Jump to content
LSP_Mike

The Revell Classic trilogy

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, thierry laurent said:

1/156!

 

This was the era of kits 'accurately scaled' to enter in the box! :doh:

 

There were three complete bombers in the box too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A shout out to a member here who threw me an original RoJ Ki-43. The 1973 issue kit. Also included an original "Jack" print. Amazingly, I just happen to have a set of decals for the kit.

Who'd a thunk it?

So, thank you sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought there were 6 kits during this era.  The 3  Japanese kits, the Bf-109F/G, the P-47 and the P-40.  My money is on the theory that the topping was destroyed by accident/incompetence.  The lost at sea is more interesting however. 
 

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rick Griewski said:

I thought there were 6 kits during this era.  The 3  Japanese kits, the Bf-109F/G, the P-47 and the P-40.  My money is on the theory that the topping was destroyed by accident/incompetence.  The lost at sea is more interesting however. 
 

Rick

 

Don't forget the Corsair, Mustang and Bf 110.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first 3 were the 109F , Spitfire and the P-40E in 1967. In 1968 they added the

Zero , Huey Attack , Huey UH1D and the Huey Cobra. 1969 was the P-51B , P-47 bubble,

the Wildcat and the Stuka. The '70s and beyond is where 1/32 really took off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to consider two things:

 

1. Whereas the Spit and P-40 were globally sound from a shape and dimensions perspective, the 109 was an absolute mess! 

2. I just realized that the very first kits had the best panel and rivet scribing (overlapping panels, scribed screw heads and a mix of recessed and protruding rivets) whereas the later kits had far more simplified and less accurate surface features. This is a rare case of a model company releasing kits that were not better than their ancestors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The screw heads were clocked at different angles as well. The original lost trilogy kits had very nice detail. 

The majority of the boxart was eye grabbing as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oJ5XZHX.jpg?1The last two weeks I was reunited with my stash at my parents house.  I moved my stash there while I relocated to Singapore for a few years.  Recently, I moved back to the states and I was familiarizing myself with everything.  I just ran across this!   How cool is this box top!!!

 

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, thierry laurent said:

It is interesting to consider two things:

 

1. Whereas the Spit and P-40 were globally sound from a shape and dimensions perspective, the 109 was an absolute mess! 

2. I just realized that the very first kits had the best panel and rivet scribing (overlapping panels, scribed screw heads and a mix of recessed and protruding rivets) whereas the later kits had far more simplified and less accurate surface features. This is a rare case of a model company releasing kits that were not better than their ancestors. 

 

Can't speak for the P-40, but the Spitfire, while very good in the fuselage, has issues with the wings - they are too broad in chord and short in span. It also has issues with the cowl panels that are too short and have the wrong openings for the exhausts. The cowl panels are fixable, the wings much more difficult without destroying surface detail.

 

Surface detail on all three is wonderful! I still say. Pity they couldn't continue that level of detail. But if they could get that finesse back then, why not now? Too much effort? Too much cost? Some companies use Lidar which must capture a lot of extra detail - why not use it?

 

Edited by Pete Roberts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm quite aware of the Spit issues as I'm currently building a detailed Mk. I from that kit! Indeed, the cowling panels are a complete nightmare. And I've never put so much plasticard on a single seater WW2 kit to fill holes and gaps everywhere! Add to that a new cockpit, new LG bays and wheels, a leftover Hasegawa canopy, a DH propeller from the 2014 kit and 3d-printed exhausts! Morever, tons of small things need to be scratchbuilt such as all fuselage and wing bumps. However, to me the scribing on that 1967 kit is far better than the one of most current kits. It is a pity it is a true dog to assemble... ☹️ Note I disagree regarding the wing chord. It is identical to the later kits one. There is indeed a wing span discrepancy but as it is globally 2.5mm per wing, this is not noticeable if you do not compare with a correct plan. Last, the nose is at least 2mm too thin. This is far more annoying than the wing span discrepancy as this noticeably complicates the use of another spinner. 

 

Thierry 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...