Jump to content

Airfix 2020


jenko

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Albeback52 said:

Would you settle for an Avro Type 730 instead of the Short Sperrin

 

Maybe but I'd be much happier with a Hunting H.126 :) 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2019 at 11:44 AM, BD757 said:

Just my tuppence worth but I would be surprised if Airfix haven't thought about the P8. I know they want to stay away from having to pay licence fees etc and Welsh Models have just released theirs but the aircraft ticks so many boxes that have been mentioned as prerequisites for a new Airfix kit; 

  • The P8 would sell well in the UK and offers a route into the North American market (as well as Norway, India etc)
  • As with the Valiant add-ons they could do a 'special' weapons bay set for incremental sales
  • If engineered correctly elements of the mouldings could be re-used for an E-7 Wedgetail version that could also open up the Aussie and Turkish market
  • Unlikely but they could do as Heller did with the old 707 and E-3 series and offer a pax 737NG

Obviously this would be a massive step for Hornby and a tenuous business case so it probably won't happen and we will have a new Spitfire. Not long to go now!

 

It is just about to get into RAF service and the RNoAF ones are still some way down Boeings assembly line - expected delivery in 2021-2022.

According to one of the officers involved in the projects, the RNoAF P-8s will only differ from the RAF ones by having a coffee machine instead of a tea maker.

So it is too early, besides BPK has a Boeing 737-800 in the works http://bigplaneskits.com/boxart-for-737-800-1-72/#comment-37334 

If Airfix wants to get Christmas cards from Norwegian modellers, promise us a stretched C-130J in 1:72 or a T-6 Harvard in 1:72 & 1:48.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, yes... the Short Sperrin. An obvious candidate to revive Airfix’s fortunes with a flood of high street purchasers. A pig-ugly “backstop” built in errrr... ones, that never served its purpose, flew in only one colour scheme, and was roundly outclassed by three other large aircraft Airfix already make kits of...

 

😜

best,

M.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Albeback52 said:

Would you settle for an Avro Type 730 instead of the Short Sperrin ? 😂😂😉

I normally avoid masks because I think they are poor value for money and, in some cases they can actually cost as much as something like a series 1 Airfix model kit.

That said, I consider this a good idea. The economies of scale involved in mass production would probably ensure that the masks would add little to the cost of the kit

 

Allan

The cost of the masks should not be compared to the cost of the kit to which you are applying them. The appropriate way to evaluate their value is to the time saved in using pre-cut masks versus creating the masks yourself or, if you are brave, painting the frames free-hand with the associated need for touch-ups and re-work. You may not think of it this way, but time itself has value. If you put an hour into building a kit, you've probably already spent more on that kit in time than in the cost to purchase it. If you spend ten hours on a kit, there are very few kits you couldn't buy with the value of that time. You might think I'm being facetious with this line of reasoning, but our time is not unlimited and if buying a set of masks saves me half an hour versus the alternatives it's money well spent in my opinion. I'm currently working on an Airfix 1/72 Blenheim I and it took me all of 15 minutes to mask the clear parts with Eduard masks whereas it would have taken over an hour to mask all the parts if I had to cut all the masks myself. That doesn't account for the likelihood that I'll make a cut in the wrong place and have to then fix the unwanted mark on the clear part of the canopy.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

I entirely agree, but other manufacturers can produce parts that fit almost seemlessly without the problems that can be experienced on some recent Airfix kits.

Other manufacturers produce kits with much finer detail than Airfix seems able to do. That may be a choice, with Airfix trying to produce kits that are buildable by the casual modelers who probably make up most of their sales. That said, I'm often tempted to send a Flyhawk kit to Airfix HQ with a pointed question asking why they don't seem able to produce kit parts with details as fine and sharp. Don't get me wrong, I'm mostly a fan of Airfix's new products, as evidenced by all the red boxes in my stash, but I'm disappointed that their recent seem to have plateaued in regards to improving the small details in their kits so they don't appear so chunky.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, VMA131Marine said:

That may be a choice, with Airfix trying to produce kits that are buildable by the casual modelers who probably make up most of their sales. That said, I'm often tempted to send a Flyhawk kit to Airfix HQ with a pointed question asking why they don't seem able to produce kit parts with details as fine and sharp. 

