CharmyDown

For those wanting to research Spitfires, this website has been around for ages:
 
http://www.airhistory.org.uk/spitfire/production.html 
 
We now also have this:
 
http://www.airhistory.org.uk/Hurricane/home.html
 
Heavenly... 

1/24 is niche ...
 
I'm guessing that they won't want to shoot themselves in the foot by doing something that has been done well (or at all) by someone else ... the market isn't that large and they'll want it to sell well.
 
My guesses would be ...
 
* A corsair (they already have the power egg!)
* A Hawker Tempest (same reason as above)
* Either a later or earlier Mk Spitfire than the IX (a 1a or Vb)
* An accurate Bf.109 F or G
 
... a random left field idea ... A Bristol Beaufighter (I mean - they did a Mossie so it's not an awful shot!)
 
Rog
 

Nice looking mossi John1 ! I'm a sucker for Mosquitos. Ever since I first saw 633Squadron way back when I was a kid [ 1964] I had a thing for 'em.

Indeed - I picked the issue up when I built mine - only took a few minutes to 'fix' - but, fortunately, I caught it before the paint! 
 
 
Iain

I have three of these in the stash (various marks), the plastic looks great in the box, and I've seen several made up examples at shows that really look the part. I'm no fan of exposed engines etc., I prefer the all zipped up and ready to rock 'n' roll look.
As I'm no 109 expert, what's the problem with Eduard's 1:32 109Es?

The area behind the fuselage is swollen.  It's not noticeable from the side...   but viewed from the top, front, or rear, it looks awful.  And once you see it...   you can't un-see it.  When I built mine, I felt something was wrong, but couldn't quite place it.  And once I applied the early BoB camo pattern, it jumped out at me.  It was in a group build and once completed and RFi pics posted, it went straight into the bin.
 
You can see my pics here: 
 

Too short chord of slats, quite basic cockpit and sporty assembly of the nose area are the most obvious issues. The rest is very minor. Moreover the very initial release had canopy shape issues quickly solved by Eduard.

I have three of these in the stash (various marks), the plastic looks great in the box, and I've seen several made up examples at shows that really look the part. I'm no fan of exposed engines etc., I prefer the all zipped up and ready to rock 'n' roll look.
As I'm no 109 expert, what's the problem with Eduard's 1:32 109Es?

I'm probably in a minority of 1 - but I love their 1:32 109E kits.
 
Yes, they take a little work, but the surface detailing is more subtle than the Dragon kits IMHO.
 
I'd love to see them pick up the scale again.
 

 
Blue skies,
 
Iain

Actually very very minor points that do not deserve passionate debates...

Thanks K1.
All of the mods have your back on this, and I fully believe in this case, as per our discussions, it was 100% warranted.

OK guys, time to right this ship and get it back on topic. We've been aware of Simon's conflict of interest with regard to Kotare and Richard Alexander for some time now, and normally we would treat this as their personal business to sort out between them. But it has spilled over into many threads here in the forums, and caused a certain amount of aggravation. Given that we've recently discovered that Simon had in fact been removed from the forums once before, I've taken the rather drastic decision to ban him. We don't normally discuss these decisions openly in the forums, but I think an additional level of transparency is required in this case.
 
OK, back to Eduard's fantasy 1/32 release schedule!

Kev

And not needed on this forum! 

At this point I think I have to let everyone know that you confessed in a PM that you had an axe to grind with Kotare.
The folks here have a right to know about this conflict of interest when reading your posts.
The fact that you hijacked a thread about Eduard to dis on Kotare isn't helpful.
 
No kit is perfect, the tiny errors you mentioned in a previous thread about the Kotare kit are negligible by any modeling standard and can be corrected should one desire to do so.
I think the Kotare Spitfire is a terrific kit, accurate, well engineered and you are trying very hard to find tiny faults out of spite.

They haven't, and this constant sniping hasn't gone unnoticed.

I must have missed the memo.  When did the Kotare Spits go from “outstanding” to “garbage”?

Using the wings from either of the vac kits is a lot more work than correcting the kit supplied wings IMHO.
 
I have a couple of the ID Models (Tigger) kits - somewhere...
 
I'm so close with a solution - the really hard work is done - but it's at least a few months away I'm afraid - and I make no promises as I'll feel even more guilty if it doesn't materialise.   
 
Iain
 
 

Hi all,
 
I'm temporarily locking this thread at the present time.
 
Recent interest is lovely to see, and really appreciated, but has been a catalyst to some self-imposed pressure/stress/anxiety which I could really do without at present, as I've been really busy on other things.
 
However, I have been honing my 3D design skills so, as soon as I can find some time to sit down and focus on the Liberator again, I'll hopefully have something closer to a solution.
 
And when I'm there I'll post here...
 
Thank you,
 
Iain

No, not in any way, shape, or form!
 
Believe me - I've gone through ALL the options... 
 
If I can get the inserts to work it will result in a light/strong structure that keeps existing surface detail, most of the existing kit parts - and is relatively simple. This route will also be cheaper and take an awful lot less design effort.
 
The wings are too large for complete resin prints - and if I could get a printer large enough - the results would be too heavy and relatively brittle.
 
If printed on the FDM printer as complete wings you'd end up having to do a lot more work - and have to surface prep and engrave all external surfaces.
 
I've been really busy elsewhere, but I will get back to looking at the CAD models at some point in the future.
 
Iain
 

I've foolishly sat through those I-love-the-sound-of-my-voice-but-I-never-learned-presentation-skills so-called reviews where, at the end, I learnt 100x more by squinting at the vimeo with the sound off and finger on the pause button. Utter friggin' drivel most of them. They very seldom know the difference between their @$$hole and a hole in the ground when it comes to subject knowledge. 
Bring back Fanny Craddock.
Some YouTube presentations are, however, indispensible - especially the fixing appliances ones.
 
Tony
 
 
 
 
 
 

Just as well I didn't say "the dog's bo%%cks"!
 
Tony

Agreed - CAD is one thing, tooling another matter!
 
But they appear to know what they are doing, so I'm sure they've factored everything in.
 
Possibly better to have stayed quiet at this stage regarding future plans - but we'll see.
 
As others have said - their planned subjects tick lots of boxes from where I'm sitting - I wish them every success! 
 
Iain

Never mind seamless intakes, what we really want are all the parts needed to make a British Phantom.

A little bit of good news about the Typhoon rebuild.

My very thoughts.
After rummaging through the stash to locate my Revell  Typhoon with all it's various AM bits, I thought this would be a good candidate for a Kotare release.
Maybe not thier next release, but certainly worth future consideration.