Jump to content

What model has nobody kitted that you REALLY want to see?


Alan P

Recommended Posts

Just thought of another one- the Parnall Elf. Just three were built, though one survives and is still flying. I can't imagine anyone in their right mind releasing a kit of the Elf, but if they did one in 1/72, I'd buy it.

 

Looking back at my suggestions so far, I might as well just say "all the aircraft of the Shuttleworth Collection in 1/72."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just been reviewing this thread and noticed I made bobo in my original post by naming a ship!

 

Thinking about it, aircraft wise I would like to see are

 

1/48 Fairey IIIF

1/48 Blackburn Blackburn 

1/48 Avro Bison

 

All with markings for aircraft operated from HMS Furious.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I’ve thought of another Id really like, but I doubt it’ll happen unless there’s a conversion kit:

 

1/48 Tornado F.2, with the early 229 OCU red/yellow markings. That would be amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Lord Riot said:

I’ve thought of another Id really like, but I doubt it’ll happen unless there’s a conversion kit:

 

1/48 Tornado F.2, with the early 229 OCU red/yellow markings. That would be amazing.

Couldn't one crosskit the Revell IDS and F3?

( short IDS exhaust and short IDS  forward fuselage F3 and shortened F3 belly recesses?) There was a conversion for the 32nd one some time ago I think!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, exdraken said:

Couldn't one crosskit the Revell IDS and F3?

( short IDS exhaust and short IDS  forward fuselage F3 and shortened F3 belly recesses?) There was a conversion for the 32nd one some time ago I think!

Whilst that suggestion might be good its not what this thread is about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Black Knight said:

Whilst that suggestion might be good its not what this thread is about

Yes, but there was also a "conversion kit" mentioned.... sorry for going off-topic 😀  just wanted to be helpful....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 9:18 PM, Jon Bryon said:

 

b) different 'types' which, to me, are clearly 'sub-types': Mirage III/5/Kfir, F-86/FJ Fury (this one is complicated!), Su-27/30/33/34/35 family, MiG-23/27, F-80/T-33, Vampire/Venom, Mi-24/35, Seafire/Spitfire, Su-9/11, P-39/63, La-9/11

 

c) weird examples which straddle a) and b): Intruder/Prowler, Panther/Cougar, Harrier I/II, Freedom Fighter/Tiger II

 

A bit late to this end of the party, so others may have commented, but if you consider Spit I and 24 two different aircraft, I think it's a bit tough to have the Kfir as merely a sub-type of the Mirages - clearly it was a development of the Mirage, but with such a lot of changes; similar for Vampire & Venom - different engine, entirely new wing for the Venom, a bit like Panther & Cougar.

On 11/25/2021 at 5:08 AM, Space Ranger said:

Strombecker did one back in the late '50s/early '60s; I had one. It was later re-done by Aurora, who then passed the molds on to Monogram, where it became an A-37.

Sure the Monogram kit is based on that ancient Strombecker mould? I never compared them as I only have an empty Strombecker box, but in contrast to the other Monogram kits based on existing Aurora tools (e.g. F-111A, A-7A, WW I stuff), the A-37 appeared some 15 years later, and the conversion of the mould would have required some fairly drastic retooling - in essence, only part of the airframe shapes would have been useful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bit left field.  Large scale  nose sections.  Like a cockpit fest. 

Example.  1/24 Lancaster and B-17. 

 

The list can go on and on.

 

Any takers??

 

Dick

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still hoping for a 1/72 Vickers Varsity. Got the lovely Aeroclub vac kit, but I'll surely mess that up.

Other than that, I'd love a 1/72 Fiat G.46 and a Howard 500. In 1/32, I'm still hoping for a B-26B.

 

Steve

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Winded Penguin said:

I'd like to see... 😉

 

Wingnut Wings quality Spitfire XIV high-back in 1/24 

 

Tamiya quality Hercules C130-J in 1/48

 

Tamiya quality Boeing P8 Poseidon in 1/48

 

 

 

 

.......and I forgot Tamiya quality Vickers VC10 in 1/48  

Edited by Winded Penguin
grammar
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tempestfan said:

A bit late to this end of the party, so others may have commented, but if you consider Spit I and 24 two different aircraft, I think it's a bit tough to have the Kfir as merely a sub-type of the Mirages - clearly it was a development of the Mirage, but with such a lot of changes; similar for Vampire & Venom - different engine, entirely new wing for the Venom, a bit like Panther & Cougar.

 

 

Well my comment was intended to show the futility of trying to distinguish between an aircraft type and sub-type in any meaningful way, but when it comes to the Mirage/Kfir and Spitfire 1/24 distinction I'll stick with what I wrote on the basis that a kit manufacturer can make a Mirage/Kfir by modifying a common set of mould (a la Kinetic) but no one has done this for a Spitfire Mk.I and Mk.24, presumably because you can't. Ergo a Kfir is a Mirage sub-type (at least the wings are the same!) but a Spitfire Mk.24 is effectively a different aircraft. Of course it also matters which Kfir we're talking about...

 

But all this is highly debatable, which is precisely my point.

 

Jon

 

Jon

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All in 1/72 ....  an accurate Britannia 'accurate' being the key word here.  The Mach 2 kit has some dimensional issues (I've seen data showing the span is too                                short which may through off cowling placement & wheelbase dimensions.

