Wumm

Beautiful work Frank, After three great finishes, you got there in the end, and the results are spectacular. Steve.

Good Morning Ralph, You've been busy! Lovely fine airbrush work all around and, as always, sound build fundamentals. http://www.flickr.com/photos/28092068@N03/7864051584/in/set-72157631642098014/ Let me know if the link doesn't work, and I'll try and take a grab of it from Marc's site. Cheers, Steve.

There is always another option George... Don't buy it. After all, as part of the 5%, they don't care what I think. The easiest thing in the world to do, is nothing. I have over a dozen Hasegawa 109G kits in the stash, why would I spend $50 plus Au per Revell kit to replace what I already have in my possesion, that will still need extra work to get them to the standard I enjoy? Where's the incentive? S

Hi Rog, "Yellow 13" appears to be Bf109G-2/R1 of Wilhelm Crinius, 3./JG53, Tunisia January 1943. W.Nr.10804. http://www.modelforum.cz/download/file.php?id=590436 http://www.modelforum.cz/download/file.php?id=590435 "Black <" is the G-4/Trop of Heinz Edgar Berres, I./JG77, Tunisia January 1943. http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Bf-109G/JG77-Berres/pages/Bf-109G2Trop-Stab-I.JG77-%28+-Heinz-Edgar-Berres-Tunisia-1942.html "Black <-+-" is unknown to me, but may be this one: http://www.messerschmitt-bf109.de/display.php?lang=de&auth=e&name=version_display&fotonummer=2628 There are lots of other aftermarket options for markings as well. This variant also flown by Bär. Graf, Grislawski, Rall, Hartmann, Ehrler, Müller etc. Steve.

Interesting... If Revell aren't worried about what the 5% think, at least BG is! Which is probably a truer indication of the state of play. And rightly so. I actually thought of emailing Revell as soon as the news came out about the Erla G-10. I figured it might be better to give them some pointers, rather than complain about it afterwards. However I see that they've repeated the gun width errors of the G-6, the gun trough openings are too far back, and the upper panel break appears wrong too... just on the one cowl piece shown. More worrying is the fact that Andreas says it won't be fixed, so there seems little point now. I wonder whether the Spitfire Boffins will be treated better? S

I can't imagine what this might have to do with the subject of this thread... Is it some kind of medical apparatus you might use in your particular line of work? Or perhaps something you come across in another hobby you might have? S

I understand your point of view George... But I don't share your opinion. This thread is about attitude. Whether or not we should be humbled by the fact that as serious modellers, we are only a small cog in the wheel of overall sales of model kits. However, I believe that it's the manufacturers who also need the reality check. For instance... I have two Revell 1/32nd scale JU-88 kits. One was bought online from a UK site, and the other was sourced locally at a Hobby store here in Brisbane, Australia. As I was not asked anything about my modelling habits or even my plans for these kits when I bought them, I fail to see how Revell could possibly know whether I frequent certain Modelling websites, am a member of the LEMB for instance, or how much if any aftermarket I had bought for these kits or modifications I had in mind for them. And if they're not asking about my modelling habits or preferences, I find it very hard to believe they're asking the majority of their end customers, and I therefore dispute the accuracy of this magical 5% number. Which leads my to belief that it's a question of attitude. Not mine, but Revell's. They're the one's trying to make a living from the hobby, not I. And as I stated earlier, I am less worried about the inaccuracies of a particular kit, than the attitude of the manufacturer towards a segment of their market that represents repeat sales. At the other end of this equation is Zoukei Mura. Their proprieter exhibits passion for the hobby. Their research team visits the actual aircraft to, for the most part, get the details right. And even though the cost of their kits are significant, I don't mind paying it because of the attention to detail built into the product. Compare that to Revell's last effort: First we were getting an engine included, then that fell by the wayside. Then they visited an airframe, only it was the Speyer G-4 with the narrow MG17 gun troughs and no cockpit vent, and they guessed the position of the vent, gun troughs, the beulen and other aspects of the airframe. Then they assembled a team of 6 knowledgable individuals to help with the research, and ignored a significant amount of that information and expertise for the sake of cost cutting. Well, some things are more important than the bottom line. I would rather save for 6 months for a single Zoukei Mura kit, than buy a single Revell product for a sixth the price; because one manufacturer wants my business, and the other thinks I don't matter. Can you guess which is which? Steve.

