1/72 - Avro Shackleton AEW.2 & MR.3 by Revell - AEW.2 released - AiM MR.3 conversion set

[Graham Boak]

It is 8th October in the Pre-orders, now. http://www.airfix.com/uk-en/shop/pre-orders/avro-shackleton-mr2.html It used to be December.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Graham Boak

[gunpowder17]

I cant wait. I will be getting both airfix and revell

[brewerjerry]

Hi

If your getting both it will be interesting to compare the quality of the clear parts of the airfix to the revell ones.

cheers

jerry

[Acky190]

It seems that some have completely written off the forthcoming Revell release already, there are derisive comments on both the corresponding Airfix thread and on here. These seem mainly based around the shenanigans that occurred whilst both companies were conducting research, and centering on the access given by a certain preservation group to their own airframe, or not as the case may be. I am pretty patriotic, those who know me will know the inns and outs of this and I fully support Airfix, especially with their recent and forthcoming releases being the standard they are. However I am also fully aware that there has not been a main stream IM kit of the AEW released ever in 1/72, and to have several options available in the coming weeks/months will be pretty amazing, and nothing short of very wishful thinking 3-4 years ago. I won't be writing off either kit or indeed trashing them prior to release at any stage, I will however be looking forward to having the option of building multiple versions of the "Growler" from a modern tooling and thus retiring the Frog/Novo/Frogspawn/Modelcraft/Revell etc etc kit and Aeroclub AEW conversion to the mists of time! I also think as an aside if John were to re-release his excellent AEW decal sheet at any time in the near future then chances are it might sell very well indeed.

[andy wood]

I was hoping for better to be honest.

Poor, poor research, and it shows that while several museums tried to put them right, they've still gone and created some kind of franken-Shack that's all their own work.

MR3 ailerons on an MR2 shaped wing.

MR3 interior in an AEW2 (things such as the Blue Silk unit on the rear floor, and raised floor with an escape hatch for the nosewheel bay between the pilots!!))

MR3 glazed panel for the fuselage flares - a South African Air Force local modification.

Maritime trailing aerial moulded on (amongst others), when the AEW2 doesn't have one.

Faired in AEW radome, when it was an addition with a built up 'skirt' to take something non original to the aircraft.

If you want accuracy, stick with the Airfix kit.

Regards,

Rich

The problems you list don't make it has bad as you say it is. I'm no shack expert but they all sound easily correctable, and as for the interior, bet you won't be able to see anything once it's buttoned up. And what kit is perfect anyway?

[Heraldcoupe]

The problems you list don't make it has bad as you say it is. I'm no shack expert but they all sound easily correctable, and as for the interior, bet you won't be able to see anything once it's buttoned up. And what kit is perfect anyway?

The observed faults should indeed be correctable, but it does indicate poor research which may manifest elsewhere. Like Acky190, I won't be writing it off before it's released, but I'll wait for others to have a look before I lay down cash for it,

Cheers,

Bill.

[Acky190]

Agreed Bill,

One of the issues I had was with statements such as

"If you want accuracy, stick with the Airfix kit"

Is this the as yet unseen by anyone Airfix AEW version, or just the MR version that as yet has not to my knowledge been reviewed or handled by anyone either?? Even the sprue shots of the Airfix kit are inconclusive of the AEW versions accuracy. Making huge sweeping statements like this are in my opinion just plain silly.

[feldr]

Actually... Jenny Wright has already built the Airfix MR2. ..

Due in a mag review in next 2 weeks

Edited September 26, 2015 by feldr

[richw_82]

The problems you list don't make it has bad as you say it is. I'm no shack expert but they all sound easily correctable, and as for the interior, bet you won't be able to see anything once it's buttoned up. And what kit is perfect anyway?

I've not said its a poor it, just poorly researched. There are other AEW2's that could have been used when we disagreed with Revell, instead they went off to Gatwick to look at their MR3 instead.

I get that no kit is perfect, but if we are talking scale modelling is accuracy not what we strive for in our models? Starting with an accurate kit is a lot easier than correcting mistakes that could have been avoided.

[richw_82]

Agreed Bill,

One of the issues I had was with statements such as

"If you want accuracy, stick with the Airfix kit"

Is this the as yet unseen by anyone Airfix AEW version, or just the MR version that as yet has not to my knowledge been reviewed or handled by anyone either?? Even the sprue shots of the Airfix kit are inconclusive of the AEW versions accuracy. Making huge sweeping statements like this are in my opinion just plain silly.

Its not a sweeping statement, and your knowledge of who has seen what is probably a little lacking.

Look on Airfix's workbench blog regarding Shackleton. You'll find me sat inside a Shackleton reviewing their work. I spent the better part of a few days going over our aircraft with their researchers, hunted out the relevant drawings, and sent a lot of AP (airframe publications) to them. I've been involved in this since its inception way back in 2010, which is plenty time to find and eliminate any accuracy issues. They (Airfix) even had time to measure up our radome before it got scrapped.

Put bluntly, Airfix created the model from the manufacturers drawings. They are accurate enough to build a 1:1 example to much finer tolerances, so the 1:72 is quite accurate. I have high hopes Revell will sort their kit before it hits the shelves; as there's no real reason to get it wrong.

[gunpowder17]

If i am right , the only thing common between the aew and mr3 would be fuselage from the cockpit back , tailplanes/fins , engine nacelles? The front fuselage and entire wing were different were they not?

Edited September 26, 2015 by gunpowder17

[David H]

I disagree. This was a cheap shot.

david

Edited September 26, 2015 by David H

[gunpowder17]

OK just read the original thread. Got the answers.

