What about Heller?

We now pretty much know what is going to happen with Airfix/Humbrol. But
what about Heller???
As I am from Sweden I hope they will survive or at least sell the "Swedish"
moulds to a serious kit maker.
//André
Reply to
4. André
Loading thread data ...
I believe that Humbrol actually owned the Heller moulds. In recent years Heller simply did the production and marketed some kits in their own boxes. In theory, at least, the Heller moulds should go to Hornby as well.
Reply to
Enzo Matrix
What??? Are you joking? Humbrol doesn't own Heller moulds, Heller does. Heller moulded for Airfix, but this brand did payed its bills... and that's a part of Heller's problem... not the opposite...
Reply to
Flying Frog
Ooh! I always thought that Humbrol had bought up Airfix and Heller totally. The local management of Heller made a management buy out a few years ago but only retained the manufacturing equipment.
If Heller *did* retain their moulds, there is a major opportunity for some enterprising manufacturer to snap those up. Maybe Eduard.
Reply to
Enzo Matrix
Il se trouve que Enzo Matrix a formulé :
Why? Heller isn't dead. They have some difficulties, but they are still alive... ;-)
Reply to
Flying Frog
snip
Thank goodness! While some of the Heller genre are not the best, their SHIP models are about the best plastic ship kits available. Their two large kits, the HMS Victory and the le Soleil Royale are the absolute best ship kits, over 2000 parts in each kit with absolutely topnotch molding and detail.
Reply to
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
Right! The "sirene" is also a good model... but all their ship models are very fine... same thing for old cars for example...
Reply to
Flying Frog
Besides, who else made a 1/72nd Boeing 707, DC-6B, Connie, etc? Not perfect, but they were available! Not to mention the EC-121, E-3D, CL 2 and 415, Noratlas, Transall C-160,and the rest.
I've done the Victory and it is fantastic.
Heller have done some fine kits. I was particularly fond of the F-86 and pre-Trumpeter F-8.
Don H.
Reply to
Don Harstad
Don Harstad a couché sur son écran :
Right also! I'm working now on the A380 1/144 scale, and it is another great kit! Heller often produced a lot of models wich would be made by nobody else...
Reply to
Flying Frog
their ju52 is a nice kit easy to make super details for. i've built 4 and am forking on the infamous2600, max immelman. wish i could paint the name....gotts find an alternative. any artists out there with advice?
Reply to
e
who else has done the me 321 and 323 in 1/72. speaking of which, what company did the 1/48 vac. there's one flying across the cieling of the hobby lobby in vegas pulled by a 1/48 zwillig i don't know who made. kit or bash, anyone know? those 2 together are a really imposing sight. the real thing must have stupefied observers.
Reply to
e
FWIW I believe those are Italerii kits, not Heller. At least the 1/72 Me-323 that is in my stash is by Italerii.
The 1/48 321 was a fibre glass & resin kit from some European outfit, MPM maybe. The Zwilling is a conversion using two Monogram He-111s and a resin set from Dave Klaus' Meteor Productions sub division that does all the resin bits. I never bit into this lot, I'd have to build a museum addition onto the house to have a place to display them.
Bill Shuey
Bill Shuey
Reply to
William H. Shuey
indeed. that's why i bet they are where they are. take up a space about 10x3 feet. i bet the builder had no