Jump to content

1/48 Avro Lancaster Family from HK Models !


AlCZ

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Mancunian airman said:

 Sad to report that the Tamiya canopy kit is not a good example, the front (windscreen ) centre leans back to far  . . . :undecided:

 

I’ve looked into it, and while there may be some slight truth to what you say (I cannot link pictures right now), the overall cross-section of the Tamiya canopy is much taller and way superior in overall appearance. The two downsides I see is the thick Tamiya frames and the lack of “forehead” to that canopy, but sanding off the frames to mask them thinner can solve both to some extent. 

 

  Re-angling the windscreen, if necessary, is quite doable under the old rule it is easier to remove than to add... The fact is the overall Tamiya canopy cross-section is way taller, and that solves most of the HK problems.

 

  The only unknown now is how the periphery of the Tamiya canopy base conforms to the HK fuselage cut-out...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don´t undestand this "nick picking" and "scepticism" over every new kit. Monogram B-17 is obsolete, vintage kit. I bought a HKM B-17 and it is a Fortress. Look it is as fortress, now you have many AM sets.... and you can build an B-17 in modern style...

 

Lancaster is the same case.  A  nice kit, for reasoneable price tag, with full rivets and nice detailing.

 

A 40 years NOBODY can make 1/48 Heavies or "Viermotorige".  For me don´t exist a B-24, B-26, B-17 or Lancaster because i can´t build a kit older as me ! Lancaster in render looks as Lancaster, i pray for Modeling Gods for quarter scale Lanc from "Fix" but - not... B-17 from Tamiya was rumored a twenty years ago, but where is ? I understand a few people was a fanatics on this type and must have an absolute accurate kit... But nobody make it. "Viermotorige" moulds  are expensive in quarter scale and nobody can make it. I wait for WnW gorgeous lancaster, as my last kit for Farewell in scale modeling - but where is WNW ? So, i can´t wait for hypotetics  Fortress by Tamiya (they not make a P-38J or Me-262B !!!! )or lookin for obsolete and expensive their Lancaster. We live in strange times, with strange Pandemics, and isn´t time a wait.... Viermotorige can´t producers make, because every bought one and this is all. Producers make most favourite Mustang or Spit or Butcher Bird or Mess, because they sold  many times with many variants and L.E.. Medium bombers make systematicaly one company (ICM) but not Heavy bombers....  Medium bombers are better choice for model companies... And when we are realistics, we must say a many traditional companies live from history.... re-released old kits, from new moneys.... Revell, Italeri, Heller....  few new kits and re-boxes of re-boxes....  Airfix run in small scale, Tamiya make a one -two new aircraft in year.... and Hasegawa in last times nothing :( Only who makes a real new kits from real new tool are Asian and post-communistics Europe companies.... (Czech, Ukraine, Russian (Zvezda).   But "Viermotorige" make a HK only :( 

 

And when you can build a 1/48 you can´t bought a 1/72 or 1/32. (1/32 Heavies are for Lords  in Manors...but are Lords scale modellers ?).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AlCZ said:

I don´t undestand this "nick picking" and "scepticism" over every new kit. Monogram B-17 is obsolete, vintage kit. I bought a HKM B-17 and it is a Fortress. Look it is as fortress, now you have many AM sets.... and you can build an B-17 in modern style...

 

Lancaster is the same case.  A  nice kit, for reasoneable price tag, with full rivets and nice detailing.