Sorry, but part of my point is that the tight tolerances are making kits more difficult to make and so less buildable by casual modellers.

 

Personally, I do not like the Flyhawk approach of many many tiny parts, which I'd have thought equally unlikely to be enjoyed by more casual modellers.  I do however agree that their details are beautifully crisp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Graham Boak said:

Sorry, but part of my point is that the tight tolerances are making kits more difficult to make and so less buildable by casual modellers.

 

Personally, I do not like the Flyhawk approach of many many tiny parts, which I'd have thought equally unlikely to be enjoyed by more casual modellers.  I do however agree that their details are beautifully crisp.

I'm not sure how else you would mould a 1/700 ship kit other than to contain many tiny parts. I just got the Flyhawk Bismarck and the parts for the secondary armament alone are just incredible. The detailing on the funnel is a work of art.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Tight tolerances...…………………….. at our age …….. come on get real :analintruder:

 

Any way.... bet there is something really left field.....like... 1/48 Zero or Mig 15

 

Dick

Edited by jenko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Seahawk said:

Perhaps they'll scale up the 1/72 one for you....  

There is a trend of Airfix doing this. The Tamiya one is like hens teeth to find.

 

Dick

Edited by jenko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, jenko said:

There is a trend of Airfix doing this. The Tamiya one is like hens teeth to find.

You really wouldn't like Airfix to do that.  It would be a service to humanity to make the Airfix 1/72 MiG-15 completely impossible to find: it is easily the most inaccurate of all the Hornby era Airfix releases.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

The cost of the masks should not be compared to the cost of the kit to which you are applying them. The appropriate way to evaluate their value is to the time saved in using pre-cut masks versus creating the masks yourself or, if you are brave, painting the frames free-hand with the associated need for touch-ups and re-work. You may not think of it this way, but time itself has value. If you put an hour into building a kit, you've probably already spent more on that kit in time than in the cost to purchase it. If you spend ten hours on a kit, there are very few kits you couldn't buy with the value of that time. You might think I'm being facetious with this line of reasoning, but our time is not unlimited and if buying a set of masks saves me half an hour versus the alternatives it's money well spent in my opinion. I'm currently working on an Airfix 1/72 Blenheim I and it took me all of 15 minutes to mask the clear parts with Eduard masks whereas it would have taken over an hour to mask all the parts if I had to cut all the masks myself. That doesn't account for the likelihood that I'll make a cut in the wrong place and have to then fix the unwanted mark on the clear part of the canopy.

I don't think you are being facetious at all. I just do not see time spent masking as an issue. I never have.

My sole issue is over the cost of pre cut masks. I always thought that considering what you have to pay in exchange for some bits of sticky paper makes them extremely poor value.

From that perspective therefore I think it is perfectly justifiable to compare the cost of masks with the cost of the kit to which they are being applied.

Others, like yourself obviously take a different view and, I respect that. However, I'd rather spend my very limited funds on additional kits.😊

 

Allan

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, roy107 said:

 

Maybe but I'd be much happier with a Hunting H.126 :) 

Hell no! That thing's even uglier than an F-35!!! No mean achievement!!. Still, at least it isn't boring and grey! 😉😂

 

Allan

Edited by Albeback52
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Seahawk said:

You really wouldn't like Airfix to do that.  It would be a service to humanity to make the Airfix 1/72 MiG-15 completely impossible to find: it is easily the most inaccurate of all the Hornby era Airfix releases.

Even more than their 'Bf109G6'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Adam Poultney said:

Even more than their 'Bf109G6'?

the Hurricane IIc is worse than the Bf109G6 IIRC,  I got the G6 really cheap, (at model club) and while poor,  I don't recall the outline being awful, in comparison,  the Hurricane suffers from being a very good rendition of some drawings in a authoritative Hurricane book, that happen to be be blinkin' awful when compared, to well, any of the photos in the book for example..

 

I presume the MiG -15 suffered a similar fate,  of being based on what looked a reasonable source... but were probably recycle cold war era ones of dubious provenance.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Albeback52 said:

My sole issue is over the cost of pre cut masks. I always thought that considering what you have to pay in exchange for some bits of sticky paper makes them extremely poor value.

