Do you want Revell to release a new tool 1/32 P-51B??

[fightersweep]

Well, this is the reply I got. I was actually very happy to get a reply at all, so kudos to Revell.

 

Dear Steven,

many thanks for your mail, which is one of hundreds, we received regarding our coming P-51 D. You can be sure, that we have noted the big interest in a "B"-version of the Mustang, and we will discuss this. But first we are waiting for the "D". After that we can do the next step. One thing for sure, a "B" Version means for 75 % a fully new model kit, so we don´t talk about a "conversion" but a fully new model. All your other ideas we will put into our big list with other 1/32 scale suggestions and will discuss about all in our next coming internal new item meeting. Of Course, we can´t tell you today, what the result will be, we are sure, you understand this.

Kindly with all the best regards

yours Revell GmbH from Germany

 

The other subjects I begged for were the Dornier 17Z and Messerschmitt Bf 108.

 

Best regards;

Steve

[DeanKB]

Well, this is the reply I got. I was actually very happy to get a reply at all, so kudos to Revell.

 

Dear Steven,

many thanks for your mail, which is one of hundreds, we received regarding our coming P-51 D. You can be sure, that we have noted the big interest in a "B"-version of the Mustang, and we will discuss this. But first we are waiting for the "D". After that we can do the next step. One thing for sure, a "B" Version means for 75 % a fully new model kit, so we don´t talk about a "conversion" but a fully new model. All your other ideas we will put into our big list with other 1/32 scale suggestions and will discuss about all in our next coming internal new item meeting. Of Course, we can´t tell you today, what the result will be, we are sure, you understand this.

Kindly with all the best regards

yours Revell GmbH from Germany

 

The other subjects I begged for were the Dornier 17Z and Messerschmitt Bf 108.

 

Best regards;

Steve

 

Good work Steve!

 

That they think a B would require 75% new tooling would suggest it's a route they won't just simply follow after the D version.

[JimRice]

I went ahead and also asked for a /132 P-51B.  I then threw in a Stearman in 1/32 as nice as their 1/48 and a BT-13 in either.   The Stearman "might" have a chance.  Don't see them doing the BT-13.  Guess I'll have to build the 1/48 resin kit I bought from Lone Star Models a few years back.

[MikeMaben]

That they think a B would require 75% new tooling would suggest it's a route they won't just simply follow after the D version.

 

Not immediately no, that would an unreasonable expectation.

The Spitfire MkIX used some of the MkI/II (would be interesting

to know how much) and there was 3 years between them.

 

75% new tooling from a D to a B seems odd to me. There's just

not that much difference between them.

The software for cutting the D mold is there. Using it as a base

it doesn't seem it would take a lot of work to change it.

I know there's more to it than just a software change, and they're

likely busy with other projects so maybe a couple of years away ???

 

We'll see I guess.

[Radub]

Not immediately no, that would an unreasonable expectation.

The Spitfire MkIX used some of the MkI/II (would be interesting

to know how much) and there was 3 years between them.

 

75% new tooling from a D to a B seems odd to me. There's just

not that much difference between them.

The software for cutting the D mold is there. Using it as a base

it doesn't seem it would take a lot of work to change it.

I know there's more to it than just a software change, and they're

likely busy with other projects so maybe a couple of years away ???

 

 

Well, working from the nose to tail, the only things from a "D" kit that can still be used in a "B" are spinner, propeller, exhausts, carburetor intake, carburetor filters, exhausts, gun sight, rudder pedals, trim wheel, outboard landing gear doors, main landing gear legs, main wheels, elevators, flaps, radiator intake ring and duct, oil cooler matrix and flap, water cooler matrix and flap, tail landing gear, tail wheel, tail wheel doors, tail planes, elevators, rudder, tail light. That is indeed about 25% of the plane. All other parts need to be changed, some in small ways, some in radical ways and most of the other parts need to be completely redesigned. There is no software that can make this happen all by itself, it will take a human being operating that software and time to implement all those changes. As I said in the other thread, the B and the D are two completely different planes sharing some parts and a name. Again, thing Volkswagen Golf Mk.1 versus VW Golf Mk. 3. Or if you want to use aviation analogies, think Bf 109 E versus BF 109 F. 

HTH 

Radu 

[DeanKB]

Well, working from the nose to tail, the only things from a "D" kit that can still be used in a "B" are spinner, propeller, exhausts, carburetor intake, carburetor filters, exhausts, gun sight, rudder pedals, trim wheel, outboard landing gear doors, main landing gear legs, main wheels, elevators, flaps, radiator intake ring and duct, oil cooler matrix and flap, water cooler matrix and flap, tail landing gear, tail wheel, tail wheel doors, tail planes, elevators, rudder, tail light. That is indeed about 25% of the plane. All other parts need to be changed, some in small ways, some in radical ways and most of the other parts need to be completely redesigned. There is no software that can make this happen all by itself, it will take a human being operating that software and time to implement all those changes. As I said in the other thread, the B and the D are two completely different planes sharing some parts and a name. Again, thing Volkswagen Golf Mk.1 versus VW Golf Mk. 3. Or if you want to use aviation analogies, think Bf 109 E versus BF 109 F. 

