heraldcoupe

Just to clarify, this wasn't an aircraft that survives, but one that was comprehensively assessed when it was newly delivered (1939?). The photographs were something of a revelation, like the best walkarounds of museum exhibits, Cheers, Bill.

The Soviets purchased two new Do-215 and they were very extensively photographed, full interior and external detail shots. It's some years since I've seen these images, but they are presumably still to be found somewhere, and I would assume have made it into print, Cheers, Bill.

Dragon's 1/48th Ta-154/Fw-190 Mistel was available in a Revell box until fairly recently, Scalemates says it was issued in 2012, Cheers, Bill.

The assembled model looked like a mixture of 3D printed and injection moulded parts. The rear and forward fuselage looked like 3D prints, where the engine cowlings, spinners etc were a lot cleaner like IM plastic. This is a long way from finished, but it looks to be a very impressive kit when we get it, Cheers, Bill.

The 1/24th Spitfire Mk1 has been in production forever, so presumably it's been a good earner for them. The tooling is well past it's best though and it looks like a serious candidate for replacement, but I suspect a MkIX would be most likely this time round... ...but I said pretty much the same before they announced the Typhoon, Cheers, Bill.

They used to be very good, but the last couple of years they have been truly dreadful. 6 months waiting for clear parts for their recent 1/48th Sea Fury which were unavailable a few weeks after the kit's release. When pursued for the promised parts after that time, I was told they couldn't help and to return the kit to the shop where it had been bought. Fair enough and in line with consumer law, but why wait six months to tell me. Canopies for their 1/72 Blenheim were chased for over a year, they eventually sent an entire replacement kit as they had no spares stock... Cheers, Bill.

My recent experiences with Airfix customer services haven't been so good. Waiting 6 months for replacement parts which were on backorder, then being told to take the kit back to the retailer when I chased up the status. This wasn't for a Typhoon (mine was OK) but for another smaller kit released this year, YMMV Cheers, Bill.

It's quite a bit more expensive than the B-17 was when first released, but the latest B-17 price brings them pretty close.

WNW have reportedly been working on their Lancasters for 8 years so far, the kits' catalogue numbers certainly put them amongst other subjects which WNW were releasing from 2012 onwards. While the HK Lancaster was announced some time ago, there have been long periods of silence with many of us questioning whether we would ever see it released. Cheers, Bill.

That's really intriguing, I considered mine to be amongst the best fitting kits I've ever built. Worst fitting for me wasn't an LSP but a SSP, one of Roden's early He-111 series. A misshapen fuselage like you just couldn't imagine, with pretty poor fit everywhere else. Sticking strictly to LSPs, the aforementioned Airfix Fw-190 caught me out too. Everything seemed to fit well, then I found the engine was substantially longer than it should be when it was too late to do much about it! Cheers, Bill.

This is a bit of a pet subject for me, and I'm glad that Revell haven't jumped on the Do-17Z. If Revell pressed ahead with the Do-17Z now, they would not have an original example available to measure. Now I don't know what plans and drawings relating to this aircraft survive, but there's no substitute for studying the real thing. All of Revell's recent 1/32 releases have involved study of complete airframes during restoration, and this once more is the case with the He-219. Take into account that there is a substantially complete Do-17Z underwater, which the RAF Museum intends to recover this year. A Do-17Z produced in a few years will benefit from vastly improved research material. The people at Revell aren't stupid, I'd be astonished if this isn't a major consideration to them, Cheers, Bill.

I think it makes a lot of sense. Revell will have been able to study an original example of the He-219 under restoration, in the same way they have oen with the He-111 and Ju-88. For the moment, the only Do-17 known to exist anywhere in the world remains underwater. That should change in Spring 2012, and I'm sure Revell will be paying a great a great deal of attention to that aircraft's recovery, Cheers, Bill.

Looks rather nice. Have they announced a Mk2 as well as the Mk1? The Mk1 is shown on their website, but the (different)CAD images on the Armorama site show some features of the Mk2 http://www.mbltd.info/35114.htm Cheers, Bill.

I'd be even happier if they did that with their La-5 or La-5FN....... Cheers, Bill.

Afraid not, Revell have reboxed ICM's 1/48th Bf-109F, rather than the superb Zvezda kit, Cheers, Bill.

There is a preserved example of the Do335, however until recently, no Do-17s were known to exist. With the recent discovery and planned recovery of a substantially complete Do-17Z, I suspect Revell will aim to complete their BoB Luftwaffe trio. The availability of an airframe to study and measure makes all the difference, Cheers, Bill.