 

A 40 years NOBODY can make 1/48 Heavies or "Viermotorige".  For me don´t exist a B-24, B-26, B-17 or Lancaster because i can´t build a kit older as me ! Lancaster in render looks as Lancaster, i pray for Modeling Gods for quarter scale Lanc from "Fix" but - not... B-17 from Tamiya was rumored a twenty years ago, but where is ? I understand a few people was a fanatics on this type and must have an absolute accurate kit... But nobody make it. "Viermotorige" moulds  are expensive in quarter scale and nobody can make it. I wait for WnW gorgeous lancaster, as my last kit for Farewell in scale modeling - but where is WNW ? So, i can´t wait for hypotetics  Fortress by Tamiya (they not make a P-38J or Me-262B !!!! )or lookin for obsolete and expensive their Lancaster. We live in strange times, with strange Pandemics, and isn´t time a wait.... Viermotorige can´t producers make, because every bought one and this is all. Producers make most favourite Mustang or Spit or Butcher Bird or Mess, because they sold  many times with many variants and L.E.. Medium bombers make systematicaly one company (ICM) but not Heavy bombers....  Medium bombers are better choice for model companies... And when we are realistics, we must say a many traditional companies live from history.... re-released old kits, from new moneys.... Revell, Italeri, Heller....  few new kits and re-boxes of re-boxes....  Airfix run in small scale, Tamiya make a one -two new aircraft in year.... and Hasegawa in last times nothing :( Only who makes a real new kits from real new tool are Asian and post-communistics Europe companies.... (Czech, Ukraine, Russian (Zvezda).   But "Viermotorige" make a HK only :(

 

And when you can build a 1/48 you can´t bought a 1/72 or 1/32. (1/32 Heavies are for Lords  in Manors...but are Lords scale modellers ?).

Totally agree.

 

These are 'scale representations' using the tools available to the manufacturers and based on a whole host of design compromises and yet in almost every regard they blow the toolings of previous years out of the water in terms of engineering and options. They look the shape, they have at least as many, but generally far or more options available than their predecessors while the potential for super detailing - not just through AM but now 3D printing - can take them to heights never before available. If it doesn't look right to people then don't buy it. If it doesn't have the 'greebles' that they want then they should just add them themselves or not buy it. Or get the kit, measure the plastic, do a detailed compare and contrast with the Tamiya kit and even with other scaled kits, using laser measuring tools then compare with the real aircraft in museums and photos and plans and then send a dissertation back to HKM of all the faults and flaws and mistakes and missing details and lost opportunities, which might be more satisfying than just building and painting the kit?

 

It's a 'new tool 1/48 Lancaster!' - the only other one available in 40 years that a company has invested huge resources to produce and get into our hands in the 'middle of a global pandemic' which I think is extraordinary. And in all likelihood, AM companies will look to go to town on the detail sets. But with the economic fall-out from the pandemic still to really hit home in force there is, sadly, a good chance that a number of these projects may come to an end and that would be such a shame. So I'm with those that feel great that HKM appear have done 'enough' right to get me excited and want to give them my money. Just like I did with the recent Meng F/A-18E. And when the kit is in my hands I'll look it over against my books and if there's enough there that I like I'll keep and hopefully build and add detail as I go. Just as I did with the recent Meng F/A-18E (which from CAD's and photos taken under certain conditions, suggested to some that there were 'wrong' shapes all over the place - but looked fine when I placed the parts over the top of my Hasegawa Superbug - which I'm sure was probably also wrong back in its launch day but thankfully I missed any such commentary).

 

But sometimes it can be hard to feel good about a purchase after sifting through a lot of these comments. How could I possibly waste my money when it had already been pointed out by someone that the 'ECS Fairings' or some panels or other are 'clearly' the wrong shape and the 'Intake Valve' or whatever is more rounded when it should be oval. Wasn't I listening? Didn't I read the comments before I spent my money? Didn't I see what the statements about it being the wrong mark, or whatever, for that kind of feature? Didn't I look at the photos provided? Didn't I see the clear difference? Didn't I? Didn't I? 🤕

 

Maybe we even need two different kinds of forum? One for those that wish to study, dissect and criticise kits and one for those that wish to buy what they like the look of and then just get on with building, painting and sharing? 🤔

 

I think I will enjoy this kit. I hope others who buy it will do too and feel good about their purchase. 🙂

 

 

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have said somewhere how grateful I am that HK have produced a 48th Lancaster.