 

Allan

Allan, if you read again my post which seems to have started the whole pre cut mask debate, you'll find me writing I think we pay 2-3 times their actual price in having to buy them separately. So I agree with you in regard of their cost; still there are kits I nowadays don't want to start building if I don't have them at hand!

V-P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regards to suggestions about an F-35, although I personally would love to see one I suspect that Italeri's recent unveiling of a test article of a 1:72 F-35b might have scuppered that possibility.

What do I think it could be? I'm still betting on a Vulcan (the hint about something "BIG" and the presumed mass appeal of it). What am I hoping for? Also a Vulcan...

And yes I have heard of confirmation bias...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Airfix's 2019 Telford announcement, plus their 2020 range will have already been well down the design stage by now so I'd doubt Italeri's newly unveiled F-35 will change their opinion. It may however steal a bit of thunder, but they will still go ahead as planned. Let's just hope that it is a Vulcan as you and many others have eluded too anyway! 

 

Cheers.. Dave 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cathasatail said:

What do I think it could be? I'm still betting on a Vulcan (the hint about something "BIG" and the presumed mass appeal of it). What am I hoping for? Also a Vulcan...

 

Really?

 

Airfix have not long put on their website they are taking pre-orders for their existing Vulcan kit for a winter 2019/20 release and a few weeks later they announce a new tool kit, that in one fell swoop will kill all those sales and incur a shed load of abortive costs. Given the precarious finances of Hornby/Airfix, not a wise move and not one you'll see on any business related MBA course.

 

Its clear their existing Vulcan mould gives them a good source of income with little investment/capital and until that mould shows signs of becoming unserviceable, I doubt there will be any new Vulcan tool.

 

Tommo.

 

 

 

 

Edited by The Tomohawk Kid
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, vppelt68 said:

Allan, if you read again my post which seems to have started the whole pre cut mask debate, you'll find me writing I think we pay 2-3 times their actual price in having to buy them separately. So I agree with you in regard of their cost; still there are kits I nowadays don't want to start building if I don't have them at hand!

V-P

I was actually responding specifically to a post made after yours which was suggesting, obviously with tongue in cheek that the big announcement was going to that Airfix was going to include paint masks. I had not, at the time seen or read your own original post. Sorry about that!😊

 

That said, I agree with the point you make. I also agree that it is a sound suggestion.  Provided they did not significantly increase the cost of the kits, I would support it. However, unless or until it happens, I still won't be buying individual masks.

 

Allan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that this thread shows any great respect to such things as wisdom or sense or business acumen.  Assuming this last point is not a contradiction in terms.  Just "I want".  Much like the current world we are living in.

 

And it will certainly take no notice of statements of reality that have already been made and totally ignored.  I don't believe that the Tarrant Tabor will appear before a replacement Vulcan, and saying that Airfix won't do something Is one way to get egg on your face, but I think either of the two types has the same probability for next weekend.

 

Yet for a company that rereleased their original Il.2 in the 21st century, nothing can be ruled out.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I would love to see a modern tooling Vulcan, that the current 1:72 one is about to be re-released seems to be pretty conclusive proof that the 'big'announcement is not a new Vulcan, unless of course it is in a different scale...  A 1:48 scale Vulcan (616mm in length with a 631mm wingspan) would be a similar size to what I guess is Airfix's largest model, the 1:24 de Havilland Mosquito (length 565mm, wingspan 688mm).  Have aircraft kits in that size range been big enough sellers to make that kind of a big announcment likely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

I don't think that this thread shows any great respect to such things as wisdom or sense or business acumen.  Assuming this last point is not a contradiction in terms.  Just "I want".  Much like the current world we are living in.

 

And it will certainly take no notice of statements of reality that have already been made and totally ignored.  I don't believe that the Tarrant Tabor will appear before a replacement Vulcan, and saying that Airfix won't do something Is one way to get egg on your face, but I think either of the two types has the same probability for next weekend.

 

Yet for a company that rereleased their original Il.2 in the 21st century, nothing can be ruled out.

So you don’t rule out the Barling XNBL-1 then?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...