Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DeanKB last won the day on July 2 2018

DeanKB had the most liked content!

About DeanKB

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

632 profile views
  1. I apologise, guys. I won't darken your doors in the future.
  2. I zipped an email off to Richard, and he was kind enough to reply. He said that the research work for the movie did not help WNW with their kit - they did their own, seperate research, as the movie research was completely different to what WNW required. He also said the kits would be sold on the same basis as all WNW kits - limited run. Finally, the 4 books on the designers desk, hinting at French, Italian or Austro-Hungarian subjects - "don't necessarily read too much into books seen in the background, as they have all sorts of reference books lying around."
  3. At those prices, they'll remain available as well.
  4. Not sure placing it on the back of a door would not be without consequences..... In terms of the kit, a few years ago I would have thought it was pretty bloody impressive, and I'd have one for uniqueness, if nothing else. Now? With the B-25, Ju-88, He-111, He-219, Bf110, P-61, Gotha, AEG, Felixstowe, Mosquito & B-17 already here, and the B-24, B-26, Ki-45 and multiple Lanc's on the way - my multi-engined-multi-person-aeroplane-kit budget has already been seriously compromised. Doing HpH's Dreaded Walrus didn't enamour me towards HpH, either.
  5. A model can be a toy - like a model elephant, or model car, for instance. But a scale plastic model kit, designed to be built & displayed, is clearly not a model in the same way as a child's toy, for the reasons I've already discussed. As for the bolded section - please, grow up and discuss modelling, rather than throwing insults around. It's pathetic. I also made no such claims regarding you last sentence. Saying the kits are toys is an opinion that we are all allowed to have, and I certainly didn't say they are not worthy of discussion - but on a large scale aeroplane modelling board, where we obsess about accuracy, it just seems an odd subject to complain about tracks when the model lacks scale & accuracy all over. Finally, I will also take the advice you have so helpfully, and openly, given in your signature, and place you on the ignore list. Life's too short as it is.
  6. I understand - emotionally, the old kits bring exciting memories back to life, whilst the new kits make the hobby more enjoyable.
  7. Assuming you mean "They" in place of "There"? Toy - "an object for a child to play with, typically a model or miniature replica of something."; Toy - "an object, often a small representation of something familiar, as an animal or person, for children or others to play with; plaything."; Toy - "something for a child to play with"; Toy - "a toy is an object that children play with, for example a doll or a model car"; Toy - "a toy is an object that's made for a child to play with"; Toy - "an object for a child to play with." Scale Model - "is a representation or copy of an object that is larger or smaller than the actual size of the object being represented"; Model Aircraft - "a replica of an existing or imaginary aircraft"; Scale Model Aircraft Hobby - "the construction of accurate, nonflying scale replicas for display. Just because some children take an interest in making model aeroplanes, does not make model aeroplanes a toy. A friend of mine has given his 12 year old daughter his old Canon DLR, because she loves taking photos and uploading them. This does NOT make the Canon DSLR a toy.
  8. I'm nostalgic when it comes to the actual aeroplanes - I spend hours upon hours in museums, at airshows, in books, etc. But when it comes to modelling them, I must say I prefer modern, more technically advanced kits, over the older "original" boxings.
  9. The kit is for kids. It has "toons" on the box. It's a little wee shrunk Panther, trying to look all cute and non-threatening. You could take issue with any number of issues - insufficient wheels, made-up muzzle brake, tiny gun, stunted growth - but they are all supposed to look like that, because it's a cute little cartoon tank. It seems bizarre to pick out the tracks, of all things, to complain about on a mini cartoon tank!?
  10. The new Revell Spitfire costs a shade under £20. That's a bloody bargain!! Don't go farting around with a 50 year old kit, when you can have a brand new, decent, basic kit for not much money at all.
  11. Pretty bloody damned good, old chap!!
  12. Well, that's a new way to justify buying more kits! The old, tried and tested, "cost of kit/length of build" remains the ultimate go-to, probably saving many marriages - and costing a fair few as well. Strangely enough, expensive kits always take a long time to build, thereby ending up costing less per hour than a Revell Spitfire. Then again, some kits take so long to build because they are not great kits (mention no names, HpH Walrus), and end up looking great value on the old cost per hour measure, when in fact you just want to throw it clean across the room, out the window and hopefully under the path of a nearby steam roller. And, of course, the worst measure of all is a kit that has not yet been built. Cost per hour is huge, as the only time invested is the 10 minute initial look at the moulding & instructions. My Achilles heel.
  13. So, it's kind of a dumbed down WWII display team?
  14. A Texan painted up to be a completely different aircraft? I this a normal occurrence? I don't get it.
  15. This is the answer. Their search algorithms, to use the technical term, are crap. You have to hit the specific term absolutely correctly - no Google like near misses.
  • Create New...