The B-1B is from the Palitoy era of Airfix. It predates CAD by a lot. Other Airfix kits from that era (mid-1980’s) include the 1/48 EA-6B, 1/72 original Vulcan, 1/72 HH-53 Super Jolly Green Giant, 1/72 SH-2F Seasprite, 1/72 F2H-1/2 Banshee, Kamov Ka-25 Hormone, Mil Mi-24 Hind, 1/48 AH-64A Apache, the retool of the C-130 into the AC-130 Spectre gunship, and the retool of the Canberra B.(I)6 into the B-57B. There were others but those are the ones I can remember off the top of my head.
Just listening to the part of the discussion about what Revell would call their version of “Vintage Classics.” Remember that a large chunk of the Revell/Monogram back catalog, which included a bunch of Aurora and Renwal molds were sold to Atlantis Models shortly after the Hobbico bankruptcy. Atlantis effectively are Revell Monogram vintage classics. For some weird reason, Revell keeps reissuing therir horrible 1/72 P-51D which makes zero sense because they have the Matchbox tool. The shape of the Matchbox P-51D is at least reasonable even if lacking in detail.
Just opened my Shannon box which was delivered in bubblewrap direct from Airfix last week. Annoyed to find railing C35 broken on the sprue, looks like a mail to Airfix required :(
@@MOS6510Models Got a few replacements from them before, so familiar with the process. Can't believe someone in Airfix signed off on the moulds having no perimeter on the sprues, especially with such a large number of delicate parts in this kit. It's time Airfix took Phil Flory's comments on board and issued sprues in individual bags, would give a better impression of the company, and reduce the need for part replacements where they are having to sacrifice kits which could be sold at full price for the sake of removing parts for replacements. Lost revenue for Airfix, plus the cost of customer service staff issuing spares and the associated postage.
*sigh* YT has just dumped over an hour's worth of comments. Not rewatching the whole first hour yet again (sorry everyone reading this if you're in the video). Re the main question. Is it that Revell do subjects nobody else does, and a related issue, licencing and not the /quality/ of the product? Luke's snowspeeders for example.. nobody else has a Star Wars licence so if you like that franchise there's only one place to go. Luke's right in that the 'buildabilty' of a kit depends on the amount of time and effort you're prepared to put in. Some /could/ be if not good then 'acceptable' but would take a /lot/ of work, which a minority might be prepared to put in.. many wouldn't so for them it's 'unbuildable'. The Shannon lifeboat is marketed as a Starter Set. Yes Luke's right that there /are/ workarounds, /BUT/ a newbie modeller who the kit is aimed that won't know them. Starter Sets are supposed to encourage not /discourage/. Modelling - especially a Starter Set - is supposed to be /enjoyable/. Being discouraged is /not/ enjoyable. Airfix market their Starter Sets as 'everything you need to make the kit'. Not if you need Spruegoo and filler it isn't. Ref the level of modelling seen on You Tube. a) The videos are the 'edited highlights'.. they have to be or every video would be hours long and take even longer to upload. No modeller should expect to complete a model to the same standard in 20-30 minutes. It won't happen. What we don't see are the delays between paint coats, the head scratching with weird bits, the multiple goes at getting fiddly bits to stay where they are supposed to be, etc. b) The modellers who video what they do on YT are /not/ newbies. Don't aim for /their/ standard, aim to be a bit better than your last model. Keep doing that and one day you /may/ be as good as a YTer, what you /will/ be is as good as you can be and that's the standard you should aim for. Be /your/ best, not anyone else's. Luke is /absolutely spot on/. The videos are /aspirational/ and /inspirational/. Use them as an /ultimate/ goal not an /immediate/ one. MOS you mentioned a newbie shouldn't spend over £20 on a kit. Did you mean /just/ the kit? The Italeri 'Complete Set for Modelling' is £30, but it's not /just/ the kit, it's also four or five tools the modeller can then use for other kits. Granted not the best quality tools but IMHO better than the Airfix Starter Set as the Italeri one has tweezers, a sanding stick, and snips too. You also said a 1:48 kit depending on the person, but none of those are under £20, and only one is in the 20s (admittedly I only looked in Airfix Military Aircraft). I sort of see Luke's point but a counter-argument to it is that you could spend a /lot/ on tools only to find out that modelling isn't for you, or that you're not using the tools to their best because /you/ are inexperienced. So you could /waste/ a lot of money. MOS that reminds me of the kid in your book whose Dad bought him all the best fishing gear, but he was useless at fishing.. I think I described him in an email to you as 'all the gear and no idea'. [Just a thought BTW for all YTers. I saw a video of Sully's where he roped in his wife as a newbie modeller, but he also did a second video, a 'Blooper Reel'. Have you ever considered putting together a video of the bits that didn't go to plan?]
Revell USA is wholly owned by Revell Germany. They are effectively the same company since the Hobbico bankruptcy. Revell Germany issues lots of former Revell USA kits in their own boxes.
Why the myth persists of "Revell America" and "Revell GmbH" is beyond me. The German subsidiary (which was formed in the 1950s) to the US company was doing it's own toolings long before any split, and the two were only separate for 6 years between 2006 and 2012. They have been one company for the last 12 years, as they were before. Please, please, please don't keep propagating this fallacy of separate companies! A single company can have production for different lines split between different locations.
The B-1B is from the Palitoy era of Airfix. It predates CAD by a lot. Other Airfix kits from that era (mid-1980’s) include the 1/48 EA-6B, 1/72 original Vulcan, 1/72 HH-53 Super Jolly Green Giant, 1/72 SH-2F Seasprite, 1/72 F2H-1/2 Banshee, Kamov Ka-25 Hormone, Mil Mi-24 Hind, 1/48 AH-64A Apache, the retool of the C-130 into the AC-130 Spectre gunship, and the retool of the Canberra B.(I)6 into the B-57B. There were others but those are the ones I can remember off the top of my head.
