly more if some kind soul comes up with a Valiant B2 conversion set!!
-
Y'know, the more I look at the Aerofax book, the more I think that if *somebody* doesn't do a Mk.2 conversion, there truly is no justice in the world. I'm not sure how such a relatively simple change could take a rather conservative, frumpy looking airplane and turn it into a sleek black beauty, but it did!
Couldn't agree more! The Mk 2 looked really mean!! I'm not usually one for buying after market bits & pieces but, if someone produced a conversion set, I'd probably buy at least 3!!!
-
If they had half a clue, they'd do a new 1/72 C-130 to match the quality of their C-160 kit. Modular to allow a C-130B thru J would be a cinch. But instead we get a model of an airplane that may have a couple of hundred built at some point far into the future instead of a major airlifter that's been around for 55+ years, built in the thousands, and in service in every corner of the globe - and for which there is no really decent kit in any scale.
Maybe they will and, I hope they eventually might. However, for my money, they've made a wise decision. Regardless of how good,bad or indifferent the available C-130 kits are, there is plenty of choice available. I'd prefer to see a wholly new subject like this rather than yet another rehash of a subject that's been well covered already. As to "really decent" C-130 kits? Well, I don't personally know how this would be defined. I think I've built every available 1/72 scale C-130 over the years. I've not had any problem with any of them but, that's just me! There is of course another factor. The A400 may or may not be well known outside Europe but,there is hardly a country within Europe ( at least within the EU anyway) that ISN'T involved in one way or another. It may therefore appeal more to the "home" market than another "foreign" aircraft? I am sure Revell has done its marketing
I really don't subscribe to the view that the numerical production total of any particular aircraft should determine whether or not a kit should be produced.Only about 25 Junkers JU-290s were built and yet, Revell have seen fit to produce 2 incarnations of this magnificent beastie! Only 68 E3-D AWACS have been built and yet, there are (to my knowledge) 7 kits ( ranging from 1/300 - 1/72) produced. To date, 230 C-17s have been built. Given the cost & specialised nature of the aircraft I suggest this number is unlikely to increase significantly. I hope however that this relatively small number should not be used as the basis for determining whether or not any more kits should be produced.
Referring to the post on the alleged 1/144 scale A400 - I really hope that IS a mistake. I don't like that tiddler scale. I'm sure the original announcement WAS for a 1/72 kit. Maybe they're doing both?
-
I quite enjoyed building the kit. Picked it up for about a tenner on evilbay. All I added was an aftermarket bang seat. Other than that, it was straight from the box. Decals were a mixture from out of my bits & pieces box! As to accuracy or otherwise? Well, I don't really care. It looks like a GR1 & nobody who has seen it is going to be any the wiser so, I'm happy with it!
Nice little model. Maybe Revell could do a brand new Harrier series in 1/32? Probably get 4 for the price of the Trumpeter kit!
-
It's being sent out to UK retailers at the end of the month (June) as far as I know.
Hmmm!
I'm heading for Waddington Air Show in July. Be nice if I could pick up few Valiant shaped souvenirs from a few well known traders there.............!!
Well, one can only dream!!
-
Yes, well, some of the guys are overly obsessive about the models. Well, that is how they enjoy the hobby. But unfortunately their close-mindedness ruins it for others.
Funny thing is I have known more than one professional model maker and none of them were that obsessive over accuracy and putting in all the details. Yes, when building a refinery model they have to be over obsessive and 100% correct, because that model is made to check clearances and interferences. So then they are obsessive. It is like when I make my drawings. I am a professional draftsman (draughtsman in England) and what I draw will be built in real life. So I cannot make an error, period. But I do not let that form of obsessiveness carry over into my everyday life.
Obsessiveness in a person's hobby simply reflects his own personal make up and perhaps personal problems.
It is unfortunate when the obsessive ones ruin it for everyone else by their insistence that theirs is the only way to make a model and all others are wrong.
They can be like the religious fanatic who absolutely believes that only his church is correct and all the hundreds of millions of other people will all go to hell.
Unfortunately, as far as I am concerned when the accuracy-uber-alles guys take over an IPMS contest it is a case of the inmates running the asylum.
Stephen
Stephen, it's pity we're on opposite sides of the pond!! I'm sure we could swap a host of stories over a beer or 10!!
-
The problem seems to be that there are two sides in modeling. The purist accuracy uber alles guys and the relaxed, leats make a model for the fun of it types.
Yes, they are always sniping at one another.
Why? Well I can think of any number of reasons but I wont. It will take too much time and is not worth the effort. But I will say that IPMS is a major factor in making this differentiation. The IPMS contests I have seen seem to emphasize accuracy. Just making a model for the fun of it seems to be a form of heresy.