[dpm1did1]

However 'accurate' either manufactures Shacks are claimed to be (or not) I'll be reserving judgement until I've read not 1, probably not even 2 but 3 builds, preferably of shop bought kits as opposed to pre-release review examples (although these are often good for knowing wether to pencil a name on the wishlist before erasing or penning it in later).

Regardless of which is more accurate, better fitting, better detailed, has more stores and decal option one thing is abundantly clear even now - the aftermarket will have correction sets, etch and resin details, stores supplies, and alternative decal options within weeks.

[richw_82]

I disagree. This was a cheap shot.

david

Then we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm words on a screen to you and you have no idea of the intent behind them.

[richw_82]

If i am right , the only thing common between the aew and mr3 would be fuselage from the cockpit back , tailplanes/fins , engine nacelles? The front fuselage and entire wing were different were they not?

Fuselage framesin the nose above the centreline, and all the way back to the tailwheel bay. Main and trailing spar and booms, and the undercrriage bay ribs. The wing itself got redesigned from a safe life system with 4 internal tanks in each wings, to a fail safe type with 6 internal tanks, and tip tanks - the internal tanks being removed from above rather than below as in the Lancaster derived wing. Horizontal tail and fins were the same as were the powerplants. Nacelles were different to deal with the tricycle undercarriage and Viper engines in the later MR3.

The wing on the MR3 is pretty much the one that became the Argosy's wing, the MR1 and MR2 is essentially a Lincoln.

[Dave Fleming]

Anyone who was at Nuremburg saw Airfix's AEW2 parts. I don't expect them to announce anything until the MR2 is on the shelves and selling.

I have no vested interest, but equally I see no reason not to say what I see. I'll buy the best kit, but from having looked at the sprues and shots of the AF build I have serious reservations about the Revell kit, especially in the nose. I hope not, but time will tell.

Ind just to be even handed, I don't like the panel lines on the AF kit, lines where there are none on the real thing

Edited September 26, 2015 by Dave Fleming

[brewerjerry]

Hi

Well be un educated in shacks,

' they both look like one to me '

so for the majority of modellers, i think it will come down to price, or manufacturer preference.

cheers

jerry

[Albeback52]

Well, I am no Shackleton expert. I could not, for example tell, just by looking at the kit that the ailerons/wings are wrong. As for the interior, well is that even going to be noticed once the model is built?. I have to agree with Jerry on this. Not all modellers are fanatical about accuracy. I suspect that the majority don't really care one way or the other. For me personally it will come down to price. If the Revell kit comes in significantly cheaper than Airfix, then I am afraid that is where my money will go. Regardless of any flaws, I am sure this will be a good seller. I do not personally strive for accuracy. All that interests me is getting a good result out what comes in the box. I would also suggest that, while obviously avoidable, the afore mentioned errors are easily rectified?

Allan

Edited September 27, 2015 by Albeback52

[richw_82]

Ind just to be even handed, I don't like the panel lines on the AF kit, lines where there are none on the real thing

No panel lines, eh?

The reason you can't see many is that the ones between fuelage sections and wing sections are filled with a mastic type sealant, and have a 3" wide fabric tape applied over them. There are quite pronounced panel lines between individual skin panels (such as on the nose here) as they are overlapped rather than butted up against each other.

[richw_82]

Regardless of any flaws, I am sure this will be a good seller. I do not personally strive for accuracy. All that interests me is getting a good result out what comes in the box. I would also suggest that, while obviously avoidable, the afore mentioned errors are easily rectified?

I hope both will sell well. Anything can be rectified - the amount of work to build a reasonable vacform version pr to convert the old MR3 proves that.

[Dave Fleming]

No panel lines, eh?

The reason you can't see many is that the ones between fuelage sections and wing sections are filled with a mastic type sealant, and have a 3" wide fabric tape applied over them. There are quite pronounced panel lines between individual skin panels (such as on the nose here) as they are overlapped rather than butted up against each other.

Yeah, visible as faintly raised lines, not inch wide gaps between panels - even on the Phaphos aircraft that have been lying out in the open air for 25 years, they are still little more visible than the rivets.

Like here

http://data4.primeportal.net/hangar/howard_mason4/avro_shackleton/images/avro_shackleton_03_of_50.jpg

But that's a matter of personal taste/artistic impression I suppose

Edited September 27, 2015 by Dave Fleming

[richw_82]

That photo was taken roughly 12 feet away from the aircraft, and as you can see they each are a distinct line. You can see it from further away too, and if it were little more than a raised line, I wouldn't need the mastic, or the 3" wide tape...

Here's a shot of our wing, before new tapes were applied.



This is a recent (ish) shot from Paphos.




Even on the link you posted - which was WL790 at Pima, USA - the lines are still evident.

Here's some shots from it being repainted.



This image, you can see some of the wide layer of mastic used to smooth things out and seal the gaps.



Basically if there's even a hint of dirt of fading on the aircraft its only then the lines show up - but they are there.

Go factory fresh and they vanish -




On a small model a covering of paint will make panel lines less pronounced, and a light wash will bring them out slightly as does the dirt and wear and tear on the full size.

I've said it before to people, I'll say it again - come to Coventry one Saturday and crawl all over our Shackleton if you want to make your mind up for sure.

[Albeback52]

I hope both will sell well. Anything can be rectified - the amount of work to build a reasonable vacform version pr to convert the old MR3 proves that.

Not going to argue with you on that!! Personally, I can live with any issues the Revell kit may have. I am just delighted to be getting TWO Shackletons in one year!

Allan

[Richard E]

I guess there'd be copyright issues... but I do hope someone does a set of "Magic Roundabout" decals for this!

It looks like the new Xtradecal sheet,72-235, includes markings for WL747/Florence.