Scale Model Shop

Collapse

In Box Review of Revell's new tool B17G

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Guest

    #1

    In Box Review of Revell's new tool B17G

    This kit was so high on my Christmas wish list, it competed with the fairy on the top of the tree. Sadly Peterborough and Cambridgeshire had not even seen the kit prior to Christmas or between that and the new year so I had to go without.

    However, a parcel arrived in the post this morning and in it was my belated Christmas present.

    Now, I believe that this kit released late last year as a new tool 1:72 B17G could possibly be the most important release in the scale for 2010 and possibly 2011.

    It is a huge jump from the very long in the tooth 'Memphis Bell' which I have been doing the "Shall I, shan't I" bit for ages. The reviews of the Memphis Bell and the age of the kit kept putting me of and I am soooo glad I waited.

    The new tool is very impressive. It has a fully detailed interior and I mean fully detailed at this scale. Sadly, I doubt much of it will be visible at the end but this could well be a modellers model.

    Also, Revell have dropped the Memphis Bell, I had hoped that they may have done the Sally B as at Duxford, but have instead gone for "Little Miss Mischief" as the star of the superb box art.

    Little Miss Mischief is a very well thought out subject as it history is clearly displayed on the aircraft.

    In 1944 over Cologne, the aircraft was hit by flack and was described on crash landing at base as "almost cut in two" by the flack. In just over a month its ground crew got Little Miss Mischief operational again using parts from 13 other damaged aircraft. So when she flew again, it was a bit of a patchwork quilt. She has bare aluminium. Olive Drab, Olive and green cam and even a whitish grey on some of her parts, not to mention the red on the fin and the tail planes.

    Not only is the story behind Little Miss Mischief fascinating, it has to be one of the best paint challenges for an aircraft modeller, if only it came with pre cut masks for all that glass!!!!

    Anyway, I believe Revell have done us all a major service with this release. It comes in what I originally though to be an optimistic box measuring some 17"x9.5"x4.25" deep, now that is one big box for a 1:72 model However, although not tightly packed, the four bags of sprues fit in quite snuggly. As usual with Revell, this is an end opening box which I find a pain in the bum.

    As I have mentioned, the box art is beautiful and photos on the side show the finished interior detail

    The sprues are in good old silver plastic and the panel lines are, at last, engraved. I don't want to get into a debate on this as I think we all know that engraved panel lines are the least accurate you can be but they certainly make the model easier to detail with washes and, most agree, look better that the possibly more accurate fine raised panel lines. However, neither are technically right but I like mine engraved.

    The decals are superb given the scale and have loads of stencils and of course, the obligatory nose art. There are two options, Little Miss Mischief based at Bassingbourn as part of 8th USAF, 1st Air Division, 1st Combat Wing, 91st Bomb Group Feb 1944. Or "Nine 'O Nine" same unit and base but depicting the aircraft in April 1945. Nine 'O Nine is painted in the Olive upper and grey lower colour scheme. Bassingbourn is situated near Royston Cambridgeshire and is only a short drive from where I live so it is nice once more to have models of aircraft which operated locally.

    I have to admit, I have no idea when I will get around to this wonderful looking kit but I shall be keeping an eye out for reviews and even possible 3rd party additions.

    If you want a really stunning B17G, packed with history then at around £18, you cannot go wrong with this one from what I have seen so far.

    P.S. Apologies for the quality of the pictures. I am still not back to full health and my head is still a shed lol. If you want more detailed pics then I would be more than happy to take specific ones if it would help you decide on the kit.
  • yak face
    Moderator
    • Jun 2009
    • 13841
    • Tony
    • Sheffield

    #2
    Nice review graham, and the kit looks like its up to revells excellent recent standards. They can get a bit of flak but in my opinion any new tool they have released in the last 10 years or so have been superb, and great value, always with excellent decals too. Ive seen this on the shelves and like yourself was amazed at the size of the box! the last fort i made was the old airfix b17g , im sure you could get 3 of those boxes inside this one!!! Looking forward to seeing this one graham, is it going to be alclad ? cheers tony

    Comment

    • Guest

      #3
      Cheers Tony. I will use Alclad on what bit of bare metal Little Miss Mischief has left. I need to do some checking up but if you look at the pictures from the side of the box, most of the nose forward of the wings is in a white/grey colour. On the box art it looks metal so a bit of digging to do first.

      Comment

      • AlanG
        • Dec 2008
        • 6296

        #4
        I'm hoping they'll scale it up for a 1/48 version to replace the old one too. Still looks an excellent kit. Thanks for the review

        Comment

        • Guest

          #5
          Lovely looking kit Graham and I have to say, compared with Tamiya releases it's very good value for money. I'm with you on the panel lines though as engraved lines are a lot closer to reality than raised lines and take a wash far better and that interior should keep you busy for a while.

          If this comes out half as good as your 190 it should be a fantastic model and the diorama options are endless.

          Comment

          • stona
            SMF Supporters
            • Jul 2008
            • 9889

            #6
            Well done Graham. Not my scale I'm afraid,maybe a 1/48 version would tempt me.

