1:72 VC-10

[Mike]

You only have to look at the Trumpy Vigilante to see a kit that was desired by many and topped the FSM most wanted polls on more than one occasion, but once it rocked up in the plastic, was bought by few...

God I'm taking part in the circular debate "Yes", "No", "Yes", "No", repeat to fade...

[The wooksta V2.0]

And here's me thinking - hoping, actually - that you'd locked it.

[Kev1n]

That could equally mean the opposite of course. It more likely means they have still have stock from the initial production run to shift and they will simply remain in the catalogue until they are sold. I very much doubt they have been popping them on a regular basis to keep in the catalogue.

Marty...

the afx 737 and 727 have consistently been two of the best sellers; there are more after market decal sheets for these two than any other type; they are small; relatively easy to build; and cheap; the real ones sold extensively and were used worldwide by more operators than any other type.

A /72 scale VC10 will be none of these

[Roland Pulfrew]

kevIn

Let it go. There are those on here who would dearly like to see a 1/72 VC10 produced to a decent quality by a main stream manufacturer. You aren't one of them. For all your arguments there are just as valid counter arguments. There were only 54 produced - as opposed to the 49 Nimrods which has already been modelled in this scale. It would be too big in 1/72 - as opposed to the E3D which has been modelled in this scale (and only 68 built). It was never used by enough operators - but lots more than the Nimrod and more than the E3. Nobody would want it - as opposed to the numbers who say they would. It would be too expensive at £50/£60/£70/£80 - as opposed to £100+ Spitfires, Mosquitoes, Mustangs. etc, etc, etc. As someone with well over 2000 hours on type I still think it would be relatively easy to do all of the variants in one box. After all the the RAF VC10K2s were used by Gulf Air; the VC10K3s were used by East African; the VC10K4s were used by BOAC.

It cannot be beyond the wit of a good manufacturer to produce a breakdown of parts that would allow longs and shorts. Yes the rivet counters might say it has the wrong stub wing or a missing wing fence, but I am afraid (like the Nimrod) if it look like a duck and it quacks like a duck....... There are just as many reasons for doing it as there are reasons for not doing it - except one: the business case. All it takes is a manufacturer with some balls though.

[pigsty]

Let it go? You could say the same to the people championing the idea. All of this thread is proceeding on supposition and opinion. It's approaching the level of theology, and we know where that leads ...

[Mike]

And that my dears is why I don't like these threads much, because sooner or later, the two entrenched points of view start to butt heads. We'll put this on sabbatical now I think, because unless I've missed something, pretty much everything has been said now. Several times over. Roland & Sean, although you were directly responsible for the end, the circuitous nature of the argument was the other cause, and those folks know the score.