Jump to content

Lanc news


Guest Smitty44

Recommended Posts

I can only say that the model better be a damn sight better than the CAD

 

If they put out a dog it'll kill them

 

 

In exactly what way? Don't toss out a grenade like that without some kind of specifics.

 

 

... Ditto! ...

 

... CAD doesn't look that bad for an early model Lanc ...

Couldn't we at least wait until the latest test shot before posting judgement?

They've enlisted a lot of help/feedback from individuals in the know since the first one - hence the delays.

 

Whatever hits the shelves ... it's going to be a sight better than a Vac or subscription magazine build ... 

I think it will sell quite well regardless of any minor defects ... "kill them" is an rather large exaggeration.

 

Rog :)

Edited by Artful69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I think the Lanc is a cool aircraft, I can't believe someone is making a 32nd scale kit of this.   How many people have the cash / room available for a beast like this?  

 

From the first day I heard this was a possibility (how long has it been now?) I have been planning for the event. If they produce it, I will make it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I think the Lanc is a cool aircraft, I can't believe someone is making a 32nd scale kit of this.   How many people have the cash / room available for a beast like this?  

 

Should be something like 26" long with a 38.25" wingspan.

 

It almost makes the Wingnut Wings Felixstowe look small! 

 

One thought: perhaps you could display it with the wings mostly chopped off and showing some internal wing structure; I have seen Felixstowes like that and they look pretty cool actually.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong I want this to be good, and I'll definitely be buying one if the reviews are favourable; and I may still even if they are not.

 

But, the CAD looks a bit odd: one wing bigger than the other - yes I know the kit won't be like that but this is meant to be a shop window so why shouldn't it look ‘just so'?

 

I've also seen comparison photos of the nacelle join to the wing comparing it to the real thing and its clearly different.

 

Given their Mosquito they need to demonstrate they've got this right - I'm not going to assume or give them a pass I'm afraid.

 

If you feel different then that is your prerogative

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong I want this to be good, and I'll definitely be buying one if the reviews are favourable; and I may still even if they are not.

 

But, the CAD looks a bit odd: one wing bigger than the other - yes I know the kit won't be like that but this is meant to be a shop window so why shouldn't it look ‘just so'?

 

I've also seen comparison photos of the nacelle join to the wing comparing it to the real thing and its clearly different.

 

Given their Mosquito they need to demonstrate they've got this right - I'm not going to assume or give them a pass I'm afraid.

 

If you feel different then that is your prerogative

 

Don't worry about the look of the wings. This is just an  "optical illusion" due to the parallel projection of the CAD image. When there are two dihedral wings viewed in a certain angle as parallel projection, one appears larger than the other. Here is a picture of my RS.14, and even though it looks a bit weird, I can garantee that the wings have the same size.

 

VBBhRlZ.png

 

Cheers

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If HK Models ever produces the later fuselage without windows I would undoubtedly purchase a copy inorder to build a post war Canadian MR Lanc.

 

I take it there are additional, hard to scratchbuild, differences between early and late versions?  Filling fuselage windows should be a very simple task.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take it there are additional, hard to scratchbuild, differences between early and late versions?  Filling fuselage windows should be a very simple task.

 

The vast majority of operational wartime Lancs were either Mk Is or Mk IIIs, the difference between these two being the latter had Packard Merlin rather than Rolls Royce Merlins. There's the added complication of "needle point" or "paddle blade" props but they do not determine the Mark of the Lancaster, some Mk Is were fitted later with paddle bladed props but they were still Mk Is!

Max

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mock up seems to be a bit of a mish mash of various Lancaster parts rather than the particular aircraft it will represent in the kit, there are also the different bomb aimer blisters and cockpit side window blisters that varied across aircraft in the Squadrons rather than belonging to a certain mark. Personally I'd rather have less internal detail and only one exposed engine to make it more affordable to the masses, but it's wonderful in this day and age that we can discuss things like this.

 

Graham

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...