Ben Brown Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Thanks! Ben Quote Link to post Share on other sites
David Hingtgen Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 (edited) Delta had both -200s and -300s with the -80A, so they were common enough in the US at least--including 2 of the 3 767s I've flown on. Edited April 14, 2009 by David Hingtgen Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 Delta had both -200s and -300s with the -80A, so they were common enough in the US at least--including 2 of the 3 767s I've flown on. Only the non-ER -300s had them. There were very few of those built. The huge majority of -300s built have been ER's. J Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony P Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 So what Boeing House livery is it going to have? The actual house livery it had way back when or the new dreamliner one? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scotty100368 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 So what Boeing House livery is it going to have? The actual house livery it had way back when or the new dreamliner one? The dreamliner scheme. Scott. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dobilan Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 The dreamliner scheme. Scott. Unfortunately for the cool "Dreamliner" scheme, Zvezda only gives us a couple of white "767" logos, a pair of "BOEING" logos and some white striping, the intricate electric blue and deep blue patterns being left to the braves who will dare to take this challenge. I'm sure this task will make german "sausages" and mottling and italian "circles" look like child play. Quite a dissapointment . What a pitty! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GearDownPlease Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Latest photos here, at the end of the thread http://www.airlinercafe.com/forums.php?m=posts&q=4441 , the nose section looks indeed strange on both build up model and sprue photos but I admit photo distorsion could be responsible of that strange look. Good thing about Zvezda's kit, the landing gear strut angle (perpendicular on the Revell kit -> wrong), the nice looking engines (I like the separate exhaust cone and intake lip), the one piece wing/belly section and the, presumably and hopefully, petite Tu-154-like recessed details. The wing to fuselage attachment looks interesting. Too bad about the Boeing corporate livery decals anyway I prefer airline liveries. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 May I just interject that the "Dreamliner" scheme has never appeared on a real 767-300, so it would be a fantasy scheme if you actually did it. That said, I may have to get one to do this with: J Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GearDownPlease Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Okay, the nose section actually looks much better than on the first photos _which may have suffered from distorsion or whatever_, latest pics here (comparison between Revell and Zvezda fuselages, to me the Zvezda fuselage set wins clearly): http://www.airlinercafe.com/plug.php?e=gallery&f=1262 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Viking_Samurai Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 So where can I buy a couple then? Chris Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JacSmith Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Hi vc-10, yep early 767-200s had these "early" CF6-80A2s (which Revell may have tried to reproduce in their 767 kits?... it is true that the Revell engines look more like early CF6s) while 767-300s and late -200 had the "newer" CF6-80C2B7Fs that are, from a modeler's point of view, identical to those powering the 747-400.Hmmm, those Zvezda photos are indeed small but the engines, late CF6s, look very nice. And I read that, regarding the main landing gears, even the brake disc blocs and linkeage are provided, "àla Revell A330/A340". And the belly/wing-fuselage fairing looks to be much better shaped. Gosh I love that kit already! I came to notice that it actually does look exactly alike . Well a handful of 200s and so as the 300s had P and W JT9s which are also identical to CF6s. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PMG Offramp Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 P and W JT9s which are also identical to CF6s. They are not identical, the differences between PW and "early", or even "late", GE engines are clearly visible. 767 JT9D and PW4000 engines are indeed identical from a dimensional and outline point of view, but there may be slight differences in details such as latches or service doors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fly-n-hi Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Can we say "zombie thread?" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trojan Thunder Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Holy thread revival Batman! :D Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.