Just getting back into modeling after 25 years…I bought Jaunty Jo as my first attempt at producing a nice scale model. Anyone built it or have any advice?
The kit is a reissue from the Monogram company, which was bought out by Revell. Like most original Monogram kits, its got great detail and is fairly accurate out of the box. If you are building it with the landing gear down, you will have to be creative in placing a lot of weight in the nose gear area because she is a heavy ‘tail sitter’ if you don’t. There’s an aftermarket company that sells custom nose weights that fit into the design of the kit. You can find them on eBay I think, don’t remember the name off hand.
As the molds are getting a little old (about 40+ years old), you’ll probably need to pay some additional attention to wing and fuselage joints. Take your time, the kit will surprise you if you work with it.
Good luck,
Dave
Thanks for the info and sorry it took so long to get back to you…I’m new to forums and trying to figure it out
IIRC Monogram bought out Revell and used the Revell name because it was more well known. Which I find to be a little strange.
Ok thanks
rcflyer> A good place to find information is to use the search function for the forums (not the “SEARCH FineScale.com” above where you log in). This is on the Main Forums page and is called “Search the Community”. It searches the forum threads instead of the entire site. Somewhere in the forums, someone has built one of these models, and you can find good information concerning the kit.
i.e., http://cs.finescale.com/fsm/modeling_subjects/f/2/p/154230/1663319.aspx#1663319
Also a good Google search for “Revell B-25J kit review” will bring up a host of other sites that contain information and build logs.
A good kit, though a bit daunting size wise for your first build.
Good luck!
Gary
Advice- you may want to add some shims at the engine nacelle joints to the lower wings and to the stabilizers joints to the fuselage. It is a good kit and not overly challenging.
I am actually in the final stages of building this same kit just for fun. One of the things I would suggest if you feel comfortable doing it is to rescribe all the panel lines since they are all raised. Other than that it is a great kit out of the box and a fun build. You will have to get some good putty and a file set and use it in places especially around the canopy and where the nose fits to the fuselage. Also about the nose weight for this model, there is a little trick i found on another site about using some fishing weights to the left side under the cockpit area where the front landing gear connects, you will never see this area when the model is completed and it worked like a dandy. Another issue i had was with the guns, they are not very accurate due to the solid barrels, however they do make aftermarket kits for them or if you have a good pin vise you can painstakingly drill each little hole in every barrel (hence the painstakingly). Overall, it is a really fun model to build with minor frustrations, and with getting back into modeling its good for making use of putty, pin vise, and a file again.
Just a little thing about the panel lines. While attending the EAA Air Venture event last year, one thing really jumped out at me as I walked underneath the B-25. It has overlapping panel joints and rivets which stand proud from the skin. While I know that the popular trend these days is to sand and scribe, I like to leave the Revell panel lines on because, in this case, it would be the most accurate representation of what’s going on with the actual plane.
Eric
Thanks for reminding folks about this Eric. [:D[ It is a fairly well known fact but it helps to point that out for folks perhaps new to the hobby and who believe that any kit with raised panel lines must be re-scribed in the name of accuracy. That’s just not the case in reality. Good on ya mate!
Gary
I am glade that we can tell the difference between lapping and butted panel lines. Good work!
Yes the B-25 does have 90% of its panels overlapping, however the seam on this looks just like a recessed or butted panel line when in scale. Rescribing is done for ease in weathering. besides if we wanted to go with true realism, we would be scribing rivet marks into every panel on the B-25 as they would all be visible at even a 1/48th scale.
The kit is just fine “as is” straight out of box for any returning modeler. If in a few years one wants to get another and do all sorts of surgeries such as replacing engines, gun barrels, adding raised rivets and modifying raised panel lines to truly represent the overlapping panels of the B-25 it is a good canvas for that as well. Especially for the price. Yes it shows its’ age, but externally it is no more or no less accurate than any of the new tooled kits with recessed (and inaccurate) rivets and panel lines of the B-25 out there. When manufacturers start getting that part right I’ll call it accurate. Hardly any kits out there have that detailing aspect done properly.
I am only going to be speaking for myself when I say that recessed panel lines (again, for me only) are not an automatic given that they simplify, or make easier, the weathering process. I like to use a combination of masking and altering the tonal qualities of random panels using a combination of airbrushing and pastel chalks.
I don’t believe recessed panels suddenly make a plane easier to weather. I understand that some people like to use washes to “bring out” these lines but I just never cared for the look of this. I look at a picture of a model and I see a veritable grid drawn with perfectly uniform panel lines filled with washes. Then I’ll look at the very same plane in a photograph take while it was in service. The last thing I see are panel lines all over the actual plane.
I believe that raised and recessed panel lines on a model kit require their own unique methods of craftsmanship. You use one method for recessed and you use a different method for raised. Note that I said the methods are different, not better than one or the other. It’s like saying that creating a work of art with marble is better than creating one with canvas. Well, no. One is not better than the other. You just have to use the appropriate tools when working with a particular material.
I’ve always felt that people are apt to criticize one particular method only because they are unfamiliar with, or have had bad luck with, that method. I will be the first to stand up and proclaim that I have tried to use washes in recessed panel lines but with little to no success. I still build models with recessed lines but I utilize the same technique with those as I do with the kits that have raised lines. I never understood why people sand off raised panel lines only to do all that work of scribing all the lines back in just to lay a wash in when what they could have done in the first place is change their weathering methods to fit the raised line conditions.
Eric
PS. Siiiiiigh…I feel like as I get older, I’m turning into our dearly missed HVH.
Anybody got a SITREP on HVH??? He is terribly missed here and amongst the Monogram Mafia…
still MIA…
Although I’m not new to modeling in general I am new to scale. I believe one should pick a picture of a particular subject in my case Jaunty Jo and build as close to the picture as possible. As far as panel lines go i’m no expert but there’s no way a war torn aircraft had perfect panel lines.I would imagine the field expedient method would be to put it together as quickly as possible and not worry about how they look or if they match.I do enjoy everyone’s input and appreciate all the ideas…keep it coming
For areas to put weights don’t forget the nose gear well, crawl tunnel and behind the instrument panel. If you balance it right very little weight is actually on the nose gear, it’s all on the mains!
Great idea
another good spot for weights is inside the engince nacelles at the engine firewalls on their backsides.