Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Just saw this on Aitkens Website.

B-25B Mitchell Signature Edition "40-2344," Lt. Col. J.H. Doolittle, Co-Pilot Lt. R.E. Cole, 34th Squadron, April 18, 1942 1:72 Air Force 1 AF1-0111S - Aiken's Airplanes Store

B-25B Mitchell "40-2344," Lt. Col. J.H. Doolittle, Co-Pilot Lt. R.E. Cole, 34th Squadron, April 18, 1942 1:72 Air Force 1 AF1-0111 - Aiken's Airplanes Store

It appears that Air Force One have a B25 tooling in 1:72. The first release will be Doolittles B25B. There will also be a signature edition. :envy:

I have been hanging for another manufacturer to pick up the B25 tooling for an age. I was hoping HM would do it.

Have to say I am so pleased. Not just the tooling, but I don't have the Pooch's Doolittle B25, so this one will be a certainty. If its as good as the P61 and they do a better job with the scheme selection than the Hound, then I am gonna all over this tooling.

Should be out in May. :cool:

Clearly WW2 is not dead. And it appears if Corgi are not willing to engage with the US market properly and substantially on its WW2 subjects..........then clearly Air Force 1 are prepared to give it a go. :cool:

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Rumour has it that Air Force 1 will be producing a lot of product this year.

The big question is what will be the level of quality though?

Although the P-61 and V-22 have been relatively good - everything else has been pretty sub-standard.

Dan
;)

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

ii believe that AF 1 will be impoving ....realizing how much attentiom they get from diecast collectors not only locally but from abroad....

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

I have the Corgi Doolittle Mitchell, but will be very interested to see the pre-pros for this one. I got the AF1 P-61 and was happy with it, so I'm hoping this will turn out as good or better.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Assuming AF1 is acting rationally (which is an open question, especially given nonsensical releases like their F-16), they must be counting on the demise of Corgi over the short to medium term. Corgi's B-25 is excellent and I suspect most collectors who might be interested in one already have one, especially given the recent re-release of 'ruptured duck' by Corgi.

I really like my AF1 black widow, but let's not delude ourselves - given the price they are asking it's just an ok model whose overall black color hides a lot of flaws and lack of detail. Their osprey likewise simply, by a narrow margin, "fails to be terrible." I'll wait for a HM V-22 or be happy with the excellent kit built one I have, thank you very much.

I suspect the AF1 B-25 is either
a) FOV/Unimax rehash
b) a trial run towards a larger/more demanding model - the obvious choice here is B-17 which corgi chronically under-produced.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

"Ruptured Duck" was not a re-release.

The last Corgi release was a bit of a dud. Which was predictable considering its very similar to a previous RAF release (just with a more accurate colour). Whilst Corgi has had some good releases, some were pretty average and many had the rather unfortunate largish runs.

More likely AF1 has the old FM tooling (which we have known about for months...along with the PBY and B17 toolings) and utilising the CAD method tooled a 1:72 version.

It also means, other nations such as Australia, Canada (mainly post war)....maybe even a Korean War B25 (apparently a few were utilised as hacks), in addition to the plethora of USAAF schemes, could be in the offing. In other words there is enough diversity that Corgi did not exploit with their tooling that AF1 could make a go of it (as opposed to a trial for a 1:72 B17 :confused:).

Actually the B25 tooling's biggest vulnerability is that none served with the 8th Air Force and ETO models have always been more popular than the other theatres of WW2 in Diecast.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Some Australian WWII stuff would be very welcome in my collection, looking forward to seeing what AF1 produces.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

I'd love it if AF1 released some solid-nosed B-25s like Red Wrath or Hell's Belles.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

After seeing AF1's B-25 on display at my local retailer's last weekend, I'll definitely be sticking with Corgi's B-25s and I don't expect AF1's pending B-17 "Bit O' Lace" will become part of my B-17 collection either.

