Jump to content

More on Airfix 2017


Denford

Recommended Posts

I find it truly amazing that some people are under the impression that Airfix (and other companies) perform no market research at all, but just half heartedly bring out what they think will sell. There is much discussion concerning future kit subjects within the companies, and many factors have a part to play, not least the cost of bringing it to market. I have heard the average cost is £1,000 per part, and as that was a few years ago it is probably more now. It is no small commitment, so kit manufacturers will only bring out what will sell in the markets they have a presence in. For Airfix this is predominantly WW2 and post war aircraft, largely British but with German and US types as well.

 

With regard to the Phantom, it has topped the Airfix SMW poll for 2014 and 2015, and I understand that there were a number of requests last year as well, obviously from people who had not seen what was actually displayed on their stall. And if the test shot is anything to go by, I have no doubts that there will be a few Fujimi Phantoms appearing on eBay once the Airfix kit is available. Furthermore, basing current Airfix output on what they were producing six or seven years ago is pointless.

 

If you want value for money, by the way, the Airfix Victor is much more worthy of a £50-60 price tag than the latest boxings of the ancient Hasegawa P-2 Neptune, but that is what you will have to pay if you want one.

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, T7 Models said:

I find it truly amazing that some people are under the impression that Airfix (and other companies) perform no market research at all, but just half heartedly bring out what they think will sell. There is much discussion concerning future kit subjects within the companies, and many factors have a part to play, not least the cost of bringing it to market. I have heard the average cost is £1,000 per part, and as that was a few years ago it is probably more now. It is no small commitment, so kit manufacturers will only bring out what will sell in the markets they have a presence in. For Airfix this is predominantly WW2 and post war aircraft, largely British but with German and US types as well.

 

With regard to the Phantom, it has topped the Airfix SMW poll for 2014 and 2015, and I understand that there were a number of requests last year as well, obviously from people who had not seen what was actually displayed on their stall. And if the test shot is anything to go by, I have no doubts that there will be a few Fujimi Phantoms appearing on eBay once the Airfix kit is available. Furthermore, basing current Airfix output on what they were producing six or seven years ago is pointless.

 

If you want value for money, by the way, the Airfix Victor is much more worthy of a £50-60 price tag than the latest boxings of the ancient Hasegawa P-2 Neptune, but that is what you will have to pay if you want one.

 

 

But you can't really blame people for doubting the Airfix or Hornby management's wisdom in a lot of areas, one example you will probably agree is how they treat retailers, another may be the quality of Humbrol enamels.

I think the Phantom is a absolutely excellent choice by Airfix, even I as a WW2 builder may well buy one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Phantome said:

You really wonder who their marketing people are whether they really have a clue on what modellers want.

 

A lot of people wanted a 1/72 British Phantom, a kit you don't think they should be bothering with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately a fact of many aviation (and I assume other) forums, although to be fair I find this forum to be far far better than many.

 

There are those armchair experts/warriors who have no experience in marketing, sales, distribution, museum management and development, aircraft operation, historic aircraft restoration, certification etc. etc. yet feel they are superior to those working hard in these areas. And such comments are rude and offensive to those who no doubt work hard in these areas.

 

The fact that they are sat in their armchairs and not filling these roles is all that needs to be noted.

 

Not to say however, that of course there are some good and valid questions or comments based on being informed and sensible, but where the Acme model company hasn't done your favourite Bomber B Mk 123 series 5A doesn't mean they are necessarily mad!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although Airfix was the only 1/72 A-26, previously there had been the Monogram one which dated from the early years of plastic kits and was almost 1/72.  (Plus the much smaller Frog one.)  However the A-26 had only a small role in WW2 and unless you specialise in small wars (and especially non-wars!) of the 50s, hardly featured in aviation history at all.  It is easy to see why it wasn't the most popular choice for kit manufacturers.  The Italeri kit was judged by harsher standards when it came out, than the Airfix one when it did.  Neither are perfect, neither are terrible, but the italeri one is better.  As it should be, all considered, if "should" is a word that can be applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, old thumper said:

. Airfix may have missed the boat already here with the Sterling, Sunderland and Halifax although maybe not if they can win on price and quality.

 

I spoke to the Airfix rep at Telford a few years back about the Stirling, just after the Italeri one came out. They were going to wait for the dust to settle, but did agree that it was one of their kits that they'd like to revisit

 

John

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

With regard to the Phantom, it has topped the Airfix SMW poll for 2014 and 2015, and I understand that there were a number of requests last year as well, obviously from people who had not seen what was actually displayed on their stall

They were probably from those moaning that Airfix had chosen to do the 'Wrong' Phantom

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aeronut said:

They were probably from those moaning that Airfix had chosen to do the 'Wrong' Phantom

 

We are modelers, collectively we will never all be happy with a kit, it amazes me how many moaners are out there.

