Brian 1 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 I agree, I think they have had some serious growing pains in regards to kit design, but I aplaud them for getting out there and doing it. I also think you are 100% right, the Tiger is nothing compared to some of the other stuff they have issued or intend to like that Pancake thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chriss7606 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Well, the Banshee isn't even out yet so I don't how there can be any sales to review along with the Cougar. It's a good point- if a 1/32 F11F Tiger wouldn't sell well enough to justify development and production, then what were they thinking with the F5U Flying Pancake!? I think that if they scaled the Tiger down to 1/48 it would do better in sales. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dnl42 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Sigh...I was hoping a 1/48 Tiger would eventually be produced. But I suppose that's now farther away... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jpk Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I had forgotten about their announced development of a 1/32 XF5U Flying Pancake. Man, now that is esoteric. More esoteric than the F-94. And they say a Tiger won't sell? For me the current holy grails in 1/48 are the Tiger and a 3 Fury. I think it would be a license to print money. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sharkmouth Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Well, the Banshee isn't even out yet so I don't how there can be any sales to review along with the Cougar. True, not out yet but distributors can pre-order... maybe they haven't. Regards, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chriss7606 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 According to Cybermodeler.com if you want to see the Tiger in 1/48, it urges you to let Kitty Hawk know via their Facebook page. Needless to say, I've already posted... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian 1 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I just read where they are issuing helicopters now, hopefully that will allow them to do more of the uncommon stuff. Only problem for me is I have zero interest in choppers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Airfixer Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) With reference to recent retail order figures and overall retailer feedback/requests, at least one distributor (I'm not going to disclose the company's name, of course) seems to have second thoughts as to scale AND subject. "With regard to particular subjects in 1/32nd scale from particular manufacturers within a particular (upper) price range, our retailers tend to place orders only in case of sufficient binding end customer pre-orders. In case we may not even list these kits, there's nothing more to be said. As yet, retailer requests have been far from beating a path to our door. And that Tiger seems to be quite an acquired taste.". An acquired taste... Pha! What a philistine... :coolio:/> By the way, one of my favourite online hobby stores has just cut the price for the Tarangus Viggen by another ten Euros... (SCNR) Edited May 19, 2015 by Airfixer Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rich in name only Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 One more vote: 1/48 F11F with folding wings (hey! if you buy 12 you have room on your CV diorama for another!). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aweber stoofan Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) See below. Edited May 19, 2015 by aweber stoofan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aweber stoofan Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) The Tiger is a little airplane, around the A-4 Skyhawk size, It wouldn't be that much bigger footprint in 1/32 scale, but whatever, its perception that counts. It really does appear that the main problem is the middle men here. I guess they get to decide what we get to buy. I've met some of these guys and I wasn't impressed with their bussiness skills or judgement, there are reasons why a lot of these guys go belly up and a lot of it is their piss poor decision making. I don't feel for the guys, sorry. Edited May 19, 2015 by aweber stoofan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
loftycomfort Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 That's a real shame. I was very looking forward to a 1/32 Tiger kit. I would have bought two - one to be built with shark mouth, the other in Blue Angels. Hopefully Fisher Models will see an opening and come up with a resin one. Terry Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Yeah, I'm sure their F-94 was a huge seller. Must have sold tens of them. Wow, a souped up T-33. How long was it in front line service, like two weeks? Yeah, that's it. The F-94 was only in service for two weeks. As opposed to the Tiger, which had a long and glorious combat career... yawn. I'd put the Tiger in the exact same catagory as the F-94. A niche subject with very limited international appeal. Keep in mind that despite the cries of the ARC fanbois (of which I am one), they don't come close to representing the typical modeler, who is a twenty-something living in China. I'm sure the average twenty-something living in China would just kill for a model of an obscure US Navy fighter that only was in service for less than 4 years, never saw combat and was never flown by any other nation. From a business standpoint, cancelling the Tiger was probably a smart move. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aweber stoofan Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) That's a real shame. I was very looking forward to a 1/32 Tiger kit. I would have bought two - one to be built with shark mouth, the other in Blue Angels. Hopefully Fisher Models will see an opening and come up with a resin one. Terry I agree, if it was a fun kit to build, I would have bought several. Fisher would do an outstanding job if he decides to take it on! Edited May 19, 2015 by aweber stoofan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aweber stoofan Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Yeah, that's it. The F-94 was only in service for two weeks. As opposed to the Tiger, which had a long and glorious combat career... yawn. I'd put the Tiger in the exact same catagory as the F-94. A niche subject with very limited international appeal. Keep in mind that despite the cries of the ARC fanbois (of which I am one), they don't come close to representing the typical modeler, who is a twenty-something living in China. I'm sure the average twenty-something living in China would just kill for a model of an obscure US Navy fighter that only was in service for less than 4 years, never saw combat and was never flown by any other nation. From a business standpoint, cancelling the Tiger was probably a smart move. The airplane was in service for a while. Hundreds of Naval Aviators flew them in the Training Command (1950s-1960s) and until the use of the A-4, it served with the Blue Angels longer than any other airplane they had flown. People I talked to that had flown the airplane loved the machine and it had great lines, it was a very attractive fighter, unlike the big toad looking F-35 of today. I have no interest building that thing. But you maybe right, thousands of Chinese may prefer it to the Tiger or maybe they have a love for the flying pancake. But as history, it was not an obscure do nothing airplane. For years it was a real workhorse with the Advanced Training Command. My dad was a flight instructor there and at that time both crews and airplanes were worked hard. The Tiger proved it had a lot to offer there, performance, reliability, and good flying attributes made it a success there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 The airplane was in service for a while. Hundreds of Naval Aviators flew them in the Training Command (1950s-1960s) and until the use of the A-4, it served with the Blue Angels longer than any other airplane they had flown. People I talked to that had flown the airplane loved the machine and it had great lines, it was a very attractive fighter, unlike the big toad looking F-35 of today. I have no interest building that thing. But you maybe right, thousands of Chinese may prefer it to the Tiger or maybe they have a love for the flying pancake. But as history, it was not an obscure do nothing airplane. For years it was a real workhorse with the Advanced Training Command. My dad was a flight instructor there and at that time both crews and airplanes were worked hard. The Tiger proved it had a lot to offer there, performance, reliability, and good flying attributes made it a success there. Works for me.. I was referring to the previous post where the guy was slagging the F-94, which actually flew in front line service for twice as long as the Tiger, served in greater numbers and was much more than a "souped up T-33". The bottom line is that from an international modeling perspective, neither aircraft is probably a subject that would be very much in demand. I agree that the F-35 is butt ugly and personally I'd never have any interest in building a model of one but I also bet that it would outsell any USN or USAF 50's era aircraft by a very significant margin. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
vince14 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I think it would be a license to print money. That's easy to say when it's not your time, money, business and possibly house and future on the line. Then things take on a different perspective. I often see modelers stating things like 'A 1/16th Fairy Fruitbat would sell like hot cakes! I'd buy two!', but in reality the numbers for less well known types frequently just don't add up (which seems to be the case with the KH Tiger). That's why manufacturers pump out Spitfires, -109's and P-51's - stuff that will always fly off the shelves - so they can afford to take a loss on kits that don't sell as well. Remember the Revell 1/48 Catalina? Before it was released, 'everyone' wanted one, it was top of all wishlists and it would make Revell millions. Except that, when it came out, it turned out that no-one actually wanted one... A while back I was talking to an aftermarket decal manufacturer. His line was somewhat niche, but his product was excellent and he was really the only game in town for certain types of aircraft. I asked him how many, on average, of each decal sheet sold, and I was rather surprised when he told me "The top seller was about 100 sheets, but on average it's more like 10 or 15 of each". When you're looking at selling a niche product into an already niche market, you have to be very sure of your numbers before committing to production (or have a multi-millionaire behind you). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jpk Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Yeah, that's it. The F-94 was only in service for two weeks. As opposed to the Tiger, which had a long and glorious combat career... yawn. I'd put the Tiger in the exact same catagory as the F-94. A niche subject with very limited international appeal. Keep in mind that despite the cries of the ARC fanbois (of which I am one), they don't come close to representing the typical modeler, who is a twenty-something living in China. I'm sure the average twenty-something living in China would just kill for a model of an obscure US Navy fighter that only was in service for less than 4 years, never saw combat and was never flown by any other nation. From a business standpoint, cancelling the Tiger was probably a smart move. The Tiger was/is a beautiful design, the F-94.....toad like. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aweber stoofan Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 That's easy to say when it's not your time, money, business and possibly house and future on the line. Then things take on a different perspective. I often see modelers stating things like 'A 1/16th Fairy Fruitbat would sell like hot cakes! I'd buy two!', but in reality the numbers for less well known types frequently just don't add up (which seems to be the case with the KH Tiger). That's why manufacturers pump out Spitfires, -109's and P-51's - stuff that will always fly off the shelves - so they can afford to take a loss on kits that don't sell as well. Remember the Revell 1/48 Catalina? Before it was released, 'everyone' wanted one, it was top of all wishlists and it would make Revell millions. Except that, when it came out, it turned out that no-one actually wanted one... A while back I was talking to an aftermarket decal manufacturer. His line was somewhat niche, but his product was excellent and he was really the only game in town for certain types of aircraft. I asked him how many, on average, of each decal sheet sold, and I was rather surprised when he told me "The top seller was about 100 sheets, but on average it's more like 10 or 15 of each". When you're looking at selling a niche product into an already niche market, you have to be very sure of your numbers before committing to production (or have a multi-millionaire behind you). I bought 4 Revell PBYs and would buy at least one -6 if they came out with that version. Most of my friends that like Naval Aviation also have the kit, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aweber stoofan Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) The Tiger was/is a beautiful design, the F-94.....toad like. I completely agree. The first Blue Angels I ever saw perform were the Tigers and I have love the looks of the machine ever since. I wish I could have flown one. Heck, I'd love one just to sit in the hangar so we could have something really cool to hang out around. It looks fast and maneuverable just sitting there! Edited May 19, 2015 by aweber stoofan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian 1 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) To sum all of this up, I think the point that is underlying here is that most manufactuers have to be picky about the subjects they release and that the suspension of the Tiger seems bizarre given KH's track record of lesser known subjects. The other issue is the kits that they have done that should be the long term staples that really generate long term money didn't turn out to be such good kits, The F-35's and Foxbats aren't very good kits (I have friends with them, and yes I'm aware that some of you can turn Lindberg kits into jewels, but most cant) The Texan, Jaguar and Voodoo probably did good, but I haven't seen any of those built up at any shows, nor do I know anyone that has them. I'm building the F-86 right now and I bet it would really turn off an inexperienced/beginner. It has a nice pit, and overall shape mesures out good, especially the complicated tail fairing and vortex generators, but it also has a short shot cockpit tub, the parts are mislabeled and has some weird parts break downs. I am going to be interested to see how they all join up. A good friend gave it to me for helping him with some stuff, but if I had to buy one, I wouldnt have for $80+ bucks... sorry its is a nice kit, but just isn't a kit of that price caliber. So maybe a 32nd Voodoo or other better known plane can come along and help them ralley their catalog and get them back to where they can do some of the obscurer stuff. I know I would have bought the 32nd Tiger in a heartbeat if they nailed it, but if I get a Pancake offered to me instead, I'll probablly mail them a bottle of syrup, because thats a dead on the drawingboard project for sure...maybe they need a FW or BF in their lineup (joke). Edited May 19, 2015 by Brian 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FCM Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 That's why manufacturers pump out Spitfires, -109's and P-51's... 109's and P-51's there are several kits, but in 1/32 scale there is a big hole to be filled with Spitfires. Tamiya's kits are the top, but are pricey and out of range for many modelers. The Spitfire family is very wide and all those would be wellcome. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mingwin Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) The airplane was in service for a while. Hundreds of Naval Aviators flew them in the Training Command (1950s-1960s) and until the use of the A-4, it served with the Blue Angels longer than any other airplane they had flown. People I talked to that had flown the airplane loved the machine and it had great lines, it was a very attractive fighter, unlike the big toad looking F-35 of today. I have no interest building that thing. But you maybe right, thousands of Chinese may prefer it to the Tiger or maybe they have a love for the flying pancake. But as history, it was not an obscure do nothing airplane. For years it was a real workhorse with the Advanced Training Command. My dad was a flight instructor there and at that time both crews and airplanes were worked hard. The Tiger proved it had a lot to offer there, performance, reliability, and good flying attributes made it a success there. some facts correction is required here... the aircraft was in service for a while... a short while. a mere 5 years of carrier operation... 11 years as a trainer... 