            Steve

            Comment

            • Ian M
              Administrator
              • Dec 2008
              • 18270
              • Ian
              • Falster, Denmark

              #7
              Nice review Graham! Should look ace when done.

              Steve, why piddle about with 1/48, save up a bit longer and go for the 1/32 scale one. It would fit much better with all the other 1/32 birds you have....

              Ian M
              Group builds

              Bismarck

              Comment

              • stona
                SMF Supporters
                • Jul 2008
                • 9889

                #8
                Originally posted by \
                Steve, why piddle about with 1/48, save up a bit longer and go for the 1/32 scale one. It would fit much better with all the other 1/32 birds you have....

                Ian M
                You are quite right Ian,unfortunately it might not fit in my house though!!!

                Steve

                Comment

                • Guest

                  #9
                  I have been intrigued all day about the colouring of the front end, from rear of wing root to nose on this model. Revell, in their pictures of their completed prototype published on the side of the box, clearly show this as a white/grey. In the instructions, they actually quote a white and a grey to be mixed for the colour. However, there is extensive info on this aircraft on the net, including a lot of models built prior to the release of this kit. Almost exclusively, the split of the two main body sections was just to the rear of the rear wing root. The aft part was in olive drab with a very pale grey underside. Much lighter than I would have thought but my opinion is biassed based on the mid grey on the underside of the Sally B at Duxford.

                  However, the front, and original body section, of the Little Miss Mischief is always described as NMF (Natural Metal Finish). No I know that in operations, they were not polished to what we se in museums and P51s these days. I have found this colour pic on the web, it is all over the place, which could help explain why Revell have gone for a white/Grey. In this original colour pic, it could easily be interpreted as a near white grey, especially as it is a very matt looking finish.

                  However, it also looks remarkably like the Alclad Dull Aluminium to me. Any comments?

                  By the way, this is probably during recovery after crash landing after it had been grafted back together, as far as I can tell, it was scrapped after this crash.

                  Spookily, I also found a log of flights of LMM and it shows the pilots name at one stage as G Thompson. My name is Graham Thompson but I have no idea what the pilots first name was, not big in America is Graham so it is more likely Gregg or something lol

                  Comment

                  • stona
                    SMF Supporters
                    • Jul 2008
                    • 9889

                    #10
                    As far as I'm aware the B-17s in the ETO were initially camouflaged in olive drab (with or without the medium green blotches) over neytral grey. We all know how these colours varied,particularly the OD but that's how they started out. Later they were simply supplied in natural metal,the USAAF deeming camouflage no longer necessary.

                    I'm not aware of any white or whiteish grey colour being officially applied to these aircraft. I'm pretty sure that the photo of the belly landed bomber shows the NMF,take a look at the paintless bent propeller tips as a comparison.

                    My guess is that when they did the "cut 'n' shut" the front end was in a NMF,not painted at all.I offer this photo of her in flight to back up my guess.

                    Cheers

                    Steve

                    Comment

                    • Guest

                      #11
                      Graham, only an observation but it may prompt further thought. If the crashed LMM was painted I am sure that there would be evidence somewhere around the front of damage to the painted surface and a difference in texture or colour would be evident. There even seems to be creasing of the skin around the forward turret which would have to have damaged any paint finish. Because of the fact that the finish looks consistent I would tend to think it is a natural metal finish. I suspect that Revell are simply trying to recreate the effect with normally available enamels rather than suggest something as specific as Alclad to simulate the finish.

                      Comment

                      • stona
                        SMF Supporters
                        • Jul 2008
                        • 9889

                        #12
                        Originally posted by \
                        I am sure that there would be evidence somewhere around the front of damage to the painted surface and a difference in texture or colour would be evident. There even seems to be creasing of the skin around the forward turret which would have to have damaged any paint finish.
                        Another very good point.

                        Steve

                        Comment

                        • Ian M
                          Administrator
                          • Dec 2008
                          • 18270
                          • Ian
                          • Falster, Denmark

                          #13
                          I would probably go for the Alcad ACL 101 as the main colour for the BMF and maybe give it a few passes with a brighter alclad, say 105 or 119. (polished alu or airframe alu).

                          Alternatively humbrols polished alu metalcoat paint and just buff it up in the areas that you want to shine a little more.

                          Ian M

                          PS Steve, you could always move into that 1/32 B-17 and use it as a hobby room!

                          ;-)
                          Group builds

                          Bismarck

                          Comment

                          • Guest

                            #14
                            Hi Graham,

                            Great review. I have almost completed this kit and though I would write a few lines as there are some omissions from the instructions.

                            1. The ammo boxes for the two front waist guns are supplied but not shown in the instructions. (see photo)

                            2. The instructions show the rear waist guns as being mounted through the plexiglass windows only, but part Nos. 45 are the gunmounts for a "no window" option.

                            The mounting points are just below the windows. I wish I had realised this before I fabricated my own as I wanted the "open window" look.

                            3. What is part No. 27 for ? Can anyone help. It looks like a blanking plate for the chin turret.

                            I found the parts an excellent fit, and as this is the first kit that I have built since about 1970, I found it a doddle.

                            David B

                            [ATTACH]51452.IPB[/ATTACH]

                            Comment

                            Working...