New Kit Releases and Wish Lists

[RangerNeil]

Yeah the TIE Bomber certainly grabbed my attention too - it's been on my want list forever.

I'd also be tempted with the UFO Shado Mobile; given that MPC recently brought out the 1/72 Space 1999 Eagles & Hawk I'm wondering if they've got the Anderson entertainment licence in which case we might see additional releases from UFO such as the moonbase interceptors, SID & Sky-Diver etc

I'm also hoping that they bring out the Eagle Freighter with the atomic waste cans in 1/72 since they've already released the 1/48 version.

Can you imagine the size of SkyDiver in 1/72. Moonbase Interceptors would be good - especially if they came on a launch bad base. So would the Lunar transporter and mothership, Strakers car, the Lunar hopper and Shadair transporter.
If MPC do have the licence then maybe the future will hold the vehicles from Captain Scarlet and Stingray - someone else seems to have the Thunderbirds licence already.

[Kevthemodeller]

Couple of new release shots from Border. Both in 1/35. The Lightning is a new one on me.

Love the 262 but it being Border puts me off I'd go for a Tamiya or another plenty out there. Admittedly not in 1/35.

[Stokesy44]

Couple of new release shots from Border. Both in 1/35. The Lightning is a new one on me.

Love the 262 but it being Border puts me off I'd go for a Tamiya or another plenty out there. Admittedly not in 1/35.

I agree, its a bit of a worry re Border. You would hope a new tool would be accurate, not just in terms of fit but in terms of accuracy to the real thing. I took one look at their Mk V Spit and thought, NOPE, rear fuselage is wrong, its looks like something from Trumpeter 25 years ago. Unforgivable.

[Stokesy44]

Oh yeah !



Get your pre orders in now.

You beat me to it mate. Some great stuff coming from your cousins across the Tasman.

[Stokesy44]

Yeah the TIE Bomber certainly grabbed my attention too - it's been on my want list forever.

I'd also be tempted with the UFO Shado Mobile; given that MPC recently brought out the 1/72 Space 1999 Eagles & Hawk I'm wondering if they've got the Anderson entertainment licence in which case we might see additional releases from UFO such as the moonbase interceptors, SID & Sky-Diver etc

I'm also hoping that they bring out the Eagle Freighter with the atomic waste cans in 1/72 since they've already released the 1/48 version.

Can you imagine the size of SkyDiver in 1/72. Moonbase Interceptors would be good - especially if they came on a launch bad base. So would the Lunar transporter and mothership, Strakers car, the Lunar hopper and Shadair transporter.
If MPC do have the licence then maybe the future will hold the vehicles from Captain Scarlet and Stingray - someone else seems to have the Thunderbirds licence already.

Blimey, between the two of you I'm calling a full on 4 alarm Geek Attack here. Love it

[Stokesy44]

We've had a bit of a downer on Border recently due to failings in their new tool releases but the He 111 looks like something else. Hopefully the kit lives up to the hype.

[digger303]

We've had a bit of a downer on Border recently due to failings in their new tool releases but the He 111 looks like something else. Hopefully the kit lives up to the hype.

It looks incredible, but at $200 a shot it better be. I hope they at least have the exterior down pat.

[Stokesy44]

We've had a bit of a downer on Border recently due to failings in their new tool releases but the He 111 looks like something else. Hopefully the kit lives up to the hype.

It looks incredible, but at $200 a shot it better be. I hope they at least have the exterior down pat.

Agree. I am seriously considering a stash sale as I have kits that I am beginning to think I may never build. There's a load of new releases I fancy but I can justify the £££

[Kevthemodeller]

We've had a bit of a downer on Border recently due to failings in their new tool releases but the He 111 looks like something else. Hopefully the kit lives up to the hype.

I'm not convinced, like the FW, Spitfire and 109 they appear to be up/down scaled Trumpeter kits. It could be the same for this with extras, I think I'll wait.

I must say it does look a great kit and the cost would put it cheaper than other 1/32 offerings of bombers but like most things that are cheaper, its cheaper for a reason.

[Stokesy44]

I'm not convinced, like the FW, Spitfire and 109 they appear to be up/down scaled Trumpeter kits. It could be the same for this with extras, I think I'll wait.

