Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I would encourage everyone to contact model collect . I have been chatting with them. They seem to be soliciting corrections and want to issue correction parts.

I urge everyone to contact them with a list of corrections . They seem very open to correcting it , and also looking for accuracy with the H model. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

27 minutes ago, engineman said:

I would encourage everyone to contact model collect . I have been chatting with them. They seem to be soliciting corrections and want to issue correction parts.

I urge everyone to contact them with a list of corrections . They seem very open to correcting it , and also looking for accuracy with the H model. 

 

Awesome! They show effort and good faith....I'll buy a bunch of them. Thanks engineman....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not a expert on the nose corrections 

so if you could list them for me , and contact model collect He has stated he will issue stracklets and the correct tail gun , but is looking for guidance on tne nose area ,

scott 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, engineman said:

I’m not a expert on the nose corrections 

so if you could list them for me , and contact model collect He has stated he will issue stracklets and the correct tail gun , but is looking for guidance on tne nose area ,

scott 

 

Great! I've been in touch with them but will contact them again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are also looking for any inputs into their H and further B-52 variants . They seem open to ideas and suggestions.

 I saw the CADS on the H , they look good 

but once he releases them feel free to be constructive . The TF-33s and the tail gun look good 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know guys....I'm not sure why the manufacturers can't get the Buff right. But to be honest....I'm not really that unhappy with the AMT and Italeri offerings.  I've got 5 in the stash. lol....

ESPECIALLY after this disappointment with MC.
Yeah....I know there's serious fit issues and inaccuracies....but if you model it right it can build up to a really great looking model. And....most people don't even notice the inaccuracies that makes us bats--- crazy.
My thing is that at least the AMT offering has:

- Engraved panel lines

- Straklets on the G

- 'Decent' engines on the G. Love the bulge...

- Full load of ALCM's WITH decals....

- In all honesty....the wing problem is not that hard to fix. Yeah...it's not perfect even after the fix. But it looks mean and loaded for bear....especially if you drop the flaps.

 

Paul

Edited by pminer
Link to post
Share on other sites

I explained to him how iconic the aircraft is in the US and our dilemma with a accurate but old mongram D model 

and the inaccurate AMT kits . I think every America knows what a B-52 and a mustang . Iconic . Also trying to explain 

all the variants and history 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, engineman said:

Also trying to explain  all the variants and history 

 

If a kit manufacturer does not feel it is necessary to do the research required to faithfully reproduce the subject - especially one as iconic as the BUFF - then I don’t feel it is necessary to do the research for them - or to buy their product

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Engineman, thanks for being proactive, very cool!

There’s a B-52D down the road at Warner Robins, if I can help with specific reference pics let me know.

 

 

Edited by Hooker169
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, engineman said:

I tried to explain maybe the tomahawks should be included for display with their GLCM set 

That's funny & not Ha, Ha!!?? I re-call seeing some CAD work or a set of instructions for the ground launched cruise missile truck which included a missile or two with some nice stands to display them!! When I got the kit in hand and removed all the truck parts & trailer parts all I had was a ball of dust rolling around the box??? Guess they launched the missiles before shipping the kit????

Oh, I got some now..........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents,

 

My two cents.  In this day and age with the amount of information on aircraft on the internet or in books and photos that can be purchased on the web it is inconceivable that a model manufacturer can get something iconic as a B-52 wrong.  Having said that they should be commended  for adding AGM-109's to the kit.  Although most modelers aren't interested in them some are.   They after all are a legitimate loadout for those B-52G's used in the fly-off competition between the AGM-109 and AGM-86B.   It shows they are willing to do something different.  I, for one am eagerly awaiting their cruise missile kit because it contains the AGM-129 which I would like to add to a B-52H.

 

Let's hope they correct this kit and manufacture both the B-52H and B-52D accurately.  When you're charging 100 USD for a kit it has to be right.  If it were up to me I'd have the H include both the cruise missile pylons and the HASB.  With tooling costs as high as they are and the limited size of the market these kits may be the only ones we see of these subjects so getting it right is an imperative.   