I'm hoping to get one of the new Revell Hawks in the next couple of days. Plan is to get one put together quickly, my son has designs on it hanging from his bedroom ceiling, which should prevent me from getting bogged down in cockpit detailing! If this thing's going to fly, it will need a pilot, so does anyone make a suitable seated figure, in appropriate flying gear? Cheers, Bill.

Excellent information, I'd extrapolated a lot from photographs, but without the reports to back it up. I don't have the Forsyth book though it's on the wishlist! I've not seen any images of outer wing guns on Mistel Fw-190s, so the availability of the bays may have been theoretical, and not actually used in practice. I've also been intrigued by the use of (apparently) Ju-88G-1 airframes, with bomber glazing. These have often been incorrectly identified as Ju-88H variants. I can't establish whether the entire cockpit assembly from a bomber was installed, or whether just the glazing was added for improved visibility. Given the poor state of finish on most Mistel airframes, the entire cockpit area on these appears to be the same base colour as the rest of the airframe, presumably RLM 76. This includes all the framework for the glazed areas, where I would expect to see a mismatch. If James installs the warhead he won't have to worry about this aspect at least..... Cheers, Bill.

Unless you have photographic evidence to the contrary, showing the specific aircraft you're building, assume that the Fw-190 lacks any wing guns. I've failed to find any images of an Fw-190/Ju-88 Mistel with these guns installed. In the case of the training Mistels, even the cowling guns seem to have been deleted. Though images of Mistel composites from above are pretty scarce, the Fw-190 in the IWM was captured as part of a Mistel trainer. http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/1997/07/stuff_eng_detail_fw190a.htm There is nothing to suggest the guns were removed and faired after capture, though there is no certainty on this. I'm currently building thsi combo in 1/47. I've had to put my own 1/32 Ju-88 on hold as I don't have a large enough work area to build it in! A Mistel in 1/32 is going to hugely impressive....... Cheers, Bill.

I assumed it would be based on the Norwegian P-1. The air intake on the left hand side of the cowlings identifies it as a P of some type. Interesting to see the seperate insert for the dorsal gunner's position, which would make the late H variants with a gun turret feasible. Cheers, Bill.

I've had my Arado since last week, though due to surgery on my hands, I've yet to do any construction. For assembly of the canopies, I will be using a technique I have used on numerous recent builds. Rather than using any conventional adhesive, I put canopies like this together with Johnson's Klear (Future). Support the parts in alignment using Blutak or similar, and flow Klear along the joint as you would with a liquid glue. Klear is much stronger than many people realise. It relies on a close fit between parts, but this shouldn't be a problem from what I can see. Cheers, Bill.

On my example of exactly the same kit, the decals broke very easily, and were too stiff to conform where they didn't break. Completely unuseable in my case, and again my only experienc of Roden decals to date, Cheers, Bill.

Oops - just spotted the other thread.

Not sure these additional releases have been reported here. Rather taken with the RE8 and the Pfalz, but I've yet to make a start on either of their other kits I bought last year! Cheers, Bill.

The Revell kit is generally held in low regard, but like you, I just happened to have one (well two actually!) sitting around. I asked for opinions on the Britmodeller site,but ended up doing my own research. Given that I also have the Trumpeter 262 as a benchmark, itself a kit which is genearlly held to be accurate, I came up with the following: Well I mananged to unearth the Trumpeter Me-262A and a Revell Me-262B. To my surprise, the differences weren't as marked as I had expected. The horizontal tail surfaces actually sit a bit further forward on the Revell kit, but the shapes are actually quite close.The wings are reasonable enough, with the Revell upper wings being a little longer. This is explained by the Revell fuselage being a bit skinny in plan view. Interestingly, the extra length exists outboard of the engines, with the fuselage widened a little, the centres of the engines would be about the same between the two kits, with only a little trimming of the Revell tips to bring the span to the right length. Revell's engine nacelles look a bit fat, but they're of little consequence as I'll have the Trumpeter spares, so I didn't make any meaningful comparison. Undercarriage bays are a bit undersized with Revell, again widening along the centreline would bring the overall wheel track a little closer to where it should be. So not as horrendous as I had thought. Bear in mind though that both kits remain substantially attached to their sprues, so comparisons were cursory, just enough to establish whether there's any mileage in using these for conversions. While I've yet to do anything with my kits (too many SSP projects on the go), I think they're worth keeping for future use. The nacelles are the only potential buildstoppers, so speak nicely to someone who might have the spares from the Trumpeter kit..... Cheers, Bill.