I'll pop some photo's on after dinner with some pointers Rog... S

This was my whole point in questioning Thierry Laurant over on LSP... Stating as he did that the Hasegawa was 2mm short in the nose, which is incorrect. The gun panel is out by a millimetre but this doesn't affect the length at all. But people repeat stuff they cannot prove, and it becomes fact. Conversely, The Revell kit is also short by nearly a mm itself, not including the spinner that's .4mm short and the rudder that's .6mm long. Take these two off the fuselage, and the Revell fuselage is actually 2mm short on it's own! But no... this is the most accurate 1/32nd Bf109 ever apparently. Brett Green said so. Roy Sutherland did the same thing on Hyperscale as 'Robertson' did on ARC, only his version has the Hasegawa 4mm short! A friend of his worked on the actual "Black 6" in the UK, and told him the gun cowl was 5inches out when compared to the 1/48 scale Hasegawa. Roy took this to mean that the 1/32nd scale was out by the same margin, and said so without ever measuring the 1/32nd scale kit for himself. When I challenged him (as I do whenever people like he or Jennings or Jamie Haggis spout this drivel) he bailed on the thread. The problem with this is, Roy is respected in the hobby, and when he and others spread this false information people believe it. Which I'm sure pushes some of those in the 5% towards the Revell kit in the belief that it's superior (which it is admittedly in some areas, but not all). Free publicity to add to the magazine and online adverts that Revell aren't apparently targeting the serious modeller with. Yeah, right! S

Wow, This little kit really looks good in the flesh Jim. Any word on how the wing to fuselage interface will mate together? S

Yeah I know, Doug... But if you follow the trail, you could see what's going on. There's been a few little hints along the way, coupled with bagging of the Hasegawa equivalent by some involved in the project... Always a nasty look. If you have enough confidence in your product, you don't need to trash the opposition. And more puzzling was Brett Green's removal of the link Nick posted on Hyperscale to the comprehensive and very fair LSM team review. And the seeming inability for LSM to source kits from Revell for the purposes of that review here. Perhaps those in the know might shed a little light on these issues via PM if they so desire? Because we are their repeat business. We are the reason Revell put full page adverts in modelling magazines. We are the reason Revell send test shots to websites like Hyperscale and IPMS Deutschland. We are the reason Revell organises a bunch of these kits for Brett Green and friends to publish a how-to book about the kit before it's even released to the public. Not those buying the kit as an impulse purchase, but we who would perhaps buy half a dozen or more kits. All of this advertising and publicity effort is wasted, if they don't care what we think. I personally think this 5% figure is picked out of the air randomly, and is being used by Revell as a convenient excuse to cut corners after the buy-out by the American parent company in 2012... Which would also account for the difference in the fidelity of some of the details in the large scale kits released since then. S

It might pay to re-read the entire thread then Doug... Especially Andreas' next post, where he says, and I quote: "During the design phase of the kit nearly all major issues were addressed in time - and simply ignored. Frustrating for all who accompanied the design phase. And these were throughout knowledgeable people! With the distance of a year now: it was nearly deliberate sabotage." His words, not mine. Sure looks like he felt he was being ignored. As does Lynn Ritger's comments in this Hyperscale post: http://www.network54.com/Forum/149674/message/1380722323/You+are+being+disingenuous+and+deliberately+misleading%2C+Darren. With comments such as "none of us were thrilled with the engineering decision to mold (sic) the spinner how it came out" and "not enough radius on the kit part, despite an awful lot of back-and-forth on it." Given some of the details that slipped through, I'm now not surprised at all.

That will require changes to every panel forward of the firewall, plus the gun cowl and the two side panels immediately behind the firewall position. Not to mention completely different oil cooler and compressor intake, plus the addition of the second M/W50 oval panel on the starboard fuselage side. Oh, and offset cowl scoops please. Try and find an Erla G-10 photo with the scoops in-line.

Sorry George, Not private, just have a lot of opinions as to Mike's train of thought. The people in charge pulling the purse strings are one thing... But we have been told that Revell have engineered the Bf109G-6 kit in a particular way, to cut costs and provide commonality in the way the kit is moulded. Then, they go and announce that the next kit in the line will be the Erla G-10, which will require a completely different fuselage if done properly. Revell had all the information available to them, but chose not to put all of it to use. This has been confirmed now by two different sources. One wonders why assemble a team of 6 knowledgable people, if you're not going to put them to best use? This is surely a waste of resources... S

I don't know Mike... Are we any more serious as a collective, simply because we prefer the larger scales, which inevitably leads to better detail being either present or, if not, expected? Is there the perception that the serious modeller will suffer less detail in a kit if it's under a certain price point? All valid questions I feel, and like this magic 5% number, probably deserves more attention. Revell may be onto something though. I had read that Revell managed to sell over 10,000 units of the 1/32nd scale Ju-88 kit. That's an awful lot of large, expensive kits if the majority were impulse buys. However, at one point Pastor John McIllmurray had only sold 120 or so G-1 and G-6 conversions for this kit to my knowledge. Not very many, considering the quality of the set and the popularity of the later N/F variants. But these conversions were mostly only publicised online. Interesting if taken into consideration with Andreas' comments. S