This photo compares Corgi's Doolittle Raider AA35312 on the left with AF1's AF10111

While I was impressed with AF1's initial Osprey and Black Widow -- though being the only 1:72 offerings added to their appeal, my issues with their B-25 include:

• Entire model -- including canopies -- appears to be coated with matte clear-coat
• Fuselage viewing ports are silver paint rather than acrylic inserts
• Engines lack detail
• Wheels look like they're attached to struts with finishing nails
• Tires lack detail
• No pilot figures
• General bland appearance

Nope, not for me.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Cheers for showing the comparison. I expect the AF1 version will find its niche somewhere with collectors who might not be able to get their hands on the corgi version, though wonder what the RRP for the AF1 is. It was always a baffling choice on AF1 to produce as the corgi version is so good, it was always going to be a tough job to compete.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

I expect the AF1 version to have a niche following by people that collect toys that sucked LOL

I think WWI battleships were constructed with less rivets :eek: You sunk my battleship :rolleyes:

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Anyone know if their actually gonna end up producing a 1/72 B-29?

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Would you really want a AF1 B-29 ? Guess you haven't seen their 1:144 versions yet...

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Absolutely. It's a diecast B-29. As long as it looks 90% like a B-29, as their 1:144's do, it's still 90% better than not having a 1/72 B-29

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

But it's AF1 dude..... I'd rather Corgi do it

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

As would I! But I don't see Corgi taking that risk. And HM isn't into large WWII aircraft.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

They did a Vulcan so don't loose hope

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

I think it would be down to price for the AF1 B-25 to sell. Overall it looks "ok". Corgi has the detailing I prefer.

As for the B-29, could be a bit of a long shot for Corgi. The Vulcan was different as it's a British aircraft with British schemes and Corgi's market is usually cited as primarily the UK. I know the RAF operated the B-29 for a short time and perhaps a question of is this enough to convince the pooch.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

I agree. I'm sure there will be some complaints about this or that flaw on such and such a model, but that's just the nature of this hobby. I'm glad AF1 is in the game and I hope they do some new and improved paints on their SU-35, and perhaps one day they will do some other Flanker variants as well.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

... and hopefully they'll tone down on the rivets as well... ;)

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Since when was the B-25 a sleek aircraft? Had the sleekness of a junkyard build.

https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/Mf...600.jpg.cf.jpg

https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/TV...son.jpg.cf.jpg

https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/ZY...072.jpg.cf.jpg

To me a model should look as it does irl standing in front of it....not how it looks flying around or in a picture taken from 50 feet away. Some like it some dont, but saying AF1 is wrong in riveting this craft is laughable

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Their B-29 is like 70%, while the Dragon Wings version is closer to 90%.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

And I bought the Dragons for that reason. I bought the better of the two options

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

The B-29 was operated by the Brits as the Washington bomber, so it's possible...

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Asked and answered -


Victoria Tsang

Jan 6https://mail.google.com/mail/images/cleardot.gif



to me
https://mail.google.com/mail/images/cleardot.gif
Dear Bill,


Thank you for your enquiry. No, the B29 in the scale of 1/72 is simply too big.


With very best regards,
Victoria Tsang
Sales & Marketing Director
Air Force 1 Co., Limited
Suite 2301, Mega Trade Center
1 Mei Wan Street
Tsuen Wan, N.T.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Thanks Bill for asking and posting, very kind of you. I suppose asking for a 1/72 B-52 is out of the question then ;) The reply appears to suggest their factory has the same limitation as HM where they can't manufacture models above a certain size...

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

If a B-29 would ever be made in 1/72 then my guess is they will need a lot of plastic in the wings for that enormous wing span. Otherwise it will probably not be able to carry its own weight.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

i'm not aware of metal model airplanes sagging noticeably in a manner like you suggest. What causes sags is poor attachment points or ones engineered to be not "strong" for other reasons, like CW's F-14 (in order to allow the wings to sweep). With the B29, this should not be a problem as the fuselage offers plenty of space to engineer a tight fit (Franklin Mint has shown this to be possible) and it is possible to design it that the bottom "V" of the wings from the fuselage to both main gear are one piece this I'm guessing would add a massive amount of strength well in excess of what is needed for a model like this.

