DavidJC

Welcome aborrd, and I fully agree.

At the risk of straying off topic, which I dislike as a rule, but is linked to the blocks above (well that's how I'm going to try and justify this post 😆) I'd venture to suggest that though outside of museums there are no large-scale letterpress machines anywhere in commercial use now, and certainly not in the more developed areas of the world, there is a handful of some very niche letterpress printers which is surprising in this day and age. I've certrainly heard of letterpress printers with a treadle-operated 'Cropper' or electric Heidelberg 10x15 platen still earning their keep on what are seen as (possibly pretensiously) top-notch wedding stationery and the like. Anyone who has an interest, Google Monotype or Linotype (the two main machines up to the latter part of the 20th Century producing type) and/or Heidelberg 10x15 (or Cropper press) to see how letterpress worked. You may even see examples of 'blocks' being used. As noted, there is probably little value in the blocks above but are still fascinating curios. As much of industry was, print was a skilled job which was labour-intensive and thus expensive, but there was nonetheless a real pride in getting a good result. Even blocks as we see above were showing strides in the field of graphic arts, all to be swept away with computerisation and digitisation. I think for anyone performing a bit of research on the Net will find it a fascinating study into an industrial past, but me? I thank goodness for a Mac, Quark and Adobe.

They are indeed printers 'blocks' as they were called in the days of letterpress, which became plates with the advent and increasing prevalence of offset-litho. Dependent on the method used, essentially they would be secured to a base in a number of ways so that the very top of the print area would be the same height as type around it, which was 23.317mm. Very much the sort of thing you'd see in toy catalogues, leaflets, even comics etc (but that would involve another process known as a stereotype for web printing). I would say though, other than the mounting base, in themselves nothing is missing since the raised surface would be inked as any surrounding type and the paper pressed against it uner intense pressure and pulled away from it mechanically, so there would be no additional dies (as suggested above) necessary to do that. From the look some do look worn which indicates a long and productive life. They are very interesting curios; keep your hands washed after handling them. An amalgam of lead, tin and antimony doesn't make for great human ingestion.

Beautiful builds so far. It's amazing in looking at that photo the Swordfish is not 1/48. I know both types of aircraft of course but I had never appreciated the size differences.

Would this not be better off in a dedicated classic car/sports car page? There might well be car fans here but we are a modelling community at our heart :)

They are nicely painted Tomek22. The only thing I might have been tempted to do is scrape the seam line off the arms of the figures, but I have to say they are nicely done. I don't seem to be able to capture the subtlety of tones/folds/shadows etc.

Those builds look so good, moreover, your daughter looks like she's absolutely loving buidling them. It's just so great to see.

For acrylic paints you can use kitchen towel or a cotton wool pad wet with surgial spirit which can be bought off the shelf from chemists. It's not dangerous in itself but it doesn't smell nice and can make a mess. so work in a well ventilated area and wear gloves. For acrylics or enamels, Revell's Paint Remover is excellent. Again a wetted kitchen towel or cotton wool pad works wonders. Expensive stuff but it's really good. In both cases, wash with non-aggressive bathroom cleaner and allow to air dry.

I don't know that anyone said that £80 is cheap? captain triggers feels that it's an 'excellent' price; to him he consdiers it value. I might not of course but then I don't really have any interst in car models and even less in what I consder the awful Morris Minor (sorry but I do!). On the other hand, whilst I would still raise an eyebrow at £80 at a faultless 1/48 Buccaneer, I would very much consider buying one. Horses for courses really.

Fantastic work from the two of you, and fantastic to see a young person enjoying modelling so much. Thank you for sharing it with us 😆

We're drifting off topic a bit, but my understanding is that Argos (even if Sainsbury's might even own Argos) are moving in to Sainsbury's stores , but only in the manner of post offices moving in to branches of W H Smith or the Co-op etc. They are all different and independent entities but presumably it's all part of a symbiotic relationship.

No, I never purchased a part built Kit, I purchased a brand new still in the box and the box still in the cellophane 1/48 Scale Model Buccaneer Then I am confused. You refer in two separate posts as to the kit quite clearly having been started: In any event, and however poor the kit is, I don't see through how all of your legal quotes any company can be held responsible for an aged kit. Putting aside your twice-made assertion that the kit was already started, the contents was what the box described, right? A 1/48 Buccaneer that the purchaser had to assemble, needing paint, glue and skills? Airfix have indeed addressed problems with the new Sea Fury but supplying new fuselage halves, as they would be duty bound to. I am afraid to say, how they have any responsibilty for a decades old kit that was of its time and not that great to start with is anyone's guess.

A little more confidence and patience and you might surprise yourself 😀

Great to see and hear from a young modeller (from a 55 year old 😆) Don't let your schoolmates drag you down, m2 browning, it would be brilliant to hear more from you and other younger modellers too, and see some finished models.

I don't know that's entirely accurate? I use 'Check if a vehicle is taxed', a Government website, and have found an old H registration car (that is, the 1960s H) and it found it correctly, saying that there is no MOT and untaxed since 1982, which would pretty much tie in accurately to my knowledge. That said I tried a 1960s G registration and there was no information at all. Another K and R registration (1970s) were also correctly identified. So I think this particular website can query its database at far back as H though no presumably earlier. Whether or not those cars or plates still exist I don't know but the website also nots SORN and I can't beleive that the cars I have tried all exist still. That said I concur, the Maxi plate wasn't found on the database; but I wonder, could that be because it never existed?

Lovely build.

Yes, please be aware of promoting (for want of a better word) other manufacturers' kits. I rather feel that producing a review here of another manufaturer will go against the spirit of Airfix's Forum. Thanks 😉

Very nice work, though I had some fit issues. Mine were particularly around the cockpit and trying to put the canopy on. Don't know if it was me or the design of the kit, but I didn't think it was as good overall as their 1/48 Hawk.

Progressing beautifully.

Great build from what's generally acknowledged as a clunky kit.

Hmm ok then, so plans are more widely available than I at first thought. £1,000 is a great deal for an individual, but in terms of R&D for a major manufacturer, it probably won't be anything at all (comparatively speaking anyway). Nonetheless, there's still the other costs to get said ship into production and the question still remains - would it sell?

There are some great posts with equally valid reasons in this thread and it's great to see. What's being overlooked though, I think, is research. Where there are abundant planes and other subjects easily available for research, and actually quite small for a team of two or three to crawl over and take photos and measurements etc easily, how on earth do you research a walloping great subject like a ship that in all probability doesn't exist in real life anyway? Plans are unlikely to exist any more, and for any subject to be taken seriously it would need to be accurate, well fitting and easy to build: gone are the days of lumps of plastic of vague representations and poor fit. Back in the day it didn't seem to matter - hulls were long and thin, turrets were in the right sort of place, even if ultimately it was an inaccurate model. Would people accept that these days? So there's another consideration, and a crucial one: research and how would it be done to produce an acccurate model (of any scale?)

So if Heller are capturing the market there, why would Airfix risk so much in trying to compete? Profitable or not, I would suggest that a businessman would look at that and think 'no point in us trying to release ships another manufacturer has already taken a risk on' and look at subjects other manufacturers haven't done, thereby capturing a market that way?

Great thread I think.

I bought it with my pennies from Woolworths around 1972/1973.