Airfix

[PR19_Kit]

My LMS has them in already, that's ModeslForYou in Raunds, Northants.

[jcf]

I might have fancied the Catalina but Sod's Law, I bought an Academy one a few months back because it had surplus ASV radar aerials in it, so I'm covered should inspiration strike.

You're better off with the Academy kit, the old Airfix kit is a rivet monster with clunky movable bits.
As to the clear parts, thick, ill defined and distorted barely covers the problems, the operable blisters
are amongst the poor choices made when the kit was designed.
I built one back in the early '70s and the clear parts were dire then, looking at photos of the most
recent previous release they look even worse, which does not bode well for the upcoming rerelease.

[Weaver]

I might have fancied the Catalina but Sod's Law, I bought an Academy one a few months back because it had surplus ASV radar aerials in it, so I'm covered should inspiration strike.

You're better off with the Academy kit, the old Airfix kit is a rivet monster with clunky movable bits.
As to the clear parts, thick, ill defined and distorted barely covers the problems, the operable blisters are amongst the poor choices made when the kit was designed.
I built one back in the early '70s
and the clear parts were dire then,
looking at photos of the most recent previous release they look
even worse, which does not bode well for the upcoming rerelease.

Unless they've done a new clear sprue for it, but I'm not holding my breath. They have done new clear sprues for some other Vintage Classics releases, but not nearly enough IMHO.

[The Rat]

You're better off with the Academy kit, the old Airfix kit is a rivet monster

The 1955 Monogram product was even worse. The entire wing was riveted, when, as any PBY afficionado knows, the rear half of the wing was fabric.

[Mossie]

I built the Catalina as a youngster and agree with Jon. The only reason I'd buy it would be nostalgia, but the price would have to be right.

Jadlam have the Academy kit for nearly a fiver less than the Airfix kit, no brainer.
https://www.jadlamracingmodels.com/search?q=catalina+1%3A72&options%5Bprefix%5D=last&type=product&sort_by=relevance

[Beermonster58]

Been scratching my head a bit over the pricing.
£42 for the Ju-52 but only £30 for the Canberra. The aforementioned PBY price and, £40 for the almost equally ancient SRN. 4. £60 for a Shackleton??.
They can whistle for that one😉

Price of course is a very subjective issue and, nobody is forced to buy. For me generally, the Vintage Classics once again saved the day. The announcement also helped me with another choice. I won't be renewing Airfix Club membership.
Not enough of interest to justify keeping it open for discounts and, the rather poor choice of Club Exclusive kit didn't help matters.

It is what it is. Airfix will never please everyone. I've got something out of it so, its not a complete washout

[Weaver]

Been scratching my head a bit over the pricing.
£42 for the Ju-52 but only £30 for the Canberra. The aforementioned PBY price and, £40 for the almost equally ancient SRN. 4. £60 for a Shackleton??.
They can whistle for that one😉

Same here. From my point of view, I think it works out like this:

I'm pleasantly surprised by the £30 Canberra since I'd have guessed it would be more. Since I want at least one, possibly two, this is a big deal to me.

I too noticed the price difference between the Canberra and the Ju 52. I suspect the difference is one of complexity. The Junkers has a lot more interior, with opening doors, and complex engines. This is reflected in the parts count: 171 for the Canberra and 218 for the Junkers.

The SR.N4 is HUGE: 39cm long when finished and 276 parts! Like Kit I was firmly expecting it to north of £50, so again, I'm pleasantly surprised. Whether it's worth it given the age of the mould is another matter, but it's certainly a lot of plastic for your money.

The PBY price is a definite mis-step, especially given what others have said about it in this thread.

The Shacks have always been expensive and I only have one because I got it for a bargain price. Again, full interior and 290 parts.


Whether full interiors are worth making the kit more expensive for is an interesting question. In the case of the Ju 52, I suspect it is, because the model has many windows and large doors in not only the side but also the top, through which most of the interior can be seen. It's one of those models where, even if the doors were moulded closed, you'd still want something visible through the windows.  In the case of the Shackleton, I'm not convinced. Most of the interior is utterly invisible through the handful of tiny windows when the fuselage is closed up, so unless you cut parts of the latter away (which most people won't do), it's a waste of time. I'd have been inclined to put all the interior bits on a separate sprue, sell them separately as an optional upgrade and make the basic kit cheaper. You could probably have moulded far fewer of the interior sprues too, since most customers wouldn't want them.