12 years as Blue Angels (which is, by the way less than the 29 years of the F-18 as Blue Angels Jet) and equal time as the A-4 did with the Blue Angels... ...in all, 200 F11F Tiger where built... not much for a rather small and simple aircraft... (not what i would call neither a "significant" part of USNAVY arms ...even at that time... ) for all the "attractiveness" of that aircraft versus how ugly is another subject, it's fully subjective, irrelevant ... to each his own, personally the F-35 have some angles where it looks not-bad-at-all... and to me the F11F looks like some winged-pointy-cigar-case... with all due respect; your dad flew it, it's part of your childhood, you're emotionally bound to that "subject" ...we got it! also, i don't know, if KH will produce the 1/48 Vought XF5U, but if they do so, i may certainly buy one, as it looks totally weird, and will be a great addition to my collection of models. also, on the plus side, it would be a rather small model... simpler and cheaper (than any other products of their line)...maybe their distributor will like that! Edited May 20, 2015 by mingwin Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jpk Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) some facts correction is required here... the aircraft was in service for a while... a short while. a mere 5 years of carrier operation... 11 years as a trainer... 12 years as Blue Angels (which is, by the way less than the 29 years of the F-18 as Blue Angels Jet) and equal time as the A-4 did with the Blue Angels... ...in all, 200 F11F Tiger where built... not much for a rather small and simple aircraft... (not what i would call neither a "significant" part of USNAVY arms ...even at that time... ) for all the "attractiveness" of that aircraft versus how ugly is another subject, it's fully subjective, irrelevant ... to each his own, personally the F-35 have some angles where it looks not-bad-at-all... and to me the F11F looks like some winged-pointy-cigar-case... with all due respect; your dad flew it, it's part of your childhood, you're emotionally bound to that "subject" ...we got it! also, i don't know, if KH will produce the 1/48 Vought XF5U, but if they do so, i may certainly buy one, as it looks totally weird, and will be a great addition to my collection of models. also, on the plus side, it would be a rather small model... simpler and cheaper (than any other products of their line)...maybe their distributor will like that! As for the service life of the Tiger, if that were the criteria as to whether or not an airplane gets kitted then there would be a lot of models out there that would not be here now. The Cougar probably served for as long a time as the Tiger in front line service. What makes that aircraft more deserving of being kitted vs the Tiger? Or the Banshee. Or the Skyray. Or the Demon. How many of those were made? It's well known that there are far fewer navy fighter planes made than airforce ones and to use that as a basis for whether or not making a kit is a stupid argument. There are any number of arguments that are just as stupid as numbers built, shots fired in anger, length of service life, etc.. The 1950's were a time of rapid advancement in aircraft. The navy passed through several designs before it became to expensive to have follow on designs in the pipeline one after the other. If the airforce hadn't been more or less forced initially to take the Phantom, how many of those do you think would have been built? Far fewer than were eventually built if it were just for the navy. And what about that XF5U? Only ONE made so what's up with that one deserving a model made of it? Length of service -0-, shots fired in anger -0-, oh, weirdness factor, 10. Edited May 20, 2015 by jpk Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Darren Roberts Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 That's easy to say when it's not your time, money, business and possibly house and future on the line. Then things take on a different perspective. I often see modelers stating things like 'A 1/16th Fairy Fruitbat would sell like hot cakes! I'd buy two!', but in reality the numbers for less well known types frequently just don't add up (which seems to be the case with the KH Tiger). That's why manufacturers pump out Spitfires, -109's and P-51's - stuff that will always fly off the shelves - so they can afford to take a loss on kits that don't sell as well. Remember the Revell 1/48 Catalina? Before it was released, 'everyone' wanted one, it was top of all wishlists and it would make Revell millions. Except that, when it came out, it turned out that no-one actually wanted one... A while back I was talking to an aftermarket decal manufacturer. His line was somewhat niche, but his product was excellent and he was really the only game in town for certain types of aircraft. I asked him how many, on average, of each decal sheet sold, and I was rather surprised when he told me "The top seller was about 100 sheets, but on average it's more like 10 or 15 of each". When you're looking at selling a niche product into an already niche market, you have to be very sure of your numbers before committing to production (or have a multi-millionaire behind you). You make very valid points. I've heard the point about the Catalina before, but I wonder about the long-term sales. When the kit was first released, they did the version with the beaching gear. I think everyone really wanted the -5a with the integral landing gear, so they held off on the -5 version. I think this is where the idea that the Catalina sold poorly came from. Over the long term, I believe they sold reasonably well. They seemed to sell well enough for Revell to rerelease them some years later. The subject that I think Revell swung and missed on was the Ju-52. But again, without hard data from the company, we'll never really know how they sold. 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.