Looks like a new model company has emerged

[ICMF]

12 hours ago, Peter Roberts said:

Has there been any indication of what tack they’ll be taking? WW1? WW2? ‘Tween wars? Modern? Scale?

 

No.

 

A similar thread on the WWI Modelling board was locked down, because there's no indication as to WHAT they'll be doing, hence no indication it would have anything at all to do with WWI.  And since they have absolutely nothing to do with WNW, other than the fact that they used to work there, it's an entirely blank slate.  Heck, they could do a series of classic sailing ship kits, or fantasy robots.  After all, one ex-WNWer is doing a 1/144 civil plane.  

 

Any predictions, guessing or wishlisting is entirely pointless at this time.  They're going to do whatever it is they're going to do, in whatever scale they choose to do it; we just have to wait and see.

[Max Headroom]

On 8/23/2021 at 4:46 PM, Thom216 said:

Closest I've got...

Complete thread drift. This set was built for the sole porpoise for that bonk on the head.

 

Sorry, what’s this thread about?

 

Trevor

[JohnT]

1 hour ago, Max Headroom said:

Complete thread drift. This set was built for the sole porpoise for that bonk on the head.

 

Sorry, what’s this thread about?

 

Trevor

Dear Max Headroom

obviously the answer to your question is that the video clip is to demonstrate the lack of headroom on the Enterprise. As I recall the film censor was worried about the amount of headroom bonking on the movie but let it go anyway 

Chin Chin

JohnT

[HMSLion]

8 hours ago, Paul Thompson said:

On the face of it I was about to agree, then did a quick count on the website (might have mis-counted a bit, I'm supposed to be cooking at the moment).

 

Single engined scouts: 83. Multi-engine stash queens , 6 (2 Gothas, 2 AEGs and 2 Felixstowes). Not counting the Lancasters and HP 0/400 because not released.

So, maybe not so much.

 

Paul.

Ah, but the Lancasters and HP must be counted.  They cost money to develop.  WNW started with the one Gotha as a multi-engine type...but at the end, released two AEG variants, two Gotha G.1 variants, and had two Lancaster variants and two 0/400 variants in the development pipeline.

 

The Fokker Triplane needed to have been done far earlier...and probably the Camel, too.

[Paul Thompson]

6 hours ago, HMSLion said:

Ah, but the Lancasters and HP must be counted.  They cost money to develop. WNW started with the one Gotha as a multi-engine type...but at the end, released two AEG variants, two Gotha G.1 variants, and had two Lancaster variants and two 0/400 variants in the development pipeline.

 

The Fokker Triplane needed to have been done far earlier...and probably the Camel, too.

 

Fair enough regarding the development costs having already been spent.

 

I'd agree that the Gotha Ursinus (which I'd forgotten was in two variants as well) was a baffling decisioin, since there was only one built. I suppose the excuse for it was that it was in reality the first of an important line. I can see why the other twins were entertained because they were all very important in the context of the war, bearing in mind that the scouts, although more glamorous and more recogniseable these days to Joe Public, only had the one job, which was to stop the genuinly important aircraft (bombers, recce and artillery spotters) from doing theirs. My problem with WNW TBH is the scale. I just don't like models that large, or have room to store more than a very few of them once built, regardless of the quality (despite those that seem to have found their way into my stash).

 

Regarding the Camel and Fokker Dr1, as you probably know, these were victims of the publicly stated policy of playing nice, i.e. not producing a kit if there was an adequate one already. Although that ultimately changed.

 

Not being privy to the true story of how the finances worked out, I have a niggling suspicion that perhaps small returns on the big kits only hastened, rather than caused, the demise. All this is by the by anyway. I hope the new company does well,  it would be nice to see new kits of the previous WNW quality regardless of whether or not they're in a genre that interests me personally, and I'll be very interested to see what they are. Just not going to speculate, though.

 

Paul.

[Eivind Lunde]

I'm a bit surprised that Peter Jackson allowed WnW to go bankrupt as I thought it was his hobby project? I understand he lost money on other projects as well, but if he dreamt about building a 1/32 Supermarine Nighthawk in his spare time, he should be aware that he would need to subsidise the development.

[Dave Swindell]

2 hours ago, Eivind Lunde said:

I'm a bit surprised that Peter Jackson allowed WnW to go bankrupt as I thought it was his hobby project?

As far as I'm aware, WNW hasn't gone bankrupt, Peter Jackson has laid off most/all staff and suspended operations, the company is still extant but it's not trading.

[Eivind Lunde]

5 hours ago, Dave Swindell said:

As far as I'm aware, WNW hasn't gone bankrupt, Peter Jackson has laid off most/all staff and suspended operations, the company is still extant but it's not trading.

[Dave Swindell]

3 hours ago, Eivind Lunde said:

Short term, I suspect there would have been more chance of seeing the kits already tooled back in production sooner if they had gone bankrupt, the tooling etc would have been sold off to cover the debt and the buyer would have wanted a return on their investment.

[Neil Lambess]

There's been some big clues on the Facebook page....it's a subject kitted before and you have to guess the year it was previously kitted ....I suspect an announcement very soon maybe in the next two weeKS ......exciting stuff

[mick b]

And it’s a Spitfire Mark I...as seen on Aeroscale 

 

Mike

[Kagemusha]

2 hours ago, mick b said:

And it’s a Spitfire Mark I...as seen on Aeroscale 

 

Mike