Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => The Second World War => Topic started by: FramFramson on December 06, 2016, 04:33:48 AM
-
I'm mainly interested in the He 111. The scale as listed on the box is 1:64, a rarity among aircraft models.
(http://www.modele.sklep.pl/files/foto_add_big/foto_add-42916.jpg)
But Lindberg also made a B-17, Junkers Ju-88, and Me 109(F) in 1:64.
Anyway, has anyone ever bought and assembled any of these kits? How would they actually look next to 28mm minis? Curious!
-
Hey guys, I took the plunge and bought one of these kits. I did some quick dry-fitting today and it fits 32mm figures PERFECTLY.
This would make a great objective for a SAS raid or such. As mentioned before, there's a few other WWII planes. The kits are older and probably a bit hard to find, but not particularly expensive.
-
In fact, it seems there's a pretty fair number of 1:64 kits WWII aircraft kits out there. They're older, and in some cases hard to find, but here's a list I was able to compile:
HOBBY-TIME
- Me 109F (very old kit - 50's issue)
LINDBERG
- B-17
- He 111
- Junkers Ju-88
- Me 109F
MONOGRAM
- Me 109F
- Mustang P-51D
- Spitfire
- Warhawk P-40N (older version) / Tiger Shark P-40F (newer)
REVELL
- B-25 Mitchell
SUNIL
- Me 109F
-
Some of them do periodically get re-released as 'heritage' models.
-
Hey guys, I took the plunge and bought one of these kits. I did some quick dry-fitting today and it fits 32mm figures PERFECTLY.
Wrong scale, but...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/291965586487?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT (http://www.ebay.com/itm/291965586487?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT)
(http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/grAAAOSw241YUt80/s-l1600.jpg)
& 'specially Pulpish
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IEn2IlqGOG0/S5KIHXsC4dI/AAAAAAAACz0/lSYxZfK0OLI/s1600/Miniaturenfotos,+Originale+158.jpg)
from page 3
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=58045.30 (http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=58045.30)
die cast, not plastic, but...
Just sayin'...
Valerik
Professor of Preposterous Physics
Adjunct Accredited Aerodynamatician
Dayton Institute of Applied Aeronautical Absurdity
-
Fram, that's interesting. Would love to see a photo of the one you have worked on.
-
I am going to do a little conversion on mine to make it into a civilian plane (basically extend the windows forward to the cockpit and add a passenger entry door on the port side behind the window row).
I haven't decided if it will be a license-built civilian He 111 (which was produced in limited numbers as a civilian model from 1935 onwards) or to slightly modify it and claim it's actually a different design derived from the Amiot 370 (which is basically the He 111 as designed by Geoffrey DeHavilland):
(http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/other2/amiot370/amiot370-3.jpg)
Either way it will be my "cutting edge" pulp transport plane, complimented by a scratch-built trimotor of some description as an older, "workhorse" transport.
Anyway, I am sure I will get some pictures up eventually.
-
It's certainly very pulpy and an excellent find. That 1930's design...kind of Art Deco isn't it?
-
Bugger. Just bought me several 1/48th scale German aircraft for a desert LRDG raid-thingie... Couldn't find the HE-111 in that scale.
-
It's certainly very pulpy and an excellent find. That 1930's design...kind of Art Deco isn't it?
In a way, yes very much so! I really love that older, fully-glazed cockpit nose. It's very very much a 30's design.
I'm also a sucker for two-engine light bombers or heavy fighters - the 111, Mossie, Marauder, P-38, Beaufighter, Me 262, something about planes like that really floats my boat. Even the DC-3 is great to my eye. The mossie in particular is an especially beautiful plane.
-
If you do a scale search on Scalemates, anywhere between 1/64 and 1/48 you'll come up with loads of interesting kits for your era and suitably sized for 28mm figures.
For example:
https://www.scalemates.com/kits/178780-upc-5064-100-babs-mitsubishi-c5m1
-
That's where I found most of mine.
FWIW, 1:50 is basically 1:48 in my book though. But there are certainly other planes at other scales near 1:64. Here's what I dug up which would work for WWII or prewar:
1:54
- Grumman Duck (Glencoe)
1:55
- Grumman XP-50 (various mfg, most recently ODK)
1:60
- Beechcraft Super 18 Twin Beech (Comet/Aurora)
1:65
- Focke-Wulf 190A-5 (Nichimo)
1:66
- Stinson Tri-Motor (ITC)
1:67
- B-26 Invader (Monogram)
1:68
- de Havilland 89 Dragon Rapide (FROG)
- B-25 Mitchell (Monogram)
Most of those kits are quite elderly though, a lot dating to the 60's. I'd imagine they'd be tough to get. The Invader and Mitchell by Monogram should be easy to find though as they were in production for many years. The dragon Rapid is VERY interesting Pulp-wise. A quick look online shows you can find the kit and for not TOO much considering how rare and old the kit probably is, though it'd still cost a few pfennigs.