Looking at the intial sprues of this kit there are a number of things I can see that I can alter, not because its 'totally wrong' but because small changes are what I can do.

 

Their 32nd scale Lancaster is obviously better detailed and again there are details that I can see that need correcting, again because I can carry out such, they will be done.

 

All of us should appreciate that these companies spend lots of money into research and manufacture which can take years and at the end of the day if you dont like what you see, you aint forced to buy it.

People review products and they are expressing opinions, they may know the aircraft well from personal experience, but I also think its down to your own skill level as to whether you can tackle the issues that a reviewer notes. My own view is that these reviews are generally there to show and point out the good and bad points, the rest is up to you . . .

 

I can only say Thank You again to those kit manufacturers who produce the kits that I want, I could never scratch build  in great detail a full aircraft or vehicle . . .

 

I for one will be purchasing more than one 48th scale Lancaster

Ian

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problem is one of different sensitivity to overall shape, vs sensitivity to crispness of details.

 

  Of course the newer HK B-17G has better detail than the Monogram, and I plan to use its cowlings and maybe it’s propellers (better twist) on the 1975 kit.

 

  But the HK B-17 is simply a mediocre, badly researched kit, with fictional wing airfoil, fuselage bulk and outer nacelles. Do not try to justify this as rational “design compromises” when simply copying Monogram dimensions would have improved it 10 times.

 

  The new HK Lancaster is radically better than the old Tamiya, nothing comparable to the HK B-17 at all, but pointing out the old Tamiya has a more accurate canopy is not nit picking, it is simply a useful observation.

 

  If you want to feel good about your purchase straight from the box, there are several 1:48 kits out there that are nearly perfect out of the box: In WWII fighters I can point to Tamiya Ki-61, Me-109G-6, P-38, Ki-46, F4U, Hasegawa Typhoon, J2M3, FW-190As, Meng or Eduard P-51 or Spitfire Mk IX.

 

  You will never see many criticisms of the above, because there isn’t a lot to make.

 

  In WWII bombers I can point to the Xuton Il-4, Zvezda Pe-2, Dragon Ju-188E, ICM He-111 (a few issues but not bad), Tamiya Betty (again a few issues) and Hobby Boss TBF-1: Not as many, and I may forget quite a few, but still good for a few years worth of builds straight from the box.

 

  Should the selection of really accurate 1/48 WWII kits be a lot broader than this in 2021? Yes, but what can one do? Note most of the better kits are less than 10 years old, so the complaining since the Internet years has probably contributed to that trend. Note only one of the above is a Chinese kit, the HB TBF-1, and even that should use Accurate Miniatures tailplanes and rudder... We have to accept Chinese makers are simply more in the “good enough” crowd, and that means the results are usually more error prone, however great the details are. With that in mind, we are lucky the HK Lancaster only needs to borrow a canopy so far. It is definitely one of the better Chinese efforts we have ever seen.

 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I have succumbed and pre-ordered the kit from Rails of Sheffield.  The kit may have an incorrect canopy, but that's certainly something I can live with.  Top and bottom of it, it's a 1/48 Lancaster, and an improvement on the Tamiya.  I'm not lamenting the absence of the WNW kit too much, that would have been too big for me anyway, although it did look very nice.  I shall be a very happy old gentleman when I get my hands on the HK Models kit.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

spacer.png

 

Stretching the CAD images vertically slightly it does seem the 1/48 HK Lancaster could be closer to actual than the initial condition of the CAD images suggested. We'll have to wait for the plastic to judge definitively:

 

spacer.png

Edited by WrathofAtlantis
Image issue
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You made a good case for your POV Atlantis in a very civil way, well done.

But now you've bought it up, it seems to me the CAD canopy representation and the pic you show are very different in many ways, there is some framing missing on the CAD that is your picture and more.

You can spend your whole modelling life waiting for a perfect kit and it might never arrive, or you can just accept some errors and get on with it ... I'm not knocking you at all mate, but when it comes time to buy and build mine, will always now think ... hmmm, this is not perfect and worry, there will be that doubt.

