Jump to content

1/72 - EE Canberra B.2/T.4 by S&M Models - released - B.6 in November 2018


Homebee

Recommended Posts

I would dearly love the B2, 100 Squadron but I would certainly be changing the individual code and serial.

I dont mind paying  a price if its the only one available that has the detail required of such a NEW kit.

None of us would pay a price of a kit that falls short of the detail and quality

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

 

Where does the 1000 production run come from? The SM Prop Provost and Sycamore kits are great.

 

Why won't S&M kits sell worldwide?

 

Perplexed, HD3

 

The 1000 kit production is down to tooling life, moulds are not produced in steel like a conventional 'Airfix' kit and ware quickly, are cheaper to make but this pushes up the unit cost. The Sycamore and Piston Provosts were 1000 of each, so the Provost is actually +/-300 of each boxing (S&M did three), and he STILL has stock left two+ years after its release, its not that easy to sell a thousand kits these days for a price you need to make enough profit to re-invest in the next project.

 

Mel sells to a proportion of his stock at trade to Hannants so they can handle export orders, but he needs to sell the majority as direct sales to get the better margin, or charge a lot more if selling mainly to trade.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Colin

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the choices are - 

1. Put up with the old Airfix kit (going for silly prices on eBay) and then finding an Aeroclub nose

2. Take ones chance on the flashy, no locating pin and heavy sprue gate kit from High Planes or -

3. Just dig deeper into our pockets and buy this latest S&M kit. 

 

I suppose this latest offering probably stacks up well considering the other choices on offer. I'll wait for the reviews and sprue shots first before I commit to one. 

 

Cheers.. Dave 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, azzaob said:

I hope it sells well. Great to see someone take a punt etc...and if it sells through Hannants, it is at least accessible to us in the colonies :)

Mel can be contacted directly and will ship abroad. Sometimes his website is not punter friendly. I have Mel's direct email if it's needed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a quick word with Mel. He had the first CADs, but he was not happy so sent them back for correction. The three main areas he has stressed on getting right is the nose, the canopy (the CADs were a bit too flat), and the tip tanks. I didn't ask how many he has planned for.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

CAD's look fairly basic, however they do capture the overall look of the Canberra quite well I think.

She was always a smooth good looking aircraft, so hopefully S&M have captured the Canberra's shape nicely.

 

Cheers... Dave

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/06/2017 at 6:52 AM, Rabbit Leader said:

So the choices are - 

1. Put up with the old Airfix kit (going for silly prices on eBay) and then finding an Aeroclub nose

2. Take ones chance on the flashy, no locating pin and heavy sprue gate kit from High Planes or -

3. Just dig deeper into our pockets and buy this latest S&M kit. 

 

I suppose this latest offering probably stacks up well considering the other choices on offer. I'll wait for the reviews and sprue shots first before I commit to one. 

 

Cheers.. Dave 

 

Not sure where you're getting the idea that the High Planes models are "chancy".   As far as I have been concerned they have been accurate, if a little primitive.  They use resin for their interior details and wheels.   Their fuselage is shaped correctly and while it does require a little more work, what you get is well worth the effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rickshaw said:

 

Not sure where you're getting the idea that the High Planes models are "chancy".   As far as I have been concerned they have been accurate, if a little primitive.  They use resin for their interior details and wheels.   Their fuselage is shaped correctly and while it does require a little more work, what you get is well worth the effort.

 

Just to clarify my post - there is no mention of the word 'accuracy' with reference to the High Planes kit - please do not add words against my posts that simply do not exist. 

I believe the chances of 'me / the average modeller' completing this kit to a level that I would be happy with (after paying upwards of $60 Aussie dollars for it) is akin to taking a big chance.

Good luck to you and anyone else out there who have succeeded - I'll pass and pay similar money for this new S & M kit.

 

Cheers.. Dave.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rabbit Leader said:

 

Just to clarify my post - there is no mention of the word 'accuracy' with reference to the High Planes kit - please do not add words against my posts that simply do not exist. 

I believe the chances of 'me / the average modeller' completing this kit to a level that I would be happy with (after paying upwards of $60 Aussie dollars for it) is akin to taking a big chance.

Good luck to you and anyone else out there who have succeeded - I'll pass and pay similar money for this new S & M kit.

 

Cheers.. Dave.

 

 

 

I have not used the word "accurate" as anything more than a descriptive term to describe the kit in question.  I agree, you did not use the term but you implied it in your comments.  As far as I am concerned, I am indeed quite happy to pay that for an accurate, Australian made kit of the Canberra in most of it's major guises.   The High Planes kits are indeed IMHO, an excellent representation of the Canberra, be it the British/Australia/American produced versions.   I apologise if you feel that to question your comment is well, rude.   However, I will do so.   I dislike people who feel that simply because they are not at the Arts' end of the world's sphere, they are above reproach. 

 

As I have said, it requires extra work, I admit but the output is IMHO invariably pleasing to the eye and the builder is provided with a level of satisfaction which surpasses building a more expensive, less easily obtainable, low production rate kit.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A run of 1000 kits is reasonable. Mel made the error of ordering 10,000 1/144 Viscounts. He admits it was not his best move.

As for kit pricing, he knocked out the first 100 Hastings at £100 each and made zero profit. The second 100 go for £125, so at least he is getting a return on them.

I'm not going to guess at the cost of the Canberra, but it is plastic, whereas the Hastings was resin.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 All very interesting! I like the choice of a Tatty Ton B.2, right up my street! it must be a hard decision for a manufacturer as to which scheme to go with. I'm unsure about the CAD rendering something looks a bit odd around the back end but I will reserve any definite thoughts until I see the plastic. The canopy looks good, which is nice.  The HP Canberra kit's are for the moment the most accurate Canberra's around in shape, if anything they suffer from trying to cover too many type's from the one kit very much like Airfix did with the 1/48 kit, but that is just a problem if things like panel lines bother you, if you are happy with the shape they are grand, if hard work. I'd love to see the RB.57A. The D is quite good and much more accurate than Italeri's effort.