I must say it does look a great kit and the cost would put it cheaper than other 1/32 offerings of bombers but like most things that are cheaper, its cheaper for a reason.

Best option is probably to wait for a decent build review. Inbox reviews are worthless as a real test so I hope someone builds it soon. I just like the idea of being able to see all that detail in the nose section due to all the glazing. Its what put me off the Lancaster when it came out. You don't get to see most of the great detail once its built. There was also the minor matters of the price and the space needed.

[Stokesy44]

Some great new releases here. Aircraft in 1/48, 1/32 and 1/35.

Das Werk have a Me 262 coming in 1/32 while Border Models has one in 1/35. It never rains......

[Stokesy44]

RANT INBOUND

I made a comment a little while back that if you set yourself up as a reviewer of kits on Youtube then you should be able to go a little bit further than what the instructions look like and and how good the plastic looks.

Surely a kit review should include an opinion on accuracy. I'm not talking 'Adam Mann' levels of expertise like he shows with the Tiger 1 but at least have something to say about whether the plastic is accurate and whether the final model will be. Is that too much to ask?

I've just watched an unboxing review of the new 1/35 He 111 from Border and despite being quite detailed, there's not one mention about accuracy.

I normally don't watch this guy's stuff but since it was about a kit I'm interested in I thought I would give it a go. I should have stayed away.

What do you think? What do you want from a review? If you think I'm being unreasonable, please feel free to say so. I'm feeling feisty so bring it on!

[Kevthemodeller]

Sadly YouTube is a growing source of income and for some a great deal of it, all it takes is views or clicks. Many on there nowadays use AI, to plagiarize serious work, a lot of WW2 or history in general, motorcycling, cars, DIY you name it is this utter crap. Some of it is just dam right dangerous. It's click bait, more clicks/views better still comments more they earn, it's just money.

I would advise you look for the long standing established channels. Avoid the latest influx of reviewers with prolific reviews over a short time.

[Stokesy44]

Sadly YouTube is a growing source of income and for some a great deal of it, all it takes is views or clicks. Many on there nowadays use AI, to plagiarize serious work, a lot of WW2 or history in general, motorcycling, cars, DIY you name it is this utter crap. Some of it is just dam right dangerous. It's click bait, more clicks/views better still comments more they earn, it's just money.

I would advise you look for the long standing established channels. Avoid the latest influx of reviewers with prolific reviews over a short time.

As an antidote to all the garbage that's out there have you seen any of the stuff being produced by Al Murray and James Holland? Their WW2 Walking The Ground series has been brilliant. So far they have done Normandy and and Holland and are currently doing the battle of the bulge in the Ardennes. They go to the actual sites and talk through the battles in terms of tactics, units and the human experience.

[Kevthemodeller]

Sadly YouTube is a growing source of income and for some a great deal of it, all it takes is views or clicks. Many on there nowadays use AI, to plagiarize serious work, a lot of WW2 or history in general, motorcycling, cars, DIY you name it is this utter crap. Some of it is just dam right dangerous. It's click bait, more clicks/views better still comments more they earn, it's just money.

I would advise you look for the long standing established channels. Avoid the latest influx of reviewers with prolific reviews over a short time.

As an antidote to all the garbage that's out there have you seen any of the stuff being produced by Al Murray and James Holland? Their WW2 Walking The Ground series has been brilliant. So far they have done Normandy and and Holland and are currently doing the battle of the bulge in the Ardennes. They go to the actual sites and talk through the battles in terms of tactics, units and the human experience.

Yes I have I've not started watching their latest as yet, they are a fine example of how it should be done. Proper research, in-depth information, actually visit and go round the sites etc. if you haven't already check this guy out TJ3 History, all based on talking/interviewing real veterans. If they're no longer with us in depth research of combat reports and debriefs. He uses top draw CGI to explain/relive their missions.

Another really in depth guy is WWII us bombers. He really goes into the weeds about tech on aircraft, weapon systems and their applications and performance, what worked/didn't and why. All backed up using real combat reports and later investigations, he shows the real stuff and absolutely no AI on either channel. There is a lot of really good stuff you've just got to learn how to widdle out to crap