Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About 32tragic

  • Rank
    LSP Junkie

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Perth, Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm the same, bought the kit again recently along with the Vector engines and Quickboost exhausts in the hope the rule would be invoked and we'd see a brand new one from Tamiya or someone. Hasn't worked yet so maybe the cockpit upgrade will do the trick As many have said, it's a Beaufighter in 1:32, that's all you need to know.
  2. Just to add to above, as we now have kits of; B-17, Lancaster, B-24, my bucket list of '4 engine heavies' would be; Focke-Wulf Fw 200 Condor Heinkel He177 Short Stirling Short Sunderland
  3. Seriously, the fat lady will never get up to sing until we get a 1:32 state of the art 'plastic' kit of the Heinkel He 177 Grief.
  4. Blah, blah, blah. All we see on here is the endless "this is wrong, that is wrong, it's the wrong block type etc.etc." Well after reading most of the other thread and now this on decals and sets no even released, I am seriously over all this. I'd held off buying the kit because of the stated errors but this is just over the top as it seems nothing will be good enough for the "experts". Well I don't care and will be buying the kit today and to answer the above about the DKDecals "Can’t use those on the HB kit". well YES you can, you build the kit and put the decals on, problem solved. Point out the issues with a kit by all means but when we get to the point of being told, you "Can't use this or that" well that's just too much. I'd just like to ask the Mr.Hobby Booboo's of the World just which 1:32 B-24 kit will you be buying seeing as this one is such a pile of rubbish? I would also hazard a guess that most people looking at a built "the dragon and his tail" at a model show or club meeting wouldn't know or care that it's "not the right block version" either.
  5. Not sure what reaction you are meaning but I think the fact he's sold the entire first production run with the clear fuselage parts would be the best and only reaction he would be concerned with?
  6. On the Revell P-51 D-5, I was glad Revell released this kit because I've wanted an early D (no fin fillet) to do a specific paint finish and markings (Passion Wagon) with only the cockpit and undercarriage exposed. Both the Tamiya and ZM would have resulted in the waste of many details (engine, other internals) so the Revell kit is perfect to serve as a canvas for just the paint/markings finish. I also have the Tamiya kit for a more detailed venture. There are more reasons other than price/details why people buy a specific kit.
  7. It just seems to me that there are some who just 'have to have b$%ch' about something, no matter how small or insignificant. Claims of inaccuracies with no evidence, going on about pin marks which as I said previously are so shallow that they can't be seen with certain light directions. Well the bottom line is HKM have sold out of the first production run with the clear fuselage parts, so whine on if you must.......
  8. The bomb door pin marks on mine are so shallow to be almost invisible depending on the angle of the light source, a light sanding is all that is needed.
  9. Yes indeed, the HKM Lancaster took what seemed like forever but was worth the wait now it's landed.
  10. I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude but are you serious "issues with the fuselage and the wing shape, but we couldn’t place a finger on exactly what it was" Talk about throwing a hand grenade in the room and running away?? "window blisters, how do you glue those on and open the hole?" May i suggest holding the blister in place and marking the position with a fine felt pen (non-permanent ink) and then carefully drilling the opening and after trimming with a sharp blade 'gluing' the blister in place with clear varnish, white glue or similar, these will hold it securely unless hit directly with something. The blisters were designed that way as different aircraft had two blisters, some one and others none, if one thinks the price is a little high now, what would it be to include three full canopies for the different configurations? "the box packing is pretty bad" again, elaboration please, what exactly is wrong with the box packing? I didn't notice anything with my kit, the clear parts had additional protection added inside their plastic pages which is a nice touch. And what exactly does the packaging have to do with the finished kit? (unless it leads directly to damage in transit, which wasn't evident on mine) This sounds like a comment from a kit collector? Again I'm not meaning to be rude but such comments really require some explanation or they just seem like grenade tossing.
  11. Yes, the RAAF flew the DB-7B, A-20A, A-20C and A-20G If you want an excellent reference on RAAF A-20s "Frend Bilong Australia Tru - The Douglas Boston in RAAF Service" by Gary Byk is a good place to start. https://www.redroomodels.com/red-roo/frend-bilong-australia-tru-the-douglas-boston-in-raaf-service/
  12. Add me to the list, always up for a bit of havoc Besides it was used by the RAAF so enough said.
  13. Will need one of these for starters. http://www.master-model.pl/product/am-35-001.html http://rbmodel.pl/index.php?action=products&cat=c_ab&sub=35AB
  14. Size matters.....A bit of trivia FYI The real Lancaster is marginally smaller in both wingspan and length to the B-17. (B-17F/G W/S 103' 9" L 74' 9" - Lancaster W/S 102' L 69' 6") It's the beefier fuselage and wings that makes the Lancaster appear bigger. And the kit box is the exact same size for both the Lancaster and B-17 kits.
  • Create New...