Why aren't civil aircraft interesting.

This is a lot of seam removel sanding thin masking and gloss painting . I REALLY got to get enthused to start one its a car with wings lol

my lastest build is a F2A2 buffalo with yellow wings and its going slow lol

I got interested in civil kits from an article in FSM way back.  I had a few failed attempts, but then started powering through.  Still have a lot to learn, as the couple builds I've seen withe the flaps down and super detailed at 1:200 or 1:144 are amazing.

I like them because of the colorful livery.  I also like to build non-civilian versions of these birds like airforce one, or airforce two.  I also have done a Cal Fire bird.  The colors and markings draw me to these subjects.  And, 1:200 is a great scale - really gets the 'view'/'perspective' of these big birds right. 

And if scale is the issue, why is 1/350 ship building so popular?

Anyhow, each to his own.  I enjoy them as much as my 1/48 fighters.

Cool!nice background info!

Philo!

Yes, interesting...

I don't think the airline ever thought to put J47's on their civilian aircraft though.

NOA Strats are a hard subject, because they and their UAL brethren had rectangular cabin windows. Which means modifications to the Academy kit, at the least.

That's a wishlist item for me. Dad was put on the "problem" early in his career at UAL (48 years in all). The things were just too slow for the time. Running at high throttle settings made the engines (R4360s) vibrate and over heat. Flying with the cowling flaps open slowed them down a lot. Pan Am had a few where the engines fell off the wings, and having that big engine bulkhead exposed really slowed things down.

United had a First Class flight that left SFO around 9.00 in the morning for Honolulu, and a Coach flight in a DC-7 that left around 11.00 in the morning. They landed right behind each other in the Islands.

Nice Alclad work (I assume that is Alclad).  I have a NWA Stratocruiser in my stash- hope to get on bench soon.

This one is very intresting!   

I would build biz jets if there were more out there in 1/48 and newer models than what hasegawa offered.

Cause they (normally) don't blow stuff up and kill people...

I agree, G. I think the manufacturers kind of forgot that in order to get fighters and bombers there was a whole development process beforehand. Without it the planes of WW 2 and the jets of Korea, Vietnam and those in present service might never have happened. We think of fighter and bomber crews who risked their lives (on both sides) but we never give a thought to those folks who risked their lives just to prove it could (or could not) be done and thus advanced the technology of getting into the air.

I would say recently that the whole civil aviation experience has become so horrible that nobody has any positive feelings about it.

I can think of a few I'd like to see that are interesting and historic. . . . How about Admiral Byrd's Trimotor (not sure if it was the Fokker or the Ford) that he flew over both poles, or, how about Wiley Post's Vega that he flew around the world twice, or, Amelia Earhart's Vega she flew across the Atlantic, or, her Lockheed L-10 that killed her, or how about Post's hybrid that killed him and Will Rodgers? Of course Lindberg's flying gas tank would be a nice one too. They are all small enough that they could be produced in 1/48 scale

Cause they don't drop bombs...

I really believe that civil aircraft seem uninteresting to most people because they are not pilots, and have no actual experience with the real world of aviation. My friend said that trainers aren't interesting because there was no danger and glory in that aspect of aviation.

Flying even a WWII trainer can be exciting and dangerous. As pilots all flying is a very exciting world and all aircraft are very interesting---even the civil types when you have personal experience with them.

I am old enough to remember the wonder and romance of the propeller airliners. When commerical flying became ho-hum with the jets, I can see why there is no interest in civilian aviation by the general public. There is so much more wonder and excitement with flying than a ticket on Southwest or American-----

SInce I just recently flew via American Airlines to San Diego on an MD-80, 737, and a 757. they will be the models I'll  be focused on since I actually flew on them first person.  Even though I worked on the F15, F18, Yf23a, A-12 Avenger 2, and the AV8-B as a detail drafter  I never had a passion to exalt them over civil airlines.

And I have worked at Southwest Airlines on the flight ramp as a baggage handler/loader with the real aircraft.  The real world makes the model come alive to me.  That,s why I relate more to civil models than military.

hogfanfs

heepey

Would it be a hijack of this thread to put up some pics of the civilian kits I have on my shelf?

 

Start a new thread!

I for one would enjoy seeing your builds!

I concur.  Many of us do not read threads that are old or have a ton of messages- you feel your voice is lost in the clammer.  Even as OP, I seldom check this thread anymore, whereas I almost always read all new ones in this forum.

heepey

Would it be a hijack of this thread to put up some pics of the civilian kits I have on my shelf?

Start a new thread!

I for one would enjoy seeing your builds!

I would not think so.

Would it be a hijack of this thread to put up some pics of the civilian kits I have on my shelf?