 

John 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've both the Provost & Sycamore and think they look like very nice kits. I'll probably stump up for one of these, I can then copy the details onto my Airfix/Aeroclub & Frog spawn kits to improve them a little too.

Steve.

Edited by stevehnz
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/7/2017 at 8:45 AM, rickshaw said:

 

Not sure where you're getting the idea that the High Planes models are "chancy".   As far as I have been concerned they have been accurate, if a little primitive.  They use resin for their interior details and wheels.   Their fuselage is shaped correctly and while it does require a little more work, what you get is well worth the effort.

 

Yes, the High Planes Canberra is an accurate kit, however the definition of "little more work" can be very misleading: in my experience these kits need a lot of preliminary clean-up work on most parts, fit of main components require a lot of adjustment and then tons of filler after that, several details are moulded on the soft side and could do with replacing...

I agree that the result can be well worth the effort but realistically the HP kit is better suited to modellers with a good experience and a strong desire to have a Canberra in their collection. No plastic has been shown of this new S&M kit but judging from their previous kits there's a very good chance that this will be a much easier build for most modellers.

I've always been a big fan of High Planes and have several of their kits (including the Canberra, not built yet though), they made accurate kits of many interesting subjects and all their kits showed the sign of having a true modeller with a lot of passion behind their design. At the same time I acknowledge that times are moving on, new technologies have emerged and today's short runs are much more approachable by modellers of almost any skill when compared to the HP kits. I'll always be be thankful to High Planes for their work but today I know I can have more.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

 

Yes, the High Planes Canberra is an accurate kit, however the definition of "little more work" can be very misleading: in my experience these kits need a lot of preliminary clean-up work on most parts, fit of main components require a lot of adjustment and then tons of filler after that, several details are moulded on the soft side and could do with replacing...

I agree that the result can be well worth the effort but realistically the HP kit is better suited to modellers with a good experience and a strong desire to have a Canberra in their collection. No plastic has been shown of this new S&M kit but judging from their previous kits there's a very good chance that this will be a much easier build for most modellers.

I've always been a big fan of High Planes and have several of their kits (including the Canberra, not built yet though), they made accurate kits of many interesting subjects and all their kits showed the sign of having a true modeller with a lot of passion behind their design. At the same time I acknowledge that times are moving on, new technologies have emerged and today's short runs are much more approachable by modellers of almost any skill when compared to the HP kits. I'll always be be thankful to High Planes for their work but today I know I can have more.

 

I built the HP Canberra T.4 a couple of years ago and it took me nearly a year!  As you say, the biggest issue is cleaning up the parts before assembly and one problem I had was that one of the fuselage recesses for the wings was 'filled in' and took a lot of effort to remove without damaging the part.  It really does look like a Canberra though.  Although not an expert on the subject in my view the shape and dimensions look spot-on.  One exception is the solid nose for the T.4 which is resin and rather shapeless.  It's the one thing that doesn't look right on the kit.  I didn't make a great job of the build because, with all the work required, I rather lost the will to live so hurried it along in the end.  I think anyone with a little more patience than me could build a decent Canberra from the kit but I will be holding out for the S&M releases. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/07/2017 at 11:22 PM, stevehnz said:

I've both the Provost & Sycamore and think they look like very nice kits. I'll probably stump up for one of these, I can then copy the details onto my Airfix/Aeroclub & Frog spawn kits to improve them a little too.

Steve.

I'll be giving one a go too Steve, I just hope it lives up to expectations. 

 

John

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Meatbox8 said:

 

I built the HP Canberra T.4 a couple of years ago and it took me nearly a year!  As you say, the biggest issue is cleaning up the parts before assembly and one problem I had was that one of the fuselage recesses for the wings was 'filled in' and took a lot of effort to remove without damaging the part.  It really does look like a Canberra though.  Although not an expert on the subject in my view the shape and dimensions look spot-on.  One exception is the solid nose for the T.4 which is resin and rather shapeless.  It's the one thing that doesn't look right on the kit.  I didn't make a great job of the build because, with all the work required, I rather lost the will to live so hurried it along in the end.  I think anyone with a little more patience than me could build a decent Canberra from the kit but I will be holding out for the S&M releases. 

I started a B.2 but unlike your T.4 my B.2 is on pause at the moment for the same reasons, it was taking that long to sort out I lost interest, but I will return to it, as I did with the RB.57D.I did start a WHIP on my site As it turns out my choice of title for the build was prophetic  Shortcut to a Dead End  

I'd like to see the nose on T.4 what some companies don't appear to understand is all Canberra noses are the same shape, I can't see HP getting that wrong, but if it was badly cast it could have been malformed?

DSC03666_zps98d1a364.jpg     

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, canberra kid said:

I started a B.2 but unlike your T.4 my B.2 is on pause at the moment for the same reasons, it was taking that long to sort out I lost interest, but I will return to it, as I did with the RB.57D.I did start a WHIP on my site As it turns out my choice of title for the build was prophetic  Shortcut to a Dead End  

I'd like to see the nose on T.4 what some companies don't appear to understand is all Canberra noses are the same shape, I can't see HP getting that wrong, but if it was badly cast it could have been malformed?

DSC03666_zps98d1a364.jpg     

 

 

Hi there.  Yes it is possible it was malformed.  I tried to sand it to something more realistic but was only partially successful,  Next time it gets an airing I'll try to post a pic. 

 

P.S. Your RB57 looks amazing.

Edited by Meatbox8
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...