Just thinking and remembering...

.

Just thinking and remembering...

Joined: February 26th, 2016, 6:31 pm

January 12th, 2018, 1:34 pm #1

The old Revell and Monogram kits that had Historical and production information on the vehicles and aircraft depicted in the kit. Often there would be a short anecdote about the pilot of a a particular aircraft.They would also name the parts accurately and I feel that added to the educational aspect of modeling.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2006, 1:18 am

January 12th, 2018, 5:48 pm #2

… for me and other baby boomer model builders. I wish today's kit manufacturers would resume the practice of naming parts, but there's not enough room on the instruction sheets to include the necessary multi-lingual names.
Michael McMurtrey
IPMS-USA #1746
IPMS-Canada #1426
CAHS #5646
Carrollton, TX

Proud IPMS-USA Low Number Thumper!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 28th, 2005, 4:18 am

January 12th, 2018, 6:18 pm #3

The old Revell and Monogram kits that had Historical and production information on the vehicles and aircraft depicted in the kit. Often there would be a short anecdote about the pilot of a a particular aircraft.They would also name the parts accurately and I feel that added to the educational aspect of modeling.
going back to the mid-60's.
I'm not a kit builder. I'm a styrene butcher.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 26th, 2005, 11:31 pm

January 12th, 2018, 7:02 pm #4

The old Revell and Monogram kits that had Historical and production information on the vehicles and aircraft depicted in the kit. Often there would be a short anecdote about the pilot of a a particular aircraft.They would also name the parts accurately and I feel that added to the educational aspect of modeling.
and have most of my instruction sheets and catalogs from the 50’s on. The “Well, yeah but..” observations would include the cost for someone who knows what the pieces are to do the written procedures, which could result in release delays as well and what would be additional costs for language translation. Some of the 60’s Monogram instruction sheets had photographs of each step(as did some Hawk and I think some Lindberg too). I definitely learned a lot.

We’re all aware of working features like retractable landing gear, folding wings, weapons dropping features causing scale disproportions and loss of accuracy, but for a time, these were the very things that kept me interested in model building. I was more driven to complete a model that had working features going for it than one I knew was going to just sit on the shelf.
Anyone who built an old Revell 1/40th Skyraider or their “S” series 1/49 F-102 got a nice little glimpse into mechanical engineering. The motorized Lindberg kits gave you some good exposure into basics of electricty with their motorized kits. I wonder how many people actually wound the armatures for the motors they included.

Most kids play computer games now for action, don’t need time consuming kits.

Chris
Last edited by cluevano on January 12th, 2018, 7:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 16th, 2008, 10:38 pm

January 12th, 2018, 9:33 pm #5

You are right about the learning aspect, but even naming the parts threw me for a loop. In 1968, as an 11 year old, I had no clue what a Magneto, oxygen regulator, push rods etc as pointed out in the 1.48 Monogram P-47D painting instructions. I did learn a lot about car engines building Revell car kits
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 19th, 2010, 3:26 am

January 12th, 2018, 10:08 pm #6

and have most of my instruction sheets and catalogs from the 50’s on. The “Well, yeah but..” observations would include the cost for someone who knows what the pieces are to do the written procedures, which could result in release delays as well and what would be additional costs for language translation. Some of the 60’s Monogram instruction sheets had photographs of each step(as did some Hawk and I think some Lindberg too). I definitely learned a lot.

We’re all aware of working features like retractable landing gear, folding wings, weapons dropping features causing scale disproportions and loss of accuracy, but for a time, these were the very things that kept me interested in model building. I was more driven to complete a model that had working features going for it than one I knew was going to just sit on the shelf.
Anyone who built an old Revell 1/40th Skyraider or their “S” series 1/49 F-102 got a nice little glimpse into mechanical engineering. The motorized Lindberg kits gave you some good exposure into basics of electricty with their motorized kits. I wonder how many people actually wound the armatures for the motors they included.

Most kids play computer games now for action, don’t need time consuming kits.

Chris
P-51's and Spitfires, sure, but atomic energy plants, visible V-8's and other engines, early aircraft. The best model today of a Curtis Jenny is still the old Lindberg kit.
Quote
Like
Share