Yeah, I agree to a certain extent Mike... But this kit has been hyped from the get-go, even way back when it was supposed to have full engine detail (remember that?). It has some very innovative features, and some areas of excellent detail, but is let down in other areas that Hasegawa did right a decade ago. Brad made some pertinent points. In the post you mentioned from LSP by Andreas Beck, he has already stated that Revell know about the gun trough issues, but are choosing not to address it. Presumably, they already know of the other errors as well, as Lynn Ritger has already addressed these (in an abusive post against the OP) on Hyperscale. Brett Green himself has put forward the notion that there will be aftermarket available for these kits (which has already come to fruition). This kit came pre-loaded with excuses for the things that they got wrong. It has now been followed up with confirmation that these issues won't be addressed, due to budgetary constraints and the fact that 95% of their target market won't care. Well, I am their target market. 1/32nd scale WW2 Axis aircraft is virtually all I build. And at this point in time, I'm less bothered by the flaws in the kit, than the attitude displayed by the Manufacturer and it's representatives. S

I share Matt's curiosity... As to how they have come to this figure, although I cannot dispute it. I hope Revell put more research into their customer demographics than did into the intricacies of the Bf109 cowling. But the real question is... To whom is the Reality Check directed Mike? Let's just say that the 1 in 20 in who's opinion Revell aren't interest in, were going to buy a dozen kits, but chose not to because they cut corners for economic reasons and completely ignored some of the advice given to them by the research team. That 5% suddenly becomes a third of their sales. Perhaps lost. S

Dodger, You can probably get away with only the barrel showing, and some modification of the underside. Gun breech was internal, with the ammunition saddle looped around in a horseshoe pattern. Apart from an exterior bulge on the underside, rectangular slot for the empty shell casings, and the barrel of course, there was no other external signs. http://i1085.photobucket.com/albums/j437/Wumm/Me410_BK5_zpsde808210.jpg S

Don't forget Customs too chaps... These have to clear US Customs, then again to get back to the UK. Goods made within the EU are duty free across borders to other EU Nations I was lead to believe... That alone would seem to cut down the end price significantly. S

I don't believe there are Mike... Might be because all the available 1/32nd Italian kits, whether Silver Wings or PCM, come with their own p/e sets. FWIW, pretty sure Eduard did PCM's p/e frets. S

What a beautiful release out of left-field... It seems as though they've missed the early side windows particular to the 20mm-armed Versuche Komets. But this should be an easy fix. Otherwise, it's all there and looks fantastic. S

Yeah it's funny that... After the "Kennett Curse" was lifted, I thought they would be unstoppable today. My Wife knows Jeff through her work, and he's actually a very polite man, despite reputations. She hates your mob though (Kanga's supporter) from the '98 G/F... something about colostrum? As for me, I'm not letting on, but let's just say I still have all my own teeth! S

Well commiserations Rog, They played well, and can take a lot out of it for the next few years I'm sure. Hawthorn were good all year, and the highest scoring team per game for the year, but they were never really able to break them through-out the whole game. And with Woosha gone from the other mob, looks like a period of dominance coming up over in the West. I used to do deliveries in Collins Street Melbourne, which is partly closed to traffic for the Grand final parade each year. So for me, Grand Final eve was always a bl**dy nightmare! Steve.

No Brad, This is a perfectly acceptable point of view that you've put forward. As margins get tighter across all industries, not just the Hobby market, retailers and businesses are made to see that service is very often the defining point where decisions are made between purchase options. We've just had the QMHE show here in Brisbane... There's a Trader that comes most years (No names, but he's from Adelaide, so it's a very long round trip), some years he doesn't get here, but he always manages to sponsor a couple of show categories even if he can't make it. This is the sort of thing that gets noticed by a lot of Modellers, and often online purchases are made that reflect this fact, certainly in my case at least. It's in everyone's interest for the health of the Hobby. Steve

Likewise Mike... Have a quite large stash of the Hasegawa's too. But the Revell seems to have some better features, despite the drawbacks. And new aftermarket underwing gondolas, cowl Buelen and other items tossed into the mix can also benefit the G-4 versions of those older Hasegawa and Pro-Modeler kits as well as the new Revell. A win-win situation all 'round... S