mark williams Posted November 19, 2022 Share Posted November 19, 2022 Well this Hurricane is a must have...hmmm will look nice with the Kotare Spit,and the Whirlwind. As for the Revell pro-mo yes its common for digital camera distortions...even apart from what ever lens there used, then theres whatever been done in photoshop, camera raw....best idea is don't judge till the kits out.The only one I can think of is a certain b-24 where the pics don't lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY IVAN5 Posted November 19, 2022 Share Posted November 19, 2022 40 minutes ago, CRAZY IVAN5 said: I for one will wait it out to see a real build or 2 . I haven't seen the "new" images as of yet [ are they on facebook? ] if that's the case then that would explain it. i f Radu says it's good I'll tend to believe him,still want to wait though. Ah, i found them , stupid me not watching closer. It does look a lot better in those pics. I stand corrected Martinnfb 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_K2 Posted November 19, 2022 Share Posted November 19, 2022 I must say that the 'pit images aside, I like what I see, and I suspect the 'pit will be greatly refined on the real kits. I went back and took a look at my review of the Revell Bf 109G-10, and as I suspected, the 'pit details, aside from the terrible molded-in belts, looks more than acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY IVAN5 Posted November 19, 2022 Share Posted November 19, 2022 4 minutes ago, LSP_K2 said: I must say that the 'pit images aside, I like what I see, and I suspect the 'pit will be greatly refined on the real kits. I went back and took a look at my review of the Revell Bf 109G-10, and as I suspected, the 'pit details, aside from the terrible molded-in belts, looks more than acceptable. Agreed, the interior details I can get around. LSP_K2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMaben Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 11 hours ago, VMA131Marine said: Revell did themselves no favours by publishing images of a test model that looks as incorrect as this one did. In the end it makes no difference. If one rejects the kit completely based on test shot photos, the best evaluation comes after someone builds it and posts photos of the completion. Most of us wait for that to make a final decision. We won't know it's cost in the U.S. until it's available here, SprueBros will likely carry it. Elftone, Model_Monkey, Kagemusha and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennismcc Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 I have waited years for a modern accurate well designed easy to build Hurricane kit for years, I have PCM Hurricanes and FLY Hurricanes in the stash as well as a built old Revell Hurricane Mk.I. I fought my way through the PCM fabric wing kit and liked the end result, however a modern easier to build kit would be nice, I was also pleased with the old Revell Mk.I kit which is still accurate in outline, note the old Mk.II is not accurate, it is just the Mk.I with cannons added no nose extension. The new Revell kit at the normal Revell price is definately worth a punt so I will be buying one regardless. Cheers Dennis Stevepd, Derek B and Martinnfb 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony T Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 16 hours ago, Radub said: The model shown by Revell is built correctly. Due to the breakdown of parts it is impossible to build the model with "zero dihedral". Even if there was some way to build it with "zero dihedral" by accident or incompetence, there would be gaps in all kinds of places. How can one make angles in parts disappear without repercussions? As I explained already, what you see in the photos from Revell is an optical artifact caused by the camera angle. I have the model in hand now, I can replicate that "look" just by turning it in my hand. There is nothing wrong with the Revell model, it is all geometry and optics. Radu That's great news. Thanks. I suspect that an authentic paint job would have made a huge difference. Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radub Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 14 minutes ago, Tony T said: That's great news. Thanks. I suspect that an authentic paint job would have made a huge difference. Tony I don't think that any "difference" needed to be made. over the last few days I had some conversations with a few people about this press release from Revell and the general gist was that "Revell should have used better photos that showed the dihedral." Why? The model is the same, no matter what angle it is viewed from. One can equally say that these photos created a visual "trap" that tripped some people in their haste to issue a "hot take" and those kinds of personal choices made by others can't be blamed on anyone else. Radu Stevepd, HL-10, MikeMaben and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HL-10 Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 33 minutes ago, Radub said: I don't think that any "difference" needed to be made. over the last few days I had some conversations with a few people about this press release from Revell and the general gist was that "Revell should have used better photos that showed the dihedral." Why? The model is the same, no matter what angle it is viewed from. One can equally say that these photos created a visual "trap" that tripped some people in their haste to issue a "hot take" and those kinds of personal choices made by others can't be blamed on anyone else. Radu The sad thing is that some people are waiting to pounce on new releases to be the first to find fault, genuine or otherwise. It seems to be their sole reason of existence Jeff, mozart, ScoobyDoo and 6 others 7 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quang Posted November 20, 2022 Author Share Posted November 20, 2022 1 hour ago, HL-10 said: The sad thing is that some people are waiting to pounce on new releases to be the first to find fault, genuine or otherwise. It seems to be their sole reason of existence There’s some truth in that Paul in Napier 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcleon Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 I will definitely be getting one, maybe more, of these... Looks great to me! Used by the SAAF as a gunnery and bombing trainer in WWII in South Africa with hectic yellow patches of paint... what's not to like?? Regards, Marc. Paul in Napier 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony T Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 2 hours ago, Radub said: I don't think that any "difference" needed to be made. over the last few days I had some conversations with a few people about this press release from Revell and the general gist was that "Revell should have used better photos that showed the dihedral." Why? The model is the same, no matter what angle it is viewed from. One can equally say that these photos created a visual "trap" that tripped some people in their haste to issue a "hot take" and those kinds of personal choices made by others can't be blamed on anyone else. Radu After the ironing board wing Spitfire release, the difference did indeed very much need to be made by Revell. Very bad marketing to show one pee-poor photo. But all's well that ends well. Definitely buying one, and any subsequent boxings. Well done Radu. Tony geedubelyer, KiwiZac, Paul in Napier and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ade rowlands Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 Apologies if its been cleared up already and I’ve missed it in all the drama but the photo only shows 4 guns per wing not the 6 I was expecting for the mark Revell said they were releasing, will the final release have 4 or 6 guns per wing. I’m far from expert but it would seem 4 guns per wing opens up more marking schemes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geedubelyer Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 @ade rowlands I believe Radu explained that everything is correct on the model for a IIb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ade rowlands Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 9 minutes ago, geedubelyer said: @ade rowlands I believe Radu explained that everything is correct on the model for a IIb Excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now