We live in bountiful times when it comes to models, especially airplanes. On FSM’s “Kit We’d Like to See Poll” it was kind of hard to think of a WWII aircraft not well represented. (The #1 insult to modelling military history today is the lack of a 350 scale CV-6 USS Enterprise - nothing else is close.) But at the risk of raising the ire of Revell fans, isn’t it really about time for a modern 1/48 build of a B-17 or B-24? 1/32 scale B-25s are doing pretty well and new tool Brit bombers are out there - both for a hefty price. I’ll grant that 1/72 has its place for heavy bombers, but I’d shell out for a state of the art B-17 in 1/48. I think the plane is worth the build. (In the tank world I’m torn between a new Grant/Lee or a good 1/35 Renault FT.
You haven’t raised my ire by calling for a new B-17 in 1/48, though I disagree and am perfectly happy with the existing kit, as well as with the B-24D and -J, and the B-29. But you did raise my ire a little bit by omitting refering to Monogram, because it was Monogram who developed it, not Revell, though it carries the Revell brand now, since the merger back in the day. Revell copied Monogram’s B-17G to develop their B-17F. I don’t mind that one as a kit, either, though it does need a lot of work.
So, sorry, but I won’t be voting for a new B-17 in 1/48.
While I’ve got a few monovell B-17G’s and a couple F’s inthe stash waiting for glue/paint/assemble and 6 more in various stages of completion. I’d absolutely love to see a new tooled fort in 48th! Mainly the F and G models.
I have to agree. The B-17 in 1/48 rates #1 in the poll just about every time I read it? Whomever does step up to this challenge should be able to print money. I’m kind of surprised Trumpeter hasn’t done so yet. They did it with the C-47 which is supposed to be a nice kit, albeit pricey. I would like to see a new F and G, engineered with the different cheek options in the F (Lockheed Vega, Boeing). This is probably the reason it hasnt been done yet…too many different cheek layouts. Also, I wouldn’t mind seeing a new P-38. I’ve built several of the Hasegawa versions (to include the J I’m building now) and although its not a bad kit, it can be a real bear if you don’t know the tricks. I had a four hour sanding session last night, so I’m not against someone out there stepping up with something more modeler friendly. I can’t speak for the Academy kit but I hear its no walk in the park either.
I cast my ballot for a 1/48 C-46, heck a new 1/72 offering would be nice too. For 1/72 I threw my vote in for a C-21 Metroliner, something capable of straddling the military/civilian fence of builders.
My sincere apologies to Revellogram fans. Having a plane as important as the B-17 represented only by one of the classics doesn’t cut it. Tamiya is getting over $100 for their new Lancasters and Trumpie is selling Wellingtons for over $70. I think a plane as intricate and as lovely as the B-17 would be trumps done with everything modern companies are capable of.
I believe someone here (might have been Hans Von Hammer) who once commented that the problem would be that by the time the research, engineering and mold tooling and final boxed product were completed it would mean a final product in the $150+ range for 1/48 scale. By his reasoning (which I agreed and sounds logical) at that price point you can buy the Revell kit and a whole bunch of photo etch and resin, and most manufacturers realize this and which is why it really makes no sense. Not to mention that with photo etch and resin you would already be building a better detailed kit than with standard polystyrene molding techniques (including advanced slide mold technology.)
I don’t doubt the three digit price tag of a new big B-17, but I am not at all convinced that you’d end up with a better kit starting with a fifty year old model and adding things on. The HK B-25s, which are doing pretty well, have a 500 + part count - that’s a lot of detail and I’d guess a 1/32 B-25 would look a lot like a 1/48 B17. Trumpies Wellington has PE included, about 350 parts, and sells for $80 in the real world. The same argument on making an uber-old kit could be used to knock the whole generation of new super kits. The super kits coming out now are raising the bar - making an aircraft model into something a ship builder would be familiar with. Look at the HK 25 or either the ZM or Tamiya P-51s: if you built one of those things out you’d have complete engines and the kind of surface detail older kits couldn’t possibly match and after market stuff wouldn’t help with. You could spend months on one of those things. Frankly, I’m glad that most aircraft are not that way. But obviously the new generation kits have their fans. And if I was going to consider devoting the time and space to a large aircraft, it would almost have to be a B-17: nothing else would have the historical muscle to justify it.
Perhaps, but the fact a new kit has not been produced indicates the model companies think otherwise [;)]. Lets face facts, B-17’s to bombers are like Spitfires and P-51’s to fighters…iconic enough (I think in some circles the term is called "name recognition [:D] ) that they are popular subjects. If a model company really thought they could produce a modern B-17 kit at about $80, you really think they would not? Those things would probably fly off the shelf. But that no company has taken said step in this span of time says something. Perhaps there may come a time when they think they could make it economical to do so, but again, that they have not says a lot. I personally think aftermarket products can produce better results than injection molded polystyrene (the fact that even the most advanced slide molded Dragon armor kits still come with photo etch kind of bears this train of thought out.) Even brand new tooled aircraft kits from reputable companies come out, and almost instantly are followed by resin and photo etch aftermarket parts.
But this is of course just my personal opinion. The question was would YOU (as in me) vote for a new tool B-17. As I answered, no I would not since the old kit suits my needs. Trust me, I would not say you personally don’t deserve a new tooled kit, just again what I personally feel about my particular choice. [H] And don’t worry, I was not offended or anything about the Revell comments. I am not a kit snob and am happy building old Airfix and Monogram/Revell kits all the way to state of the art Dragon and Hobby Boss. [Y]
You give the industry more rationality than I’d grant them. If Fujimi and Hasegawa can sell out IJN aircraft carriers that push $300 there’d be someone willing to buy an uber B-17. But look other places: as it stands there’s no Renault BT tank in 35 - that was both a ground breaking design and a line breaking weapon in 1918. How many Tigers versus T34/85s? Until Italieri put one out about a year back, there wasn’t a modern Hurricane I. There’s only one Oscar, a very widely used aircraft with jaw-dropping lines. Any planes more “iconic” in the ETO than the Stuka? Two of those - one very old. In the ship world there’s no CV-6 Enterprise in 1/350 - and it was the most important single warship in military history. And if someone doubts they could get big bucks for a new B-17, how do small companies keep thinking they can sell yet another Spitfire variant - often at twice the price of a venerable Tamiya.
To be honest, I don’t know if I’d buy a new B-17. I know I wouldn’t buy a gigantic Revellogram: maybe a good 1/72 makes sense for a plane of that size. (I’ve got an Academy 1/72 B-17B and it’s lovely.)
I believe the FSM poll specifically called for subjects that hadn’t been modeled in a particular scale before. The 1/48 B-17 as well as the other bombers have already been done before and quite beautifully, too, I might add.
I’d love to see a 1/48 Lockheed L-133 but I know that ain’t ever gonna happen. I think what I submitted for the poll was a 1/48 scale P-61E. I’d also want for it to be produced by Monogram/Revell because there’s no way I’d be able to afford it if anyone else were to come out with it.