Above and below those limits (1:54 to 1:68), I figure the planes won't look much different from 1:48 or 1:72.
Amazingly there's nothing aircraft-wise in 1:56 at all. It seriously boggles my mind that no wargaming manufacturer is trying to put out 1:56 planes to match 32mm minis. I know Warlord has just gone 1:72 and if the planes are only in flight that works, but I will never not think that 1:72 looks terrible on the ground. Sure, it'd be a high risk project and it's not clear the volume sales would be there, but god knows it's pretty rare for such trivial concerns to have stopped a minis manufacturer before.
-
Amazingly there's nothing aircraft-wise in 1:56 at all. It seriously boggles my mind that no wargaming manufacturer is trying to put out 1:56 planes to match 32mm minis.
The issue/problem is footprint related to ground scale. Are there any rules that use a 1:56 ground scale (or even anything close) ? Aircraft (especial multi-engine types) just take up too much space on the tabletop, to the point where they get in the way of or inhibit (if not outright destroy) gameplay.
Vehicles are the same, imo: The Churchill reviewed recently being a good example, in that the model on the ground is longer than pistol or normal movement range (iirc, in the BA rules for which they were released).
This is something I've been noticing recently, and relates to the objective of the game: Are you interested in modeling the things themselves (ie: good-looking models of the stuff/scenery) or the action/decisions of the encounter (ie: the game) ?
It's the answer to that question that determines where on the 'diorama-game' scale someone applies effort and derives satisfaction (which, hopefully, is why it's being done in the first place). There's no 'right' answer, of course.
-
Well, I've heard a lot of folks say that, but a couple points:
1) That hasn't stopped people from using them anyway, and they're usually using 1:48s which are massive on a tabletop!
2) Several wargames companies are releasing 1:56 vehicles, so regardless of the impact of vehicle size on gameplay (and I find it hilarious that Warlords own products screw with their games in such a way), they have found it profitable to release vehicles which match wargaming minis.
Me, I play Pulp Alley where shooting ranges can be several feet, so vehicle size is not an issue until you're talking like jumbo jets or oceangoing freighters. I actually dislike games with really short shooting ranges as I find that to be rather absurd, and that absurdly short gun ranges are a crutch to prop up poorly-done rules - just my opinion though.
I get that it's not practical in many cases, but there's certainly some demand there - and as I said, since when has a bad business case stopped a minis manufacturer? lol You see, it's not so much that I want this for me and I'm whinging about it, I'm more amazed that no one has even tried to make a go of it (well Blitzkrieg minis were going to try, I think, but that was just talk it seems).
EDIT: Seems I was wrong - Blitzkrieg did in fact release their 1:56th Stuka and it's available on their website.
-
There's at least one manufacturer on Shapeways making 1:56 aircraft, a P-51 and a Bf-109 IIRC. There's a thread on LAF somewhere. One or two of the Airfix lego style quick builds also scale out to useful sizes. Their BAC Hawk scales out at 1:56. I bought a few for the kids and they are pretty good value for gaming items, easy build, can be glued if you so desire and are decent representations. No undercart though.
Obviously there are practical considerations re scale but the chief function of an aircraft on the table is size. I tend to a mix of 1:72 and 1:48 simply because those are the most available and popular scales. If it's only passing over the table I prefer 1:72. If it lands or is static n 1/48 or case of a few choppers I have, 1:50.
-
Yes, I think there's a lot of ways to make do. I'm finding 1:64 is what I like because it's the smallest size on the table top that still looks "right" next to figures. 1:72 is just a yard to far, as it were.
1:48 can be quite workable (though I don't like it personally), but at that size they're too dominant on a table and often don't match the other terrain/cars if you're like me and also went a bit small again out of consideration for not taking up too much table space.
-
Me, I play Pulp Alley where shooting ranges can be several feet, so vehicle size is not an issue...
I know this isn't the Pulp forum, but you're mistaken in how terrain can affect play in PA: 6" is a critical dimension, and having a piece of terrain (like an aircraft) being greater or less than that can greatly influence the result of a game.
Again: Is it the thing or the game that is being modeled?
-
I know this isn't the Pulp forum, but you're mistaken in how terrain can affect play in PA: 6" is a critical dimension, and having a piece of terrain (like an aircraft) being greater or less than that can greatly influence the result of a game.
Again: Is it the thing or the game that is being modeled?
Well, that's true, but 6" can mean a lot of terrain, and not necessarily something particularly large.
But mostly I was responding to the absurdity of a vehicle being longer than a weapon range. The 6" really only matters to range for things like primitive missile weapons or what amounts to "point blank" shooting in PA, which is fine.
-
Yes, I think there's a lot of ways to make do. I'm finding 1:64 is what I like because it's the smallest size on the table top that still looks "right" next to figures. 1:72 is just a yard to far, as it were.
1:48 can be quite workable (though I don't like it personally), but at that size they're too dominant on a table and often don't match the other terrain/cars if you're like me and also went a bit small again out of consideration for not taking up too much table space.
I like your thinking sir....