Lancaster Mk I

Well it’s finally complete. The Lancaster didn’t take me nearly as long as the B-26 but it sure put up a great fight. The end result has surprised me. I really didn’t think it would turn out that well. Given the quality of the build added to the aged decals, I thought I was going to have a mediocre Lancaster. The weathering turned it around, I think. I opted to make it nice and battle worn. I’m very happy with the turnout. 

The size of this aircraft really amazes me now that it’s sitting next to the B-26 and B-24 builds. I don’t think I have ever had the opportunity to see the real product in person so to see it next to something that I have actually been inside really puts it into perspective. I’d like to get a few pictures of the three kits together eventually. I’m thinking with the size of the three, it’ll be an outside shoot. 

    
    
    
 

Advertisements

74 thoughts on “Lancaster Mk I

  1. You have done really well there! It is superb, congratulations! A Lancaster is very large. The tyre is not far short of a man’s height, and the cockpit towers high over an ordinary person. I suppose the fact that a human being can sit in the gun turrets proves how big the plane is. Thirty tons of aircraft, and it was looped at least once!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you! It’s definitely not my biggest build, but it’s my biggest WWII build. One of the greatest things about building is that I can actually see the size differences in all the different airplanes of the world. The Lanc in a beast for sure.

      Like

  2. It looks fab. What scale is this? We are very fortunate to live in North Lincolnshire and the BBMF Lanc flies over our house regularly. The sound is amazing, very gutteral and it sends a shiver down your spine. We have also seen it up close and personal when we visited the BBMF at RAF Coningsby.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you! All of my builds are in 1/72 scale. I’m one of those “only build in one scale” guys. Since this post I’ve been hearing how cool it is to see one in person. I’m getting jealous about it. I’d love to get the chance.

      Like

      • Ah, thanks. I did build (badly) a 1/48th scale B17 and that was huge, too large to display anywhere really. 1/72nd is a much more practical scale for Bombers. I do like my 1/48th for fighters though.

        Liked by 1 person

      • That scale is fine for WW II bombers; I resented 1/72 for fighters, single engine bombers, and torpedo planes; lack of detail/operating features. Get just one 1/25th scale kit – A Monogram SBD Dauntless (the dive bomber of Midway fame), or the Vought F4U Corsair, If Monogram is still around.
        Their entire series of W II aircraft was excellent; without peers. It’s been over four decades since I last built any models, so I don’t know that they maintained the quality of their kits; I recall their parts fitting perfectly. No having to trim them, no gaps like (ugh) Lindberg, requiring putty. Most had retractable landing gear, operating flaps, etc.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I do get frustrated with the lack of detail in the majority of 1/72 scale kits. Luckily they make resin updates for the majority of them if I want to get extremely detailed. But I do find that in most WWII fighters and bombers is that you can’t see much into the cockpits anyway.
        Monogram is still around on eBay but not in retail stores. Revell still puts out a few decent kits here and there but they are at the lower end of the spectrum to me. You get what you pay for in this hobby.

        Like

      • I’m old; many kits that were just a few dollars are now (sigh) $30. and up. You had mentioned to another viewer that you had some 200 kits yet to be built? $cary to this old guy.
        Having noted your other responses, both companies were my bet bets for both ease in constructing, decent photos and written instructions. As this world became more “visually oriented”, the demise of actual photos and written directives, replaced by crude drawings with arrows pointing, exclamation marks, etc, was enough to make me spit. Monogram is only on e-bay -ha- enough to put a few more years on me…
        Guess I could scare myself to see what they still have and what it would cost when figuring in s/handling fees. Later!

        Liked by 1 person

      • I agree with you. Kits are certainly priced to turn people away. I try my hardest to never pay full retail for a kit. I’ll use coupons or find clearanced out kits. eBay is a hit or miss site because people think they have something more than what it really is. For me, I’m going to build it so I don’t care about it being vintage or sealed so much. And as you said…the shipping is outrageous at times. I’d say that I buy one out of every 300-500 kits I look at on eBay. If that. Academy is a great company if you ever want to give them a try. They are by far my overall favorite. They have great, quality kits with a good bang for your buck.

        Liked by 1 person

      • There is a seller on e-bay who has moderate prices -in comparison to those on those sites. He isn’t limited to W II aircraft, so use “1/72 scale military models” in his category list. He provides free shipping as part of the package. You’ll enjoy perusing his selection. But please check this out: His monogram FW 190 is one of the kits I built in my teens. While it doesn’t have operating landing gear, it is one of the best-bar none- renditions of that fighter; moreover, you can build one of three versions. It includes the fearsome bomber destroyers our pilots undoubtedly faced on Black Thursday. With your skills, even though 1/48 isn’t your fave, this model will turn your head.
        http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-48-MONOGRAM-FOCKE-WULF-Fw-190-MODEL-KIT-/281807467165

