Kenneth

If they are repops, why are they presented as Kitty Hawk kits? And by whom? Received a Kingfisher from Super Hobby yesterday, and the box, instructions, decals and everything else are 100% identical to the presentation of that kit on e.g. Scalemates.

Super Hobby (very reliable and swift) still has a fair selection of helicopters, and also fixed-wing Kitty Hawk 1/32 kits: T-28, F-86D, F-86K, Bronco, T-6 and RF-5E. They also had Vought Kingfishers, ordered one last Saturday (got it yesterday/Wednesday here in Germany), there were no more left by Monday.

Revell published their new releases for January-April 2024, and the only 1/32 aircraft are reissues of the Alouette II helicopter and an ancient F-16A. There were four years between the releases of their 1/32 P-51D „early“ and „late“ versions…

Anybody knows what their decals are like in general? I‘d really like to see them before taking the plunge. I‘m only interested in a Danish version, and kit manufacturers usually get them wrong, in particular the proprietary font for serial number. At that price, I‘d want a kit which complete and correct… but maybe I‘m being naïve here…

Seems to me that they are painting themselves in a corner, modularity-wise, with an F.3. Beyond an F.4 (which HK has already done) and possibly a T. Mk. 7 (with a new forward fuselage), all subsequent variants will have to have completely new fuselages (and some possibly changes to the wings and engine nacelles as well, IIRC). Much more would have been possible with an F.8.

Definitely a P&W R-985 Wasp Junior…

G-MOTH was indeed rebuilt from parts as DH.82, by Russavia at Duxford in the Eighties, if I recall correctly. Note the lack of tailplane anti-spin strakes and the fabric-covered upper, rear fuselage covering (plywood on the DH.82A).

Don‘t know whether the moulds were sold to them, but Revell has in the recent past reissued the Hasegawa 1/32 Storch, 1/32 F-5E, 1/48 Citation and (if I recall correctly:) 1/48 Learjet and 1/48 Falcon.

… and the exhaust muffler. But both probably retrofits they only got much later in their Air Cadet career, to quieten them down a bit..

Agreed to some extent; wouldn‘t have taken much effort to make a T. Mk. 7 and an F.8 as well. An NF.11 would also have been nice…

Maybe I‘m biased because I‘m Danish (one of the export countries), but I personally find the F.4 historically much more significant, considering the number produced and the countries that used it, for many the first jet fighter. It‘s also prettier than the earlier marks, I think…. Have coincidentally just bought this kit, and found a set of Danish decals too…

Nothing wrong with the kit as such, npr with the previous versions of it, I have the floatplane and the PA-18-90 as well

Preview now available on their homepage: https://www.revell.de/neuheiten-revell/sports-plane-builder-s-choice.html It‘s the otherwise great Piper PA-18-150 Super Cub (with wheel u/c), with phantasy decals „designed by the Revell community“ , according to the blurb. Whereby it‘s actually just called „Sports Plane“? Well, they‘re useless „what if“ decals, in particular as the „D-PCUB“ registration is completely off; all German single-engine aircraft under 2000 kg are registered in the „D-E…“ range. Which they should know very well from the initial release of the PA-18-90, which had very accurate decals for a German aircraft. So which „person on the street“ buys a not cheap kit of a mostly unknown aircraft type, which is not that simple to assemble? Or is it just me?

With one exception (the Harrier), Airfix‘ 1/24 kits have been well-known WW2 aircraft. The German ones have been done, most of the British ones too. The two US aircraft (P-51D and F6F) were types that were also used in the UK. My guesses would be Grumman F4F Wildcat/Martlet Hawker Tempest Mk. II Vought F4U Corsair

I‘m currently building the new one. There are no two parts that do not require fettling before they will fit regardless of size and/or location on the model, and essentially all visible joints need putty. Extremely tiresome.

That‘s what I hear too (service-mindedness). But will they have enough non-damaged ones in stock?

That particular aircraft (D-FMGS) is essentially a newly built aircraft with some original components, that was completed in 2018. Revell‘s kit is from 2013, I believe…

In this review of the new P-51D „late“, all three canopies were damaged. I think I‘ll get mine from a shop were I can check them in advance.. https://www.kitreviewsonline.de/p-51d-mustang-late-in-132-von-revell-03838/

https://www.modellbau-koenig.de/Flugzeuge/Flugzeuge-1-24-1-32/Alliierte-Flugzeuge-WK-II-1-24-1-32/Royal-AF-Commonw-AF-Flugzeuge-WK-II-1-24-1-32/Avro-Lancaster-B-Mk-I-III-with-full-Interior

Did you read my earlier post? Obviously not. There are no rights, particularly regarding the parts breakdown, moulds and assembly methods, unless corresponding applications have been filed and granted.

Depends on what has been registered as a trademark/design. Is it the object/shape, or are we only talking about a name and a logo? Ferrari had protected the 250 GTO but somebody contested it, and its scope of protection was reduced in Europe to model/toy cars only, due to long-term non-use for „real“ cars. But again: Protection has had to have been actively sought and granted, and whoever has whatever rights has to litigate themselves, nobody will do it for them.

If I‘m not mistaken, the DC-3 had a single door on the right-hand side, and the C-47/-53 and R4D had a double door on the left-hand side. So you can‘t make a post-war, civilianized C-47 OOB from this kit. Seems like a missed opportunity?

1) If there are any intellectual property rights involved here, then it can only be trademarks/designs or patents, which would have had to be applied for and granted in all of the countries, where legal action is threatened. This obviously includes China, where litigation is notoriously difficult, as already mentioned. Moreover, I only see potential for such IP rights in the design/engineering of the kit as such, or in the mould as such. Do any model kit designers/manufacturers do this? In all the jurisdictions where they want to sell their models? 2) „Automatic“ IP rights, without an active application and processing, in my understanding only applies to artistic/literature work, such as books, under the Berne Convention. Even if it would apply to a Lancaster as a 3D-object, then the rights would belong to Avro‘s successors. It would definitely never apply to the moulds. 3) As also mentioned earlier, the core of this dispute will lie in the wording of the contract with the mold manufacturer. Whatever design work went into designing the kit only has a bearing on the conflict, if it is reflected correspondingly in that contract. If the contract was signed with legal effect in China, well, then good luck in going to court there… 4) Modellbau König in Germany still has it on their website.

It‘s the Piper PA-18 with phantasy decals based on (kids?) drawings submitted in an online competition a while ago. It was on their Facebook page some months ago. Nothing that the even slightly serious modeller would even remotely consider, and I frankly wonder about the point of reissuing a fairly complex, non-fighter-jet kit with cr*p decals…

Hoping for a correctly done Danish one, and preferably in F-, RF- and TF-35 versions, but am not holding my breath. Most manufacturers always get the Danish decals wrong, in particular the unique RDAF font for the letters and numbers…