 

We have never had it so good, countless manufacturers, great accessories, sites like this to share knowledge, great tools and paints, countless resources and somne wonderful kits to make

 

As I have said before, if Airfix or other manufacturers could shrink the real thing and make it into a kit, there would be someone on here saying they got something wrong.

 

Lets face it modelers are not meant to be 100% satisfied ;)

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 12jaguar said:

 

I spoke to the Airfix rep at Telford a few years back about the Stirling, just after the Italeri one came out. They were going to wait for the dust to settle, but did agree that it was one of their kits that they'd like to revisit

 

John

Don't know the position of 'the Airfix rep' with whom you spoke a 'few years back' but:

- At least under the present organisation, they will never retool the Stirling.  There are no extant examples, and all drawings have been destroyed.

- Which subjects to tool are taken by (Hornby) marketing not Airfix, though (as I understand) they put forward suggestions of subjects (eg Cold War 2 seat jets) requested by Marketing.  By inference there's a good deal of debate on cost vs detailing, follow-on subjects etc before a final decision is taken.

- Missing the boat and letting Italeri get in first is a hoary old chestnut.  Yes, they might have re-tooled it, but only at the expense of something else: Shackleton (so missing the boat and letting Revell get in first) Victor or anything else.  Airfix, with a headcount of less than 10 are limited to their output and for everything chosen, something else must be left behind.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 12jaguar said:

 

I spoke to the Airfix rep at Telford a few years back about the Stirling, just after the Italeri one came out. They were going to wait for the dust to settle, but did agree that it was one of their kits that they'd like to revisit

 

John

 

I would like it if they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Denford said:

 

- At least under the present organisation, they will never retool the Stirling.  There are no extant examples, and all drawings have been destroyed.

 

And look where that policy has got them, passing off a Bollingbroke as a Blenheim (heater ducts on the collector ring and humped engine fairings that shouldn't be there). I'd sooner have a kit made using the best available information rather than one that has been Lidared from an inaccurate restoration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave Fleming said:

They didn't and it wasn't. The cowl us neitherBlenhiem nor Billingbroke, but based on the one at Duxford. 

The point is that relying on Lidar isn't magic solution it's made out to be and therefore subjects that have no manufacturers drawings or existing examples should still be candidates for kits. Also I've had practical experience of young CAD jockeys being unable to read the old hand drawn technical drawings so I'm suspicious of that part of Airfix's plan as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, let's make kits based on contested memories and blurry photographs. What could possibly go wrong?

 

The Bleinheim kit proves absolutey nothing about the use of LIDAR as it wasn't done using LIDAR, and has never been claimed to be based on LIDAR information.

Edited by Work In Progress
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aeronut said:

....therefore subjects that have no manufacturers drawings or existing examples should still be candidates for kits.

Like it or not, that's not the way Airfix work.  I'm happy with that and there are still plenty of untooled/subjects for retooling to keep anyone in business for a long time.

If there are no manufacturers' drawings or existing examples where does the information come from?  The one thing one can be certain of, is that the data from different sources will differ.  Then there will be cries that the kit doesn't match this or that plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Denford said:

Don't know the position of 'the Airfix rep' with whom you spoke a 'few years back' but:

- At least under the present organisation, they will never retool the Stirling.  There are no extant examples, and all drawings have been destroyed.

.

As always the views of the individual do not always necessarily represent that of the management. He never said they would do but then again never say never. I did ask him about the oft quoted position that they would never tool a kit for which there was no extant example or no complete original drawing pack. He responded that he had been misquoted at a modellers talk and that if necessary they would consider using the best available information. I can only repeat what he said.

 

Notably though the Stirling Project is drawing the aircraft up in CAD using original material and information wherever possible (not all drawings have been destroyed btw), in fact we collaborated with Corgi on their diecast kit. Unfortunately they didn't use all of the info we gave them :o)

 

Will they revisit the Stirling? I'd love them to but in the present climate and with limited resources I doubt that it will happen any time soon.

 

John

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aeronut said:

The point is that relying on Lidar isn't magic solution it's made out to be and therefore subjects that have no manufacturers drawings or existing examples should still be candidates for kits. Also I've had practical experience of young CAD jockeys being unable to read the old hand drawn technical drawings so I'm suspicious of that part of Airfix's plan as well.

These young whippersnappers ay! No chance they could read and understand an engineering drawing, the chaps who designed the Victor and big typhoon for them must have been well advanced in years to do such a good job.....

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Agent K said:

Unfortunately...

There are those armchair experts/warriors who have no experience in marketing, sales, distribution, museum management and development, aircraft operation, historic aircraft restoration, certification etc. etc. yet feel they are superior to those working hard in these areas. And such comments are rude and offensive to those who no doubt work hard in these areas.

The fact that they are sat in their armchairs and not filling these roles is all that needs to be noted...

but where the Acme model company hasn't done your favourite Bomber B Mk 123 series 5A doesn't mean they are necessarily mad!