HTH 

Radu 

This get my vote for post of the year.

[Hans]

That reads like a feasibility study....😊

[R Palimaka]

Thanks for that Radu. It outlines how different the B/C is from the D/K. You can't simply throw on a shallower leading edge kink, remove two machine guns and provide a high back fuselage on a D and call it a B. There are many differences, and as you said, it's not all small details. Attaching a Merlin nose with a Hamilton Standard prop and spinner to a Hobbycraft Allison Mustang won't work either.

 

I would love to see it happen, waiting with hope for HKM. It sounds like Revell have taken notice but they also understand that means a new tool...and it's not in the plan right now.

 

In the meantime, it sounds like we will eventually see a later production D/K from Revell down the line. I'll wait for that one.

 

Richard

Edited October 19, 2017 by R Palimaka

[alaninaustria]

Well, working from the nose to tail, the only things from a "D" kit that can still be used in a "B" are spinner, propeller, exhausts, carburetor intake, carburetor filters, exhausts, gun sight, rudder pedals, trim wheel, outboard landing gear doors, main landing gear legs, main wheels, elevators, flaps, radiator intake ring and duct, oil cooler matrix and flap, water cooler matrix and flap, tail landing gear, tail wheel, tail wheel doors, tail planes, elevators, rudder, tail light. That is indeed about 25% of the plane. All other parts need to be changed, some in small ways, some in radical ways and most of the other parts need to be completely redesigned. There is no software that can make this happen all by itself, it will take a human being operating that software and time to implement all those changes. As I said in the other thread, the B and the D are two completely different planes sharing some parts and a name. Again, thing Volkswagen Golf Mk.1 versus VW Golf Mk. 3. Or if you want to use aviation analogies, think Bf 109 E versus BF 109 F. 

HTH 

Radu

 

Well Radu, thanks for the insight! I guess you better get started eh??

Cheers

Alan

[Martinnfb]

Alan, thank You for posting the link, great idea, instead or redundant talk we can take action.

Cheers

M.

[DeanKB]

Alan, thank You for posting the link, great idea, instead or redundant talk we can take action.

Cheers

M.

Redundant talk??!!

 

How very dare you!!

[GrahamF]

I'd do a resin one, if I didn't think I'd get beaten to it or have Boeing chasing my ar*e.

Graham

[Tony T]

 

Requested a Ju 88 C-6 new variant. New nose, and some cockpit and canopy parts added to the A-4 boxing, et voila. Okay, revised box, decals and instructions too. Revell Germany seem as fond of nachtjager as many of us.

 

Sorry, didn't mention the P-51B. Rather see a later D.

 

Tony

[Paramedic]

Requested a Ju 88 C-6 new variant. New nose, and some cockpit and canopy parts added to the A-4 boxing, et voila. Okay, revised box, decals and instructions too. Revell Germany seem as fond of nachtjager as many of us.

 

Sorry, didn't mention the P-51B. Rather see a later D.

 

Tony

 

Later D is bound to come mate.

[Guest Airfixer]

<partypoop>

 

I'd really like to see whether those folks at RoG will deem a 100% new-tool B/C boxing promising enough to generate substantial sales figures in Germany, France and the UK, the latter two being RoG's core export markets. Revell's more recent 32nd scale releases, Ju 88s, Bf 109s, Fw 190s, Spitfires and the upcoming P-51D, are kinda "sure shots": iconic aircraft of WWII with an extremely high recognition factor even among occassional builders who are halfway familiar with WWII aircraft. Reasonably accurate, fairly easy to assemble at a reasonable and highly competitive price.

I daresay, a B/C boxing wouldn't sell particularly well here in Germany, mainly because a great deal of those kits will be offered via department stores, toy stores or even through major drug store chains - places where you will rarely find a die hard large scale modeller, let alone "connoisseurs like us". You'll rather see occasional customers and occasional model builders "accidentally" buying one. l also daresay, if folks think of a P-51 Mustang, the D-model will be the first version to cross their minds. Google pretty much agrees with it while performing a picture search typing "P-51 Mustang".

I, for one, have second thoughts as to RoG's willingness to trade poor sales figures in its domestic market, generating roughly 45% of their overall sales revenues, only for the prospect of decent sales figures in the UK or in the U.S via Revell USA. Even more so since a potential P-51B/C boxing will be an entirely new-tool kit. It wouldn't represent another "evolutionary" step like we've seen with their Ju 88, Bf 109, Fw 190 and Spitfire boxings.

 

You'll knever know what the folks at RoG will come up with...they're always interested, they're always open to discuss things but they really like to play things safe ("no-brainers") and they're always extremely budget-conscious and extremely retail-oriented. IMHO, a P-51B would be a big, big (and pleasant) surprise. We'll see.

 

</partypoop>

Edited October 19, 2017 by Airfixer