There should be two categories for modelers in IPMS contests, one for accuracy and one for making an attractive model. There should also be two different sets of judges, one for accuracy and one for overall quality of the model without using accuracy as a criteria.
I have news for some of you guys, we are not doing anything of importance. We are not making the real things, we are merely making small scale copies of real things that others have created. We do this for personal satisfaction, for fun, for pleasure, for a feeling of accomplishment and for our own amusement. So lighten up guys, fighting over accuracy vs overall quality is a stupid tempest in a teapot. Let the IPMS contests reflect both attitudes.
Live and let live.
Stephen
Stephen, I couldn't have put it better myself!! As you may have gathered from my posting, I am the victim of one such incidence of an attitude that , to my view, borders on snobbery!! This is one reason why I have never joined IPMS or, any other modelling organisation. I don't think I have ever knowingly or intentionally decried the efforts of anyone who does belong to what I shall describe as the "purist" school of thought. It is not my place to do so. I believe I am entitled to the same courtesy/respect in return. By the same token, my mind is always open to advice/suggestions & even practical assistance in improving my skills! Even at the age of 53, I think I still have room for improvement.There is I think a very fine dividing line between hobby and obsession. Is it possible that some people have in fact crossed that line in search of modelling perfection? If I can give another example, a very good friend of mine IS definitely a member of the "purist" school
He is without doubt a very skilled modeller but, I think I sometimes drive him to despair! One such example is the Vulcan I am working on right now. Another,(one of several in my fertile breeding ground of an imagination) is for a SINGLE seat Beaufighter - with the rear cockpit removed & a shortened fuselage! I'm afraid he just cannot grasp the concept of modelling for its own sake! He shook his head & closed his eyes upon witnessing my B-58 "Vengeance " resplendent in anti flash white & 617 sqn markings!!Fortunately, any "sniping" always takes the form of good natured banter and,on occasion, Douglas & I have actually exchanged useful tips!! !! My other 'alf (bless her!) gets no end of amusement as he & I have yet another "go" at each other! That's how it should be. It's a pity the "real " world cannot be just like that. I have not yet told him about my MR-135 ASW/Maritime patrol aircraft which will be based on the Airfix E-3D Sentry!
-
Thats the point I was trying to make - manufacturers should strive to get the accuaracy right so a modeller can just build the bloody thing in the knowledge thats what provided looks reasonably like the real thing.
In fact the 'rivet counter" should be the ally of the "it looks like a xxx to me" modeller ( perhaps we should call them Rivet Acceptors?) - because without the former pointing out just how cack some models are accuracy wise, certain manufacturers will just continue to pop out nicely moulded but inaccurate models ( well thats the theory!!), allowing the latter to get on with just building models. Personally I probably fall more into into the rivet counter side than acceptor. But rivet counting should be constructive - theres no point saying the HobbyBoss Tornado is inaccurate unless you point out where and how, and hopefully suggest a way to rectify it.
What always puzzles me is why on certain forums the 2 sides ( if they are indeed sides) like to interfere in each others threads: I mean if theres a thread on the innacuracy of HobbyBosses Ta152 nose radiator ( which is indeed wrong) there's little point in posting a " well it looks OK to me, bleedin' rivet counters!" type remark, just as there is little point posting a comment on a thread of an out of the box build of said model saying its 'fatally flawed' because the nose hasnt been corrected.
The funny thing is - you may be a closet rivet counter after all!!
- I mean you realised the turrets werent right so used parts from other models to improve the appearance. LOL - thats semi-counting at least, perhaps you are a Rivet Estimater - which in reality is what most of us are to certain degress.Ultimately its an individual hobby , and no one should denigrate another modeller for the choice they make on how to build.
Cheers
Jonners
PS thats one weird Vulcan
- weird but stangely handsome! NiceThanks Jon. In a sense, you're right! Maybe I AM a closet "rivet estimator"
You're first point about manufacturers striving for accuracy is certainly right on the button! I just take it for granted that they HAVE done their research!! But then, I'm really lazy so, it suits me to take that viewpoint!!My "research" such as it is tends to be limited to checking pictures of the subject. The gun turrets on the Stirling ( as indeed on other Airfix bomber kits of the era) were generally poorly executed & ANYTHING had to be better!!
Even a non purist such as myself could tell that!!
) but, what the hell!! On my workbench as we speak are the Airfix DH-88 Comet & Mirage III. The former by the way is a year older than me!! 
Will try again later.
- I mean you realised the turrets werent right so used parts from other models to improve the appearance. LOL - thats semi-counting at least, perhaps you are a Rivet Estimater - which in reality is what most of us are to certain degress.
Just Finished The Valiant
in Ready for Inspection - Aircraft
Posted
Looks like another trip to Halfords for me for MORE appliance white!! Lol!!
I think the Valiant would look nice in the Sand/Mid Stone/ Black scheme!.
ps - well done!