My Franklin mint B-17, far larger than a 1/72 B-29 would be, does not sag.

The B-29 continues to be far and away the most important aircraft not represented in 1/72 or larger diecast and honestly I don't buy many of the explanations we get as to why it's not been done. The fuselage is a basic cylinder that can be joined in many ways. The wings can be made in reasonably sided sections and if done in the way that i suggest, the model can be shipped with user-attachable wings to keep the size of the box small. There are an absolute TON of liveries that can be done AND if a company was particularly ambitious they could even sell packs of noses and tails (with different nose art and unit numbers) for example to cover a large number ofotherwise basically identical WW2-pacific theater birds.

I think one of the 'traps' of B-29s is the focus on the Atom bomb aircraft. I think doing those is unnecessary (it requires changes to the bomb bays). By skipping those in 1/72, you avoid the bomb bay issue and any political controversy, and leave yourself with plenty of good liveries to do.

I'd buy at least three B-29s/B-50s in 1/72 and maybe more.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

You're probably right, also needs a bit of nose weight due to the tricycle landing gear...

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Well, if the empennage was plastic and the fuselage and engines were metal, that might do it.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

So I think no would be the answer for a 1/72 b-36?, what about a 1/72 b-58?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...s/Shelves3.jpg

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

I think a big part of the problem is the cost of making such a large model, and then passing that to the customer. It's possible that a 1/72 B-29 may run upwards of $300 or more, and many collectors may simply not be interested in paying that much. Also, the box it would come in would be large, I would not want to try to put the wings on my model just to reduce the box size, I think that would be a mistake. AFA the Enola Gay or Bock's Car, they didn't cut a larger opening so simply making a special inserted bomb bay probably wouldn't be a problem...or they may not even make an opening bomb bay and simply provide a Fat Man or Little Boy model to set beside your plane. Personally, I'm ok with the 1/200 and 1/144 versions of the B-29 already out there. Just finding a place to put a larger beast would be a problem...one I had to deal with for the Vulcan I bought.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

Good point, would be a quite a bit of investment required should Corgi do a 1/72 B-29 and hence the high retail price you mentioned.

Could go for a 1/72 B-58 except the concern for the manufacturer would be the cost again and there aren't many schemes that can be done.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

I have a 1/72 plastic B-58. The shape is infinitely more complicated than the "soda can cylindrical" b-29. To be any good and not suffer from CW SR-71 "broken neck" issues, the B58 upper fuse would have to be one very intricate piece. Because it's a cylinder, the b-29 need not be. Plus, while the B-29 is large, it's not that large - if today's corgi B17s are $150, then $200, not $300 is plenty. And that's again, in my view giving too much credit to the B-29's size and not enough to it's relative simplicity compared to even the B-17. Even the turrets on the B-29 are much simpler in that they are all identical and non-glazed (other than the tail).

B-29 and variants were flown in significant numbers by three major air forces (four if you count PLAAF TU-4s) and had a very significant role in two major conflicts.

I don't understand the hesitation to get this ridiculously important aircraft done in diecast.

Re: Air Force 1 1:72, Doolittle's B25B
 

The B-29 and its close cousin the B-50 could be cycled thru many paint schemes. From WW2 (all that nose art) to 1950's SAC arctic red wing and tail tips to 1960's bare metal and white top. The B-29 lasted from 1943 till 1960 and the B-50 lasted from 1947 till 1965. I understand some B-50's even went to Thailand/Vietnam in the 1960's.. Although for the B-50 you'd need to allow for extra tooling for a larger tail and some engine nacelle changes on the wing. The B-50 could also be done as a tanker.