 

                       an accurate CL-44/CC-106 Yukon (not the AIM resin conversion & the Mach 2 Britannia)

 

                       an accurate CP-107 Canadair Argus. (same comment as for the Yukon)

 

                       an accurate 1/72 DHC-Otter covering wheels/skies/floats & the amphibious floats (the Hobbycraft kit is total mash-up -  being a mix of 1/72 &                                1/76 dimensions) 

 

                       DHC-3 Caribou (the Hobbycraft kit can build into a nice kit, but it needs a fair bit of TLC ... assuming you can even find one) 

    

                       DHC-5 Buffalo

 

                       CF-100 Mk.3/4/5 ... with options for the -5C & -5D (Hobbycraft? ... Really?  There's the much superior Astra Models vac, but like Hobbycraft, it's                                long-time OOP)

 

                       CT-114 Canadair Tutor (same comment as for the CF-100)

 

                       a buildable & accurate Dassault Falcon 20 (ever tried the Mach 2 kit?)

 

                       Canadair Sabre Mk.2 - a dedicated kit ... one not requiring 2 separate conversion packages mated to a base kit & a lot of additional TLC.

 

                       Canadair North Star/Argonaut - a dedicated kit .... not the OOP Revell C-54 with the AIM resin Merlin engine conversions.

            

 

                      Scott

Edited by Scott Hemsley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jon Bryon said:

 

Well my comment was intended to show the futility of trying to distinguish between an aircraft type and sub-type in any meaningful way, but when it comes to the Mirage/Kfir and Spitfire 1/24 distinction I'll stick with what I wrote on the basis that a kit manufacturer can make a Mirage/Kfir by modifying a common set of mould (a la Kinetic) but no one has done this for a Spitfire Mk.I and Mk.24, presumably because you can't. Ergo a Kfir is a Mirage sub-type (at least the wings are the same!) but a Spitfire Mk.24 is effectively a different aircraft. Of course it also matters which Kfir we're talking about...

 

But all this is highly debatable, which is precisely my point.

 

Jon

 

Jon

 

The problem here is that it does not matter what a modelling company does, I may decide to use a certain set of parts because they look closen enough but they are not in real life. Model companies may decide to make a totally new mould for a Spitfire 24 when fuselage sections are mostly the same between this and other variants while the same company may re-use a Mirage fuselage as it is for a Kfir even when fuselage sections are different... model companies have several times based kits on existing ones without considering the differences on the real aircraft, with the result of issuind inaccurate kits

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Scott Hemsley said:

All in 1/72 ....  an accurate Britannia 'accurate' being the key word here.  The Mach 2 kit has some dimensional issues (I've seen data showing the span is too                                short which may through off cowling placement & wheelbase dimensions.

 

                   

 

 

 

If we consider the matter of accuracy a lot of apparently very popular subjects would easily enter the list... If I had to ask for something, I'd ask for a ACCURATE 1/72 Spitfire Mk.I.... of course in any thread dealing with kits never previously issued everyone would think I'm crazy if I pled for someone to make a 1/72 Spitfire Mk.I... and yet, IMHO there is no really accurate Spitfire Mk.I on the market today !

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Giorgio N said:

 

The problem here is that it does not matter what a modelling company does, I may...

The problem is that it doesn't matter what anyone does. No one has come up with a meaningful definition of what a 'type' is beyond arbitrary nomenclature. What's the parts commonality between a Mk.I and Mk.24 Spitfire? I don't know, but given the nose, tail, rear upper fuselage, canopy, wings, etc., are all different, it can't be that much.

 

That's what the discussion is about: what is a type vs a sub-type. You have your opinion and I have mine, but that's all it will be: an opinion.

 

Jon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2022 at 9:14 PM, Scott Hemsley said:

All in 1/72 ....  an accurate Britannia 'accurate' being the key word here.  The Mach 2 kit has some dimensional issues (I've seen data showing the span is too                                short which may through off cowling placement & wheelbase dimensions.

 

                       an accurate CL-44/CC-106 Yukon (not the AIM resin conversion & the Mach 2 Britannia)

 

                       an accurate CP-107 Canadair Argus. (same comment as for the Yukon)

 

                       

 

                      Scott

Aircraft in Miniature have made conversion parts for the MACH2 Britannia kit to be converted into a Canadair Argus and CL-44, but expecting manufacturers to produce injection kits of these in 1/72 is too much to expect, due to cost and size of these kits. I would be quite happy to see both 1/144 scale.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/08/2022 at 15:31, jenko said:

Bit left field.  Large scale  nose sections.  Like a cockpit fest. 

Example.  1/24 Lancaster and B-17. 

 

The list can go on and on.

 

Any takers??

 

Dick

Why a scale as small as 1:24? Wouldn't 1:16 or or 1:12 be better  These larger scales would also suit kits of engines and gun turrets that would sit nicely on a shelf or a desk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/08/2022 at 15:31, jenko said:

Bit left field.  Large scale  nose sections.  Like a cockpit fest. 

Example.  1/24 Lancaster and B-17. 

 

The list can go on and on.

 

Any takers??

 

Dick

Why a scale as small as 1:24? Wouldn't 1:16 or or 1:12 be better  These larger scales would also suit kits of engines and gun turrets that would sit nicely on a shelf or a desk

  • Haha 1
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...