Sometimes its better to let sleeping dogs lie, but from now on and because of this CAD vs a picture you show comparison, there will be a nagging doubt in some of us, what has been seen can not be un-seen kinda thing ... honestly wish I'd never seen this thread now, its kinda taken the polish off my HK 1/48 Lanc buy ... and no pun intended my friend :)

I am sure if we had a full CAD view and were able to manipulate this drawing and look from every angle there will be many more errors compared to photographs, where would it end?

Sometimes in life you need to let things slide and say ... we have what we have, seeking perfection is a futile pursuit IMHO.


99% of us would have been none the wiser and happy if this had not been pointed out, pretty sure about that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One 48

If it puts your mind at rest, the canopy is 99% correct.

The only issue that I can see is that there is an additional frame, each side running front to rear,  along the Escape hatch in the cockpit roof.

 

Cockpit-Escape-hatch.jpg

 

You are possibly looking at 'shadow' frames on the real aircraft as opposed to the CAD image  ??

Edited by Mancunian airman
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, when is Boeing complet bad, i build only "G" , never bought an "Memphis Belle" and investment funds to Lancaster.

 

But it very sad a B-17 isn' t good. In my eyes looks as "Boeing".

I was very sceptic an accurate 1/48 Fortress was released on our lifetime :/

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, colin said:

Well last year I almost bought the Tamiya kit at £78, so glad I didn't as £22 more delivered I couldn't resist the HK one

It was the 'rumour' of this that caused me to let go of my Tamiya kit and bits last year.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/13/2021 at 6:27 AM, Nocoolname said:

It was the 'rumour' of this that caused me to let go of my Tamiya kit and bits last year.

Same here Colin. When HKM first announced the down sized kit, my tamiya kits went . I’ve pre ordered one from my LHS AUD 130 to my front door which I think is a great price. They are expected late March/ early April here in Australia 

I have it on good authority from a LHS owner here who  regularly talks to Neil from HKM that a 48 Dambuster will also be released

 

Bruce 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sold my Tamiya Lancaster years ago. It had the old tool engine nacelles that Tamiya replaced when they reissued the kit. Now there will be a fantastic replacement for it. I think that getting some Master replacement MGs, seat belts and maybe resin tires should be all this kit may need.

 

For some really great and accessible reference material you can visit the grave of the Wing Nut Wings Lancaster.🧛‍♂️

http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3193&cat=1

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Masinissa said:

 

 

For some really great and accessible reference material you can visit the grave of the Wing Nut Wings Lancaster.🧛‍♂️

http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3193&cat=1

 

I wish you hadn't posted that link as it also shows the model shots.  Of course, I had to look at them and be reminded of what we are no longer going to get!  Would have knocked the HK Models Lancaster for six.  Shame on you!

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wel

On 3/17/2021 at 2:03 PM, 593jones said:

 

I wish you hadn't posted that link as it also shows the model shots.  Of course, I had to look at them and be reminded of what we are no longer going to get!  Would have knocked the HK Models Lancaster for six.  Shame on you!

Well the 1/32 one at least

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2021 at 2:03 PM, 593jones said:

I wish you hadn't posted that link as it also shows the model shots.

It's a tribute to the skill of the WNW designers that, for me, some of the best reference images come from those shots of the model. A tragedy. 

 

Rich

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lights, engines, action... I'm toying with the idea of getting one of these: Magic Scale Modelling Avro Lancaster plug and play electronics kits. Its designed for the Tamiya Lanc but I wonder if it will fit the new HK Models kit OK or perhaps there will be a new version specifically for the new kit. The website also has a great build review of the HK Models 1/32 Dambuster Lancaster - well worth a look if only just for this. 

 

There was a great interview & review of the Magic Scale Modelling products on Flory Models Youtube channel a few years ago. Its not something I've really come across before and if I'm honest I always considered electronics in models, the preserve of the RC modelling community.

 

Rich 

 

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...