[zenrat]

...Whether full interiors are worth making the kit more expensive for is an interesting question. In the case of the Ju 52, I suspect it is, because the model has many windows and large doors in not only the side but also the top, through which most of the interior can be seen. It's one of those models where, even if the doors were moulded closed, you'd still want something visible through the windows.  In the case of the Shackleton, I'm not convinced. Most of the interior is utterly invisible through the handful of tiny windows when the fuselage is closed up, so unless you cut parts of the latter away (which most people won't do), it's a waste of time. I'd have been inclined to put all the interior bits on a separate sprue, sell them separately as an optional upgrade and make the basic kit cheaper. You could probably have moulded far fewer of the interior sprues too, since most customers wouldn't want them.

Another option would be to sell a clear fuselage half, or one with parts already cut away (removable panels?), to enable the interior to be shown off.

[Weaver]

...Whether full interiors are worth making the kit more expensive for is an interesting question. In the case of the Ju 52, I suspect it is, because the model has many windows and large doors in not only the side but also the top, through which most of the interior can be seen. It's one of those models where, even if the doors were moulded closed, you'd still want something visible through the windows.  In the case of the Shackleton, I'm not convinced. Most of the interior is utterly invisible through the handful of tiny windows when the fuselage is closed up, so unless you cut parts of the latter away (which most people won't do), it's a waste of time. I'd have been inclined to put all the interior bits on a separate sprue, sell them separately as an optional upgrade and make the basic kit cheaper. You could probably have moulded far fewer of the interior sprues too, since most customers wouldn't want them.

Another option would be to sell a clear fuselage half, or one with parts already cut away (removable panels?), to enable the interior to be shown off.

Or sell the kit in two boxings, one "deluxe" version with the clear fuselage half and all the interiror bits, and one "standard" without them.

[jcf]

A clear fuselage half usually ends up looking naff and "cutaway" sections would look even worse. Then there's the issue of how they'd mould the "cutaway" fuselage half. Clear fuselages also have the inherent problem of clear polystyrene being very brittle, easily damaged by polystyrene glue and fogged by super-glue.

[The Wooksta!]

With the Shack, you need to assemble some of the interior, because it's structural and helps prevent flexing and warping.

[Charlie_c67]

Have to say, the attitude to the Airfix announcements seems to have been a lot better than the wailing and gnashing of teeth with regards to the Hornby announcements. Now whilst the pricing of some of the (few) new tools is suspect, I'm not sure how you can point out that the parent company is financially in the brown stuff, then complain that a lot of the announcement was re-releases. Logically any re-release is going to have a bigger profit margin than a new tool which is going to reduce that overdraft leading to a healthier company.

That said, it's been pretty much an annual event to whinge, bash Hornby and predict their demise in certain corners of t'interweb so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.

[Rick Lowe]

Interesting, too, about the castle and roman fort included in the sets - the moulds are still around, then... I wonder how many of the others are?

I also note that this is the third 1/35 British Cold War-era kit they've done; might there be more to come?
I could be persuaded into getting a 1/35 Humber Pig...

[Nick]

I also note that this is the third 1/35 British Cold War-era kit they've done; might there be more to come?
I could be persuaded into getting a 1/35 Humber Pig...

I can see them doing the Alvis Saladin to go with the Stalwart and Saracen family. The Salamander is vaguely possible but more likely from a 3rd party as a conversion kit.
Different versions of the Ferret/Fox/Vixen and Stalwart are also doable.

A range of Land Rovers could work but I think those are already done by several other firms.
Bedford trucks - RL for the 1950s, MK/MJ for the 70s-90s era.

[zenrat]

No one does a 1/35 Landrover 101 (forward control).  Airfix do one in 1/76 so they already have some knowledge of the subject.  Plenty of them around to LIDAR.
Kit Form Services produce a very expensive 1/24 resin example which I have so far managed to resist.