Who remembers the 1/72 Eurofighter set that included ground base plates,hardend aircraft shelter and ground equipment with ground crew figures
Looking forward to their up and coming 1/72 Tornado 2-pack.....(to go on the shelf with the other 4 i have).....not new tools but new decal sheets
Hi everybody first time comment keep unboxing vids coming
We will!
I know its probably down to their age but the decals that come with the Esci Tornado (1/72) from 1985 are Cartograph and they are awful.lol
Just listening to the part of the discussion about what Revell would call their version of “Vintage Classics.” Remember that a large chunk of the Revell/Monogram back catalog, which included a bunch of Aurora and Renwal molds were sold to Atlantis Models shortly after the Hobbico bankruptcy. Atlantis effectively are Revell Monogram vintage classics. For some weird reason, Revell keeps reissuing therir horrible 1/72 P-51D which makes zero sense because they have the Matchbox tool. The shape of the Matchbox P-51D is at least reasonable even if lacking in detail.
Just opened my Shannon box which was delivered in bubblewrap direct from Airfix last week. Annoyed to find railing C35 broken on the sprue, looks like a mail to Airfix required :(
That’s such a shame!! watch my video on how to receive free replacements here... th-cam.com/video/EvSwk3CMuU0/w-d-xo.html
@@MOS6510Models Got a few replacements from them before, so familiar with the process. Can't believe someone in Airfix signed off on the moulds having no perimeter on the sprues, especially with such a large number of delicate parts in this kit. It's time Airfix took Phil Flory's comments on board and issued sprues in individual bags, would give a better impression of the company, and reduce the need for part replacements where they are having to sacrifice kits which could be sold at full price for the sake of removing parts for replacements. Lost revenue for Airfix, plus the cost of customer service staff issuing spares and the associated postage.
FROG did a 1/48 Oakley class lifeboat.
i need to look for that :)
*sigh* YT has just dumped over an hour's worth of comments. Not rewatching the whole first hour yet again (sorry everyone reading this if you're in the video).
Re the main question. Is it that Revell do subjects nobody else does, and a related issue, licencing and not the /quality/ of the product? Luke's snowspeeders for example.. nobody else has a Star Wars licence so if you like that franchise there's only one place to go.
Luke's right in that the 'buildabilty' of a kit depends on the amount of time and effort you're prepared to put in. Some /could/ be if not good then 'acceptable' but would take a /lot/ of work, which a minority might be prepared to put in.. many wouldn't so for them it's 'unbuildable'.
The Shannon lifeboat is marketed as a Starter Set. Yes Luke's right that there /are/ workarounds, /BUT/ a newbie modeller who the kit is aimed that won't know them. Starter Sets are supposed to encourage not /discourage/. Modelling - especially a Starter Set - is supposed to be /enjoyable/. Being discouraged is /not/ enjoyable. Airfix market their Starter Sets as 'everything you need to make the kit'. Not if you need Spruegoo and filler it isn't.
Ref the level of modelling seen on You Tube.
a) The videos are the 'edited highlights'.. they have to be or every video would be hours long and take even longer to upload. No modeller should expect to complete a model to the same standard in 20-30 minutes. It won't happen. What we don't see are the delays between paint coats, the head scratching with weird bits, the multiple goes at getting fiddly bits to stay where they are supposed to be, etc.
b) The modellers who video what they do on YT are /not/ newbies. Don't aim for /their/ standard, aim to be a bit better than your last model. Keep doing that and one day you /may/ be as good as a YTer, what you /will/ be is as good as you can be and that's the standard you should aim for. Be /your/ best, not anyone else's. Luke is /absolutely spot on/. The videos are /aspirational/ and /inspirational/. Use them as an /ultimate/ goal not an /immediate/ one.
MOS you mentioned a newbie shouldn't spend over £20 on a kit. Did you mean /just/ the kit? The Italeri 'Complete Set for Modelling' is £30, but it's not /just/ the kit, it's also four or five tools the modeller can then use for other kits. Granted not the best quality tools but IMHO better than the Airfix Starter Set as the Italeri one has tweezers, a sanding stick, and snips too. You also said a 1:48 kit depending on the person, but none of those are under £20, and only one is in the 20s (admittedly I only looked in Airfix Military Aircraft).
I sort of see Luke's point but a counter-argument to it is that you could spend a /lot/ on tools only to find out that modelling isn't for you, or that you're not using the tools to their best because /you/ are inexperienced. So you could /waste/ a lot of money. MOS that reminds me of the kid in your book whose Dad bought him all the best fishing gear, but he was useless at fishing.. I think I described him in an email to you as 'all the gear and no idea'.
[Just a thought BTW for all YTers. I saw a video of Sully's where he roped in his wife as a newbie modeller, but he also did a second video, a 'Blooper Reel'. Have you ever considered putting together a video of the bits that didn't go to plan?]
@@julianmhall good shouts in that post matey. I think we will see a different revell moving forward
Revell USA is wholly owned by Revell Germany. They are effectively the same company since the Hobbico bankruptcy. Revell Germany issues lots of former Revell USA kits in their own boxes.
yes.. ive been educated on this lol
Can any of you let me know how to fit the body of a car without it rising u7
Why the myth persists of "Revell America" and "Revell GmbH" is beyond me. The German subsidiary (which was formed in the 1950s) to the US company was doing it's own toolings long before any split, and the two were only separate for 6 years between 2006 and 2012. They have been one company for the last 12 years, as they were before. Please, please, please don't keep propagating this fallacy of separate companies! A single company can have production for different lines split between different locations.
interesting. i didnt know that. but its only what i was told