 

In going to model shows as a vendor I was surprised to find how varied modeling interests are.  I was also struck by requests for my resin line by prior service Army personnel for Pershing II missiles.  I purchased their injection molded kit to find it was well done.  Based on that kit I will be adding the GLCM launcher shortly.  

 

Mark S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being more of a tall tail B-52 fan, I'd love it if some company would produce current aftermarket kits to enhance and modify Monogram's B-52D. A complete bomb bay for a "Big Belly" bird with clips and bombs included could be one kit; completely new detailed wheel wells and outrigger details could be another; complete cockpit and tail gunners interior with new vacuformed clear canopies for both positions and clear pieces to insert into the overhead cockpit windows would be a third. Get together with an AM decal manufacturer and produce some new AM 'D' decals or decals for other tall tails. Of course a "full package" could be bought for a little less then purchasing all separately. But why stop there? Do sets that would allow a modeler to build virtually every tall tail B-52 including the XB-52 using the Monogram kit as a basis (appropriate/needed cutting required of course). We would probably be able to get these modification/enhancement kits faster and more accurate then waiting on a whole new kit. It's sad to say in this day and age but after AMT and now MC I guess I just don't have much faith in a new tool BUFF that will be a better starting point than the 50 year old Monogram kit...for tall tails at least.

 

Hey, a guy can dream can't he :rolleyes:.

 

Regards all and have a great weekend.

Don

 

EDIT: A complete reconnaissance pod and mod for an RB-52 could be yet another set...:woot.gif:

Edited by Don
Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't followed this closely, but scanned back a few pages of this thread and didn't see mention of what I noticed at the IPMS Nats. They had a display of the B-52G sprues and the thing that caught my eye almost immediately was the complete lack of over-wing spoilers! I was flabbergasted that such a basic feature could be overlooked, yet there it was (or wasn't). If this was mentioned previously, I apologize.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mark S. said:

If someone would do a B-52F I'd have some great decals for it.

 

Mark S.

Wolfpak Decals

I’m in 

Vietnam era black belly or , maybe earlier SAC markings ?

On 8/19/2018 at 10:55 PM, USAFsparkchaser said:

I hope they get a good antennae set for the kits also. They should do all bumps and antennas on a extra

sprue. Also we don’t need any tomahawk cruise missle’s, not sure why they are added. And yes there was so many comments about the nose on FB.

 

9 hours ago, Paul Boyer said:

Kursad, something to consider: Various sizes of full-color U.S. national insignia printed over a silver (aluminum) surround. In the 1950s to '60s, insignias on arctic red (sometimes Dayglo, later international orange) had unpainted aluminum surrounds. Same goes for the USAF lettering on the wings. These were sometimes in an unpainted block, but sometimes each letter had it's own "halo" of unpainted aluminum. When I made my VC-137A a few years ago, I had to apply individual letters to solid aluminum trim film, then when dry, carefully cut the letters with surrounds from the sheet. Pain in the tukus.

haloweb.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2018 at 8:51 PM, engineman said:

I have a been telling him price is not as important as accuracy , and if he corrects it , the kit will sell very well 

 

That may be true for you, but it isn’t the case for a lot of us. Where I sit, there’s nothing wrong with the kit. You lot can be up in arms about perceived inaccuracies, that can matter to you and that’s fine. What you can’t do - or at least shouldn’t do - is presume to speak on behalf of everyone that builds models. 

 

No one is going to think it isn’t a buff. If it’s easier to build than an AMT one and the price is right, i’ll buy it. My son and I will build it, hang it from the ceiling, then build something else. Some of us do this for fun, man. Maybe i’ll hang it over the Prowler with two to many harms and the blue on blue on blue ‘109 that were also a lot of fun. 

 

The End

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...