 

Mad not to do this or that?
Any thought, especially one expressed as an emotion, is as valid a viewpoint as cold blooded clinical pragmatism (and sometimes it's desirable to step away from the trees). 
I love such passion. It's what really makes the world go around. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to see that it was a misquote, but it always seemed more like a Mission Statement than anything realistic.  Perhaps as some kind of ideal, but although there are enough good data of that standard around to keep Airfix busy for some years,  there's not enough for all aircraft that would be worth producing.  Lots for aircraft that wouldn't sell.

 

However, the LIDAR argument is a bit of a red herring.  The problem occurs when any single source is taken as gospel beyond the limits to which it applies.  That is illustrated by the example given above: the Blenheim (or, indeed, the much older one of the Battle).  Despite going to the best available source, they didn't sufficiently allow for aircraft being very complicated, changing with time and place.  Aircraft are built in small batches, with each batch having its own individual features, and individual examples undergoing their own evolution.  I don't think this modelling problem is ever going to change, given the limits of resources and the other constraints of creating a model.  Certainly when you go beyond a single example and offer options.  That's one very good reason for discussion groups such as this, to de-nit the resulting model and offer help to make it even better.  Faults don't mean the manufacturers are evil beyond redemption, and their reaction to such criticism should be to (metaphorically) shrug their shoulders "OK it was wrong, but we're only human and will try to get the next one right".  Not to throw their toys out of the pram and insist that "Right! From now on we won't make anything without a mountain of original manufacturer's plans and let's see you criticise them!"  Which Airfix didn't do/say anyway ... very sensible of them.

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Aeronut said:

And look where that policy has got them, passing off a Bollingbroke as a Blenheim (heater ducts on the collector ring and humped engine fairings that shouldn't be there). I'd sooner have a kit made using the best available information rather than one that has been Lidared from an inaccurate restoration.

Using that same logic, would you then rather have no restoration at all rather than an "inaccurate" restoration?  It might not always be possible to have a fully "accurate" restoration but, I am sure that those performing said task do the best they can with what they have. Me? If an "inaccurate" restoration is all that is available then I'd rather have a kit made from THAT than no kit at all. In any case, such a kit WILL be accurate inasmuch as it represents the prototype on which it was based! I can't tell the difference between a Blenheim IV and a Bolingbroke anyway so I'm not bothered with such minutiae

 

Allan

Edited by Albeback52
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/01/2017 at 2:27 AM, KevinK said:

 

And in 2018, it's the 50th anniversary of the making of the Battle of Britain film (released in 1969). Any guesses as to the camera aircraft?

...

...

...

...

.. OK, time's up!

 

Yes, a B-25!

 

So there's an opportunity for a "Making of the Battle of Britain Film" gift set, with every mark of Spitfire that Airfix makes, Hurricanes, and ......a B-25.

 

Kevin

 

 

The more I think about this the more I think its the sort of mad idea that would work. Spitfire, Hurricane, camera B-25, RAF Vehicle set, He-111 and Me109 (resin engines) and movie DVD. It would stir up some free publicity too, the press would love it. Get Clarkson and May to endorse it, they said (Argentina Special) it was their favourite/second favourite film.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blimey! 50 years since the Battle of Britain Film's release? My dad took me to see it at the cinema...

 

Not sure Airfix will be too interested, though. But maybe they'll surprise us with a new multipose figure set - Skipper, Canfield, Harvey, Falke, Fohn etc  :lol:

 

Not forgetting Susannah York, of course: 'I've booked a room...it could be marvellous'

 

:D

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Aeronut said:

The point is that relying on Lidar isn't magic solution it's made out to be and therefore subjects that have no manufacturers drawings or existing examples should still be candidates for kits. Also I've had practical experience of young CAD jockeys being unable to read the old hand drawn technical drawings so I'm suspicious of that part of Airfix's plan as well.

I'd expect that the staff interview\selection process would eliminate anyone who couldn't read hand-drawn technical drawings.  Not a difficult test to apply!  The Airfix person at Telford to whom I spoke said he actually preferred working from drawings.

Still can't see why subjects with no extant examples or manufacturer's drawings should be considered as 'candidates' when there are so many other subjects to choose from.  Fortunately Airfix take this line too: if you haven't accurate data, then do something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IanC said:

Blimey! 50 years since the Battle of Britain Film's release? My dad took me to see it at the cinema...

 

Not sure Airfix will be too interested, though. But maybe they'll surprise us with a new multipose figure set - Skipper, Canfield, Harvey, Falke, Fohn etc  :lol:

 

Not forgetting Susannah York, of course: 'I've booked a room...it could be marvellous'

 

:D

 

 

I was in my first year at secondary school. Now I am a year away from  retiring! Scary thought!! Not really bothered whether or not Airfix or anybody else does anything. I'd rather see a 50th anniversary version of the film with all deleted scenes/footage restored.

 

Allan

  • Like 4
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...