Anybody have news on the release of the visible B-17 from Revell-Monogram
Will this kit have any new tooling or other goodies? Thanks.
As far as I have been able to determine it is just a rebox of the original Visible B-17. I already pre-ordered one myself, 'cause I can’t/won’t pay what the originals go for on EvilBay [:O] ! The MSRP is about $28 for the re-release, a reasonable price.
Brian [C):-)]
where are the pre-orders available from? I’d love to take a look at this thing.
-Fred
Tower Hobbies owns RM so you can order them there or any of the Mail Order places like Squadron.
Had to do some creative searching to find it on tower hobbies. Squadron doesn’t have anything listed.
I wonder if the eduard stuff listed for the revell b-17 will work. It doesen’t say it’s for the visible 17 specifically, so I wonder if it will fit?
-Fred
It is Kit#5614 and yes any of the after market stuff will work with it. What I was wondering is will the kit come with the figures and extras like the old Pro Modeller and current #5600 kits?
Can’t wait for them!
I just bought the B-17G last week for $22.00 and was happy with the deal. Then last night I saw the visible version on Anigrand website for $28.00. I was going to do a cutaway to show off the inside but now I guess I will have to buy this one also as I have always wanted this kit. By the way from what I have heard it is just the regular kit withouth the figures etc.
Steve
I have a partially built kit of the old Visible B-17. It was the standard B-17 kit with an extra part for the clear side. I believe the figures and ground equipment were there too. The windows were molded into the clear side, but it was otherwise the same part as the solid color side.
Bill
Well, I preordered the kit from tower. Once I get it, I’ll see what’s there and then order the AM goods from eduard.
-Fred
What kind of glue do you use with a “visible” aircraft kit? I have a 1/32 “Phantom” Mustang kit in the stash, but I have no idea how to assemble it without big, ugly glue seams showing through the clear parts!
Any advise? Could I Future each clear part and then use Superglue?
Well, I intend on giving the clear parts a Future bath and then gluing them with watch crystal cement http://www.ares-server.com/Ares/Ares.asp?MerchantID=RET01229&Action=Catalog&Type=Product&ID=80343 I use this stuff on all of my canopies and I absolutely love it. It dries crystal clear, rock hard and doesn’t fog.
-Fred
That watch crystal cement should do the trick…but at $8 a tube, it’s pretty expensive. How many tubes would you need for a B-17 or my 1/32 Phantom Mustang? Two maybe? $16 just for some fancy clear glue seems a bit much. I guess you would save $$$$$ on the lack of exterior paint…but it still seems pricey.
The B-17 only has the clear side. It wouldn’t use an entire tube. The Phantom Mustang has the clear fuselage as well as wings, so it would use a little more. I would expect if you built both kits back to back, 1 tube would do the job and some of it would end up drying out in storage.
Bill
It’s actually $8 for 2 tubes. Plus a little bit goes a long way. To attach the one clear half plus all the reuglar glass, you’re probably looking at less than half a tube.
-Fred
My mistake…I saw the single tube in the Micro Mark pic and assumed it was sold as single tubes. How does the watch crystal cement use/results compare with the various Zap brands or Pro Weld? I have used both in the past and really liked their results, and ease of use! Their Tounch N Flow applicators are a big timesaver,too.
Well, I’ve never used zap or pro weld, but if I recall, zap is a ca and pro weld is for styrene, is that right? Pro weld works by melting the styrene, the crystal cement doesn’t melt the plastic, so it’s more like a traditional glue in that sense. But it does dry crystal clear. And the bond is equal to that of tenax (which I have used). Zap has a good pull strength, but is weak if if you hit it from the side or twist it. I haven’t had that problem with the crystal cement. Plus, it doesn’t fog the glass (Future or not), so it appears to be superior in that sense.
-Fred