I just stumbled on this Thread and I for one would love to build more civilian aircraft. I want all my aircraft to be in 1/72 scale thought o be consistent with the rest of my collection of aircraft. I'm working on a 1/72 scale civilian DC-6 right now in American Airlines livery, and I have a Super Constellation in the wings. I would love to see more 1/72 scale airliners. I also have about 8 single- and twin-engined civilian planes completed in 1/72 scale; mostly the old Aurora and Eidai/Arii kits. I've got an old 1/72 scale Aurora jet Commando I've started as well. I would be thrilled with a Lear jet in 1/72 scale; not to mention a 747!

I love airliner kits and I suppose I could be inventive with PE, fabricating, etc.  But some kit makers just don't try hard at all - Minicraft being among them.  Yet, they had some good decals and I couldn't find anything TWA or other U.S. carriers from the 60's thru the 80's anywhere else.  I will look into both your recommendations.  I think it would be really cool to build all four liveries for the TWA 727 #4339.  I flew on that plane as a kid from STL to BOS!

006

Makers like Minicraft don't do much for realism.  Windows are not cut out, but part of a decal.

I would love to build airliner kits - but the above observations don't have me rushing to do so.

If you are interested in building a quality airliner kit, I would recommend the Zvezda 787-800.  If you are wanting a kit that has window openings in the fuselage instead of decals then this would be a kit for you.  I am working on this kit as we speak; however, I filled the windows in and am going to use the decal windows that I purchased for the United Airlines version that I wanted to build.  The fit of the kit is really good, only a few seams to fill and they werent difficult at all.  Probably the biggest drawback that I found with this kit was the delicate nature of some of the parts.

006

Going back to the original question:  Why aren't they interesting?

Makers like Minicraft don't do much for realism.  Windows are not cut out, but part of a decal.

Wheels are plastic - no vinyl.

Try the Eduard 1:144 Ju-52, civilian version.  Every thing you say about Minicraft airliners (and, they are indeed true) has been fixed in the Eduard kit and the accessory package of PE they sell, with PE cockpit seats AND the passenger seats, plus other detail, including seatbelts!  Of course, the accessory package costs as much as the basic kit.  But then, I suppose it is the lack of detail that lets Minicraft sell their kits for such cheap prices

BTW, I prefer plastic wheels to vinyl.  Too hard to paint vinyl.

Going back to the original question:  Why aren't they interesting?

Makers like Minicraft don't do much for realism.  Windows are not cut out, but part of a decal.

Wheels are plastic - no vinyl.

Kit availability in US hobby shops is poor.

Pricing for airliner kits compared to other subjects is unreasonable.

There's a limit or unavailability on sought after airline carrier decals, liveries and logos.

I would love to build airliner kits - but the above observations don't have me rushing to do so.

OK, before this thread, Don, I never even considered building a civil aircraft!

My interest is because I currently work for an Aerospace supplier of GE Aircraft Engines. We do engineering and repair engineering for most of the current line of commercial aircraft engines, and a few of the military engines. My previous company was a supplier for Boeing. They did wire harness routing through the entire airframe and wings of the 787, 777, 767, and 737 aircraft. Plus they did some work on the V-22 and CH-47 rotorcraft.

So, I would like to thank you, Don, for starting this thread. It has opened my eyes to more than just military subjects. Plus I purchase my first airliner and will be apart of the airliner GB.

Okay, let's word it another way. What determines people's interest?

I was in the AF, but when it comes to aviation, I prefer to model civil aircraft.  I was a hanger brat as a kid, and maybe it is just that the golden age of civil aircraft had just passed, and there were so many of thse neat craft around on the ramp- Beech Staggerwings, Stinson Reliants, Howards, Waco Cabins, etc.  Maybe I just saw my fill of military craft.

But for us who like civil aircraft, the kit market is a desert with slim pickings other than airliners, and even there it is mostly current stuff, few of the classics.

I am also heavily into military history, but primarily naval.  Again, maybe we just get our fill of what is around us a lot, and are more interested in what is in the other guy's yard.  Yeah, I build an occasional AF jet, especially one from McDonnell (I used to work there) but would far rather build an old F3F or original Corsair.

My guess would be the primary reason would simply be one's area of interest.  Personally I enjoy studying history, and in particular, military history.  I was in the military and was involved in things of the subject matter.  So that's my personal reason.

I think what others have said about the more widely available options with military subjects makes a lot of sense.

Paper models are awesome! there is a WIP on it in paper models, if you like the challenge paper is the way to go. Many offerings on the web for free.....

With Execuform gone, the only other way to find civil aircraft is to go with paper, which can be used as a pattern to build plastic models, or left as paper models. Both ways work well as I paln to try doing one that way.

heepey

there was at least one model of that with a smooth cowl.

Yeah, but the cowl bumps are what gives most Reliants so much character, and I want that one!  The mold would be a female, and I would then have to cast a male, and then draw over that (that method requires a male mold).  Too much work, and my RTV is gone, have to buy a new supply- boy that stuff is expensive!  Basically too much work to get good bumps and then add them to a cowl. It is basically like building a vacu-form, and while I have built a few vuf, I don't relish them :-(