Revell 1/72 Hunter FGA9

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Enzo Matrix - 23 Jan 2008 18:33 GMT

This must be driving Quickboost crazy. When Revell released their Hunter
F6, it was obvious that the moulds had been produced with the facility for
producing both early and late versions. Oddly enough Revell seemed to be in
no hurry to release an FGA9 version, which would have been the obvious
choice.

Eventually Quickboost stepped into the breach and supplied us with a very
nice resin rear fuselage for the FGA9 that is a simple drop-in replacement
for the rear fuselage of the Revell kit.

A couple of months later, what happens? Revell release their FGA9 kit,
making the Quickboost conversion redundant, that's what!

How much of an investment is it to produce a resin conversion kit like that?
Is it a major blow to the manufacturer if such a kit is made redundant by
kit releases?

And while we're on the subject, does anyone know what markings options are
in the new Revell kit?

Signature

Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

Reply to this Message

kim - 23 Jan 2008 20:43 GMT

> This must be driving Quickboost crazy. When Revell released their
> Hunter F6, it was obvious that the moulds had been produced with the
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> A couple of months later, what happens? Revell release their FGA9
> kit, making the Quickboost conversion redundant, that's what!

Guess what would happen if a small independent company ever produced a model
of the Blue Pullman? 'Hornby' [sic] would exhume the old Triang version from
its grave, dump it on the market at exactly half the price of their rival
and then claim they had been planning to release it all along despite
endless claims to the contrary over the years. It's amazing how fast funds
can be found to finance a new version of an old model once a rival has
joined the fray. "Monkey see, monkey do" school of marketing I call it.

(kim)

Reply to this Message

someone@some.domain - 23 Jan 2008 21:09 GMT

>> This must be driving Quickboost crazy. When Revell released their
>> Hunter F6, it was obvious that the moulds had been produced with the
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
>(kim)

i think monkey eat monkey is more accurate. big monkeys especially.

Reply to this Message

Gordon McLaughlin - 23 Jan 2008 21:31 GMT

It may be that Quickboost don't need to sell a great many castings to make a
profit and, if so, they may have sold enough before the announcement of the
FGA9 to cover their costs.

I notice that they have now produced a clear resin camera nose to allow the
Revell Hunter to be converted to a FR10. This is easier if the FGA9 is used
as a basis so it is quite possible that Quickboost were aware of the
intention to produce this version. I've ordered the camera nose and the kit
as I've fancied a FR10 for years.

Gordon McLaughlin

> This must be driving Quickboost crazy. When Revell released their Hunter
> F6, it was obvious that the moulds had been produced with the facility for
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> And while we're on the subject, does anyone know what markings options are
> in the new Revell kit?

Reply to this Message

Enzo Matrix - 23 Jan 2008 22:32 GMT

> It may be that Quickboost don't need to sell a great many castings to
> make a profit and, if so, they may have sold enough before the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> were aware of the intention to produce this version. I've ordered
> the camera nose and the kit as I've fancied a FR10 for years.

I have a camera nose from the FAA Models GA11 conversion set. I was going
to use a Quickboost rear fuselage to make an FR10 in IV Sqn markings but I
was attempting to source some 230 gallon tanks. Apparently they will be
available in the Revell FGA9 so that is where the Revell kit really scores.

Signature

Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

Reply to this Message

Mad-Modeller - 25 Jan 2008 05:20 GMT

Not that this has anything to do directly with the kit but I caught some
of a TV tour of the Mid-Atlantic Air Museum tonight. I had no idea that
they had a Swiss Hunter, J-4061, IIRC. The tour was actually 10 years
old and they were talking about making it legally flyable. Of course,
they also thought they'd have the P-61 flying by 2000.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

Reply to this Message

Gordon McLaughlin - 25 Jan 2008 18:32 GMT

Enzo,

You asked about the markings in the FGA9 kit. Apparently, they are 79
Squadron, the Tactical Weapons Unit and a Swiss Mk58.

For an early review of sorts, see here:

http://www.britmodeler.com/forums/index.php?s=d4d7b8b6308bd8d83ecf5aa369bb3dd2&s
howtopic=9301

Gordon McLaughlin

>> It may be that Quickboost don't need to sell a great many castings to
>> make a profit and, if so, they may have sold enough before the
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> available in the Revell FGA9 so that is where the Revell kit really
> scores.

Reply to this Message

Enzo Matrix - 25 Jan 2008 19:15 GMT

> Enzo,
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> http://www.britmodeler.com/forums/index.php?s=d4d7b8b6308bd8d83ecf5aa369bb3dd2&s
howtopic=9301

Thanks Gordon. That shows the decal sheet, which is exactly what I needed to
know. It's slightly disappointing in that the RAF roundels included are the
lo-vis style. These were only used during the very late part of the Hunter
FGA9's career. Far more typical is the red/white/blue Type D roundel. That's
not an insurmountable problem but it would have been nice to have suitable
roundels for earlier schemes readily available in the kit (although it's
hard to imagine where they could fit on the sheet). 79 Sqn certainly used
aircraft with Type D roundels.

But that's typical, isn't it? I'm never satisfied! :-D

Signature

Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

Reply to this Message

Gordon McLaughlin - 25 Jan 2008 22:06 GMT

I agree that the markings are disappointing. The Hunter looks far better in
Type D and these are pretty much training schemes anyway. I'm not a great
fan of the FGA9 for some reason. The earlier marks seem to represent the
classic Hunter period better. I'd love to see Revell issue a F4 but I'm not
optimistic.

After reading other postings on the Britmodeller forum, I'm beginning to
regret buying the Quickboost camera nose. I don't know if you saw the other
Hunter postings but one of the contributors has done a FR10 conversion by
modifying the kit nose parts and it looks better than the resin part. I
might try it. I intend to use markings for a 2 Sdn aircraft (II(AC)
Squadron to give it its Sunday name).

Gordon McLaughlin

>> Enzo,
>>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> But that's typical, isn't it? I'm never satisfied! :-D

Reply to this Message

Enzo Matrix - 25 Jan 2008 22:58 GMT

> I agree that the markings are disappointing. The Hunter looks far
> better in Type D and these are pretty much training schemes anyway. I'm
> not a great fan of the FGA9 for some reason. The earlier marks
> seem to represent the classic Hunter period better. I'd love to see
> Revell issue a F4 but I'm not optimistic.

An hour's work will convert the F6 to the F4 (and earlier versions).
Xtradecal provides everything else that one would need - including some
quite controversial colour schemes.

> After reading other postings on the Britmodeller forum, I'm beginning
> to regret buying the Quickboost camera nose. I don't know if you saw
> the other Hunter postings but one of the contributors has done a FR10
> conversion by modifying the kit nose parts and it looks better than
> the resin part. I might try it. I intend to use markings for a 2
> Sdn aircraft (II(AC) Squadron to give it its Sunday name).

IV(AC) Sqn for me. I served on Happy Four so that will be a theme in my
collection.

Signature

Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

Reply to this Message

Model Forum / General / Models / January 2008

Revell 1/72 Hunter FGA9