Hobby Boss 1/32 B-24J - Initial Observations

[Dave Williams]

The -24 used a Martin top turret.  I think the only common turret between the B-17 and B-24 was the Sperry ball turret.

[Bill_S]

HPH put out a nice clear resin canopy for the Ar-196...

[Kagemusha]

2 hours ago, Bill_S said:

HPH put out a nice clear resin canopy for the Ar-196...

 

That was from their own kit though.

[Bill_S]

3 minutes ago, Kagemusha said:

 

That was from their own kit though.

 

Maybe so, but that's not how they market  it.

[Dennis7423]

Can't help but wish they would have gone the route of Hasegawa with their 1/72 line...

 

10070130z4 by Dennis SAuter, on Flickr

 

Here's to hoping we get some replacements in the not too distant future.

 

- Dennis S.

  Thornton, CO USA

 

 

[Pup7309]

6 hours ago, Dennis7423 said:

Can't help but wish they would have gone the route of Hasegawa with their 1/72 line...

 

10070130z4 by Dennis SAuter, on Flickr

 

Here's to hoping we get some replacements in the not too distant future.

 

- Dennis S.

  Thornton, CO USA

 

 

100% Engineering difficulties? The canopies and engines can’t be that hard to upscale? I don’t know much about these things but they are so obvious to the final look. (Unless you want to spend up on AM.)

[Sanderman]

OK, OK, so the turrets suck.  But what about the wingroot / fuselage junction where the B24 rubber really meets the road?

 

You want to nitpick turret model variants to the nth degree and ignore a wing root error that's visible from space with the naked eye?

 

I don't get it.

 

The most distinctive feature of the B24 is the wing.  And this not only fails the smell test.  It fails the faint whiff test and the ever popular "if it looks like a B24 I'm happy" test.

Edited November 28, 2018 by Sanderman
typo

[Kagemusha]

12 hours ago, Bill_S said:

 

Maybe so, but that's not how they market  it.

 

True, but it had already been produced for their own kit, if they hadn't it's extremely doubtful they would. So in the case of the B-24 turrets I can't see them doing any.

[Pup7309]

6 hours ago, Sanderman said:

OK, OK, so the turrets suck.  But what about the wingroot / fuselage junction where the B24 rubber really meets the road?

 

You want to nitpick turret model variants to the nth degree and ignore a wing root error that's visible from space with the naked eye?

 

I don't get it.

 

The most distinctive feature of the B24 is the wing.  And this not only fails the smell test.  It fails the faint whiff test and the ever popular "if it looks like a B24 I'm happy" test.

Ok don’t know much about that, but bit of a worry. Doesn’t sound like an AM fix.

[nmayhew]

firstly thank you Alan for starting this thread and for your expert observations.

 

i have taken a punt and pre-ordered this kit before seeing the video, and will build it warts and all - I just like the airframe and it reminds me of my modelling childhood

sometimes i wont buy a kit if it doesn't reach a certain level of accuracy, but either way I always want to know, rather than build blind.

obviously no rights or wrongs here, and my preferences seem to wax and wain fairly randomly

 

that being said, i am very interested to know the faults of the kit in terms of shape and detail, so this will be very interesting

 

i can see the aftermarket guys diving in - the usual Eduard photo-etched ridiculousness, no doubt some stunning (and stunning over-priced in my view) Brassin engines etc etc.

 

I am concerned about the turret though, because no-one does replacement clear parts in 1/32 bar the HPH Ar196 - which as noted was for their own kit - and l'Arsenal who made some parts for the Ju88.

Keep in mind there have been some stunningly easy wins out there which no-one would touch eg correct nose cone for Revell's He111 P and H kits, a P-3 / H-3 ventral gondola for the same kits...

so i am crossing fingers that someone steps forth

 

thank you again for your input Alan, and looking forward to any more B-24 books that you might publish (I managed to bag a copy of Consolidated Mess just before it became rarer than rocking horse sh*t! )

 

Nick

[titan]

Well, I'm planning to do at least the Martin A-3D high-hat as part of the Privateer conversion I'm working on. The A-3C should be relatively simple to do as well.  I'll see what I can do. 

 

Also, John at Tigger models already has vac B-24 turrets!

[Out2gtcha]

6 minutes ago, titan said:

 Also, John at Tigger models already has vac B-24 turrets!

 

 

I know some dont like dealing w/vac clear parts, but in this case if no one else tackes them, John may be inundated for 1/32nd B-24 turret requests! 

[PhilB]

Are there some posts I can't see?

Dunno where that came from?

[Out2gtcha]

2 minutes ago, Jennings Heilig said:

Jeez, again folks?  If your opinion of everything is "well it's close enough for me" that's FANTASTIC!!!  We're all so very happy for you.  But please don't feel the need to make snide comments (or not so snide comments) about people who do want to discuss the particulars of the accuracy of the kit.  You're not right and the rest of the world wrong, any more than the opposite is true.  

 

This happens EVERY SINGLE TIME a new kit comes out, and frankly, I'm sick to death of it.  If a kit that's so-so is good enough, go build it.  Have at it.  But stop whining about people who want to discuss accuracy. 

 

Jeez....

 

 

Honestly I see a couple people saying they will be happy to buy and build it, but I dont see anyone whining about people wanting to talk accuracy.     Snide begets snide generally, so Id say if we stick to the merits and negatives of the kit instead of each other, well all be happier.

 

I think in typical Trumpy fashion, there will be things to love and possibly things to hate about the kit once we get our hands on it.

I do think though, accuracy is important in a kit of this size. Generally for me its are the exterior shapes correct to a point of having to be a B-24 expert to know. I am not a B-24 expert by any means, but do have an eye for major things that look "off" 

 

I will be very happy to have one of our own LSPers who is a B-24 SME (or at least very knowledgeable on it) get their hands on this kit, and get an actual breakdown of things off so anyone who is building the kit can determine what if anything they want to fix, and what errors are important or not important to that individual modeler. 

[titan]

28 minutes ago, Out2gtcha said:

 

 

Honestly I see a couple people saying they will be happy to buy and build it, but I dont see anyone whining about people wanting to talk accuracy.     Snide begets snide generally, so Id say if we stick to the merits and negatives of the kit instead of each other, well all be happier.

 

I think in typical Trumpy fashion, there will be things to love and possibly things to hate about the kit once we get our hands on it.

I do think though, accuracy is important in a kit of this size. Generally for me its are the exterior shapes correct to a point of having to be a B-24 expert to know. I am not a B-24 expert by any means, but do have an eye for major things that look "off" 

 

I will be very happy to have one of our own LSPers who is a B-24 SME (or at least very knowledgeable on it) get their hands on this kit, and get an actual breakdown of things off so anyone who is building the kit can determine what if anything they want to fix, and what errors are important or not important to that individual modeler. 

+1