        Liked by 1 person

      • ??? You built that Lancaster; did a camouflage scheme, including the minutiae of weathering, ( I never bothered with that) yet you said “project build”. I built 1/48 kits such as that one from the time I was seven till I was 18 yrs old.
        Vintage simply means original releases. The series of kits that were available when I was young, not -ahem- “vintage” LOL
        After years of use, the molds used in their production could become worn, causing a less than stellar fit, or other problems.
        Except for the sake of accuracy involved when doing a camouflage pattern, the “build time” was a few hours each day, with a two day timeframe.
        I searched the links you provided, plus many on E-bay. Examination of the unassembled parts when shown by the seller, proved -unfortunately that later Monogram models, after Revell became their parent company, were of a lesser quality.
        Look for older kits where the monogram label states “quality hobby kits” under their name.

        Liked by 1 person

      • When I use the term vintage, keep in mind that I was born in 1980. The Lancaster that I built was boxed when I was in elementary school but I do believe the moulds were from much earlier than that. It gave me a headache with the fit of some parts as well as the fuselage seams being atrocious. The B-26 (also from Revell) I built before it was even worse. I don’t mind challenges but when I’m applying filler to the entire length of the fuselage, I ask myself why I picked the particular build. Lol. It all comes with the hobby though. Project builds to me are the ones that require the over abundant amount of filler or fixing errors in the kit.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I agree. Very much so; especially fuselage seams which I encountered back then (60’s).
        More aggravating were lousy fits between the wings or horizontal stabilizers and fuselage; these had to be hand held for several minutes, so there were no gaps, or changes in the angle at the fuselage joint.

        I can truthfully say that Monogram was NEVER guilty of such poor quality at that time. The parts were always an accurate fit.
        Less egregious gaps that can be closed by gentle hand pressure; can be resolved by noting the spots via the first (test) fit, and having several wide rubber bands to shore up the contact points when glued together. (this is one of the occasions where a 24 hr curing period insures a solid bond, before continuing with further assembly).
        Again, I never needed to use those methods when assembling a Monogram kit. I can appreciate the effort taken in assembling that Lank. The pictures you took were awesome.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I will say that I built a F-105 from Monogram and it wasn’t that bad. The Lancaster gave me a much better time than the B-26 but they each had their “big” issues to them. The wings on the Lancaster were warped and needed very close attention to get together correctly.

        Like

      • I meant 1/48… (quarter inch scale.) sorry. P,S. Revell, an otherwise mediocre model maker, made an incredible 1/32nd scale Bf 109 G Messerschmitt. I had re-obtained this, and a Matchbox Lancaster kit in the mid 80’s. Never built them. No good place to keep them displayed

        Liked by 1 person

      • The bigger kits are the hardest to find the proper real estate for. I used to shy away from them for that reason but lately I have been going for it. I plan on getting a B-17 and B-29 in sometime this year.

        Like

  3. That is a lovely build! As I’m also UK based I’ve seen it a fair few times – and the paint job really captures it. Hopefully you’ll see one someday – the sound is amazing – we got lucky enough to catch the three sisters flight over lincon and seeing aircraft like that in the air does really stick in the mind.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I love planes > The Lancaster is a classic plane with buckets of charm. I cant imagine what it’s like taking a ride in a Lanc. Your model is really accurate and you have a dab hand with the colours, especially the camouflage and the detail below the cockpit. It would be nice to have a close-up of it. Nice work mate!

    Liked by 1 person

      • Oh geez! That’s a loaded question there. Ok….the A-10 is my all time favorite airplane hands down. I will gladly build it anytime. I did four at once a few months back.
        With that obsession aside, I really don’t have an exact favorite. Some kits are far better than others so it’s a broad spectrum as far as construction goes. Planes in general fit in a massive category. I love all planes first off but WWII German aircraft are tops for me. I’ve always enjoyed their designs and paint schemes. From there it branches off to all of WWII. I’m kind of in a WWII kick right now. When it comes down to it, I’ll build anything that sparks my interest. I hope I answered your questions without sounding like a nut job.

        Liked by 2 people

      • No no no, Not at all. If you saw how many WWII air movies I’ve collected you would think I’m a nut job too. I remember making an FW 190 > I love the duck egg blue and then the different levels of grey and the grey spots. Adding the yellow is was the best part. I went to the science museum in London once and they had one for real there. Amazing. The A-10 is awesome but I still go oldschool and take the P47 anytime ha ha

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Since you’re a 1/72nd kind of guy, if Airfix 72 is still around, (they were my 2nd favorite after Monogram) they made excellent examples of the B-17 G, the B-25, (admittedly a late model with waist guns) Heinkel 111, and the Junkers JU88. The JU 88 is well worth hunting down.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Airfix is still around and doing well. They have such a following to them. I don’t have much luck with them. I tend to run into too many issues so I am very weary when purchasing one. I will look at reviews extensively now before I pull the trigger.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s