Italeri news 2008

[Nev]

Mind you, they still haven't done a 48th Hunter (or a T7 in any scale, damn it).

Well, the 72 kit isn't set up to do a T-bird without a complete new fuselage. The 32 kit *is*, but they've already stated that the 32nd kit didn't sell well enough to justify tooling the 2 seat fwd fuselage

As for the 48th Merlin, well Italeri's 1/35 Staghound disappeared off the face of the Earth for most of 2007 before suddenly appearing. Thankfully they were correcting problems that were raised when the first test shots appeared on the web a year previously.

[Dave Fleming]

Ahh got ya - so announced in 2007 and released in 2008. So these 2008 announcements are 2009 bound then

Not neccessarily - they sometimes take longer than expected to release kits, so we might see some or all of these in 2008

[keefr22]

But they were based in Germany

Well, I bet there's been a few Hawk away days to Germany over the years, so maybe that'll be a good enough excuse....!!

[Tim]

Okay, I'm going off at a tangent, but I've heard lots of different tales about the 32nd Hunter. There was a conflicting story that Revell were still planning to do the T7 option eventually but nobody knows when. I guess they will do it eventually as it would effectively give Revell a shiny new kit to sell without the expense of creating a completely new kit, even if it doesn't sell in huge quantities. Besides, selling phenomenal amounts doesn't seem to concern Airfix/Hornby any more...

I take it the Panther T7 conversion is either still not available, or still grossly inaccurate so that it wouldn't even be worth buying? Hmm. looks like a scratch building job here...

Edited January 19, 2008 by Tim

[thx6667]

Besides, selling phenomenal amounts doesn't seem to concern Airfix/Hornby any more...

Sorry Tim but can you explain or substantiate that? By what criteria do you think they're not interested in "selling phenomenal amounts" - because they're not doing a 1/32 Hunter trainer?

[Gary West]

By what criteria do you think they're not interested in "selling phenomenal amounts" - because they're not doing a 1/32 Hunter trainer?

If it were, it wouldn't be a phenomenal seller in my opinion - not at that scale anyway

[Tim]

er... well if they're producing kits as "Limited Edition" then I think the description is self explanatory innit?!

[thx6667]

er... well if they're producing kits as "Limited Edition" then I think the description is self explanatory innit?!

Nope. Not every kit is being done as a limited edition and those that are were done with "risk" subjects in order the guarantee that stock would not be gathering dust in warehouses.

Besides, other kit companies have done limited edtions, Hasegawa do it all the time.

[Tim]

Not quite sure what you're trying to argue about here! All I said (if you read my comments) is that there's some notion that Revell don't want to re-issue the Hunter as a T7 because it supposedly wouldn't sell all that well. I merely said that this doesn't necessarly have to be an important factor, when companies like Airfix seem happy to produce limited runs of particular kits, therefore I don't quite see why this would be a factor for Revell, especially when the re-issue would comprise of only a new nose and tail section - not a whole (and therefore expensive) kit.

Contrary to your above comment, I think the term "Limited Edition" is self explanatory to most people. Is there something in this reasoning that you don't follow?! Doh!

Edited January 19, 2008 by Tim

[AnonymousA667]

There appears to have been a genuine misunderstanding here. Tim it took me a couple reads before I got the gist of your point which if I understand it correctly is a fair one, viz: Revell haven't grasped the 'Ltd' concept whereas Airfix have. Interestingly Revell have announced some Matchbox re-pops as 'Ltd', so perhaps they are not so far behind.

peebeep

[Nev]

Tim, a year or 2 ago one of the Germans on ARC emailed Revell and asked them when they would be doing a 1/32 Hunter T7. Their reply (which he posted up) was basically - when we tooled the FGA.9 we did it so that we would be able to do a 2 seater relatively easily, but the FGA.9 didn't sell as well as we hoped so we're not going to do a T.7

The sales thing is quite probly true as you could pick up the FGA.9 for 15 or 16 quid at airshows, which considering that it is in my top 3 favourite kits *ever* tells me that traders were having trouble shifting it. You only have to look at the F.6 release - which is all but the FGA.9 with a new decal sheet - and that had an RRP of 25 quid which is OBSCENE value for money.

But there you have it anyway, straight from the horses mouth.

[DamienB]

Revell have announced some Matchbox re-pops as 'Ltd'

In appeal, perhaps?

[AnonymousA667]

In appeal, perhaps?

Ooh, we have a Matchbox Luddite in our midst. Shame on you sir! We should send you over to ARC for the next Matchbox Madness GB.

peebeep

[thx6667]

Contrary to your above comment, I think the term "Limited Edition" is self explanatory to most people. Is there something in this reasoning that you don't follow?! Doh!

Your phrasing suggested that somehow Airfix/Hornby were missing the bigger picture when it came to sales. Perhaps if you'd just said that Revell should make a T.7 a limited run (along the lines of the Airix/Hornby limted stuff), that would have been much clearer.

[DamienB]

I'm not a huge fan of the kits themselves though they did produce some fantastic subjects and they do have a lot of nostalgia value seeing as I built so many as a kid.

Can't think of many I'd want to build these days though, in my preferred 1/72 post-war British jets area at least.

[thx6667]

Ooh, we have a Matchbox Luddite in our midst. Shame on you sir! We should send you over to ARC for the next Matchbox Madness GB.

peebeep

That's fighting talk Mr Burke! Burn him! Bur... dammit these matches are wet.

[AnonymousA667]

:rofl:

[AnonymousA667]

Can't think of many I'd want to build these days though, in my preferred 1/72 post-war British jets area at least.

Go on, you know you want to!

peebeep

[Tim]

Nev, I'd heard the same story, but I wouldn't imagine that this was a decision set in stone for all time (is anything?!). I accept that the big Hunter didn't/doesn't sell all that well but I'm sure it fares just as well (or better) than some of the other stuff in the Revell catalogue, so surely they must still look at the idea of re-issuing it at some stage, when they can effectively produce a "new kit" without having to tool-up a complete kit from scratch. I mean, they did it with the F6 so it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to do the same with a T7. Guess it all comes down to just how many kits Revell want to sell before they perceive the exercise as being worthwhile.

To be honest I'm not bothered whether they produce a T7 or not but I'd like to know one way or the other! I have this horror that I could waste ages scratch-building a T-7 nose/tail myself only open a Revell catalogue... you know how it goes...

[GreenDragon]

Does anyone know what 1/72 Armour is to come from Italeri in the coming year?

Cheers Daz

I found this list Daz, but it's just figures and an anti tank gun. Link http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/News.html

Paul Harrison

[Giorgio N]

What's the controversy with the AMX Giorgio? I/we don't hear much about it here and I'm curious.

Also, why hasn't it gotten a name yet? I read/heard some years ago that it would be called Centauro, but that seems to have faded off again.

Actually the AMX has had a name for quite a while and the name is Ghibli, a hot wind coming from the Sahara.

The plane is also very non officially known as "topone", that means big rat. This because of the appearance of the nose, especially with the black radome.

As for the controversies it's unfortunately a long story that I'll try to make short.

The first production batch suffered from a number of problems, including panels literally detaching from the plane. The plane also suffered from an accident rate that was higher than expected. Now in fairness it's a rate not too worrying for a military jet, comparable to the harrier or the tomcat. It's higher than more modern jets but still acceptable. Problem is that every accident in Italy has to be investigated by the civilian Justice too, and this has led to plenty of media hypes about the machine.

A few of the accidents have been related to the real weak side of the plane, that is the engine. The AMX is powered by a non-reheated RR Spey, that is sure a good engine, only it was found to be too heavy and not enough powerful for the plane. It is also considered too slow in getting to higher RPM fro the role it was intended. Originally the plan was to use the GE F404 but the AMX consortium preferred to use a british engine to avoid export contracts to be prevented by US vetoes on the re-export of the engine. Unfortunately the only potential customer that appeared for a while was Argentina right after the Falkland war..

Then there's the ever present matter of the cost of the program: it was an expensive program and many sides would have preferred to use the same money to buy F-16s instead. But then every indigenous program is expensive and in this way we had italian workers being paid by the taxpayers rather than american ones... well, usual pros and cons of any defence program, where politics is always strictly involved as everybody who ever worked in aerospace knows too well.

All the machines from the troubled first batch are now retired and the plane did a good job over Kosovo, so it is a useful asset for both the Italian and Brazilian air forces. It's notan F-16 or a Tornado, but as a light attack plane does the job properly.

Might have forgotten something, but hope this helps !

AMX aside, I wanted to add a couple of thoughts to the discussion,. especially on the RoG Hunter: it is true that the Luftwaffe never used the Hunter, but the Dutch did, and holland seems to bequite a good market for Revell. A good number of Revell kits have dutch markings provided. Another good market is switzerland.. so much that I was surprised to see the F.6 coming before the FGA.9. While it's a small country, switzerland seems to be a good market for plastic kits, a fact witnessed by the number of kits proposed with swiss markings by many companies. So yes, there's a very good market for Hunters in continental europe !!! Now if only we could have the 2-seaters and an F.1-F.4...

Giorgio

[Giorgio N]

I found this list Daz, but it's just figures and an anti tank gun. Link http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/News.html

Paul Harrison

Found this for the military vehicles:

1/72 Scale Military vehicles

17052S Autoblinda AB 43

7053S ABM 42

7054S Bishop Mk.I S.P. Gun

7055S Kfz.305 Ambulance

7056S Sherman Calliope

7057S Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer

1/72 Scale Military vehicles EASY MODEL (2pcs)

7504S Pz.Kpfw.V Phanter Ausf.G

7505S Pz.Kpfw.VI Tiger I Ausf. E

7507S Pz.Kpfw. III J

7508S Autocannone Ro3 with 90/53 AA gun

7509S M 3A1 Half Truck

A few Esci reissues in there..

The biggest news though is neither a plane nor a tank, but it's the MAS 500 torpedo boat. Something that my ship modeler friends told me made many people happy.

Giorgio

[Tim]

Agreed, a 72nd Hunter T7 would be great - I have no idea why Revell seem to have fixed the moudling so it can only be a single seater - madness!

As you say, Netherlands, Switzerland, Beligium, Sweden, Denmark, RAFG... if you can't sell a Hunter kit then what the hell can you sell?! An F1/F4 would be nice like you say but it's the twin seater which is a real pain to convert. Considering that everybody had the twin-seater, you'd think it would be the one with the post sales potential... wierd.

Nearly finished my big Hunter book btw - should be published around March time. It's looking good - way better than the Vulcan book - got more material than space in the book to accommodate it!

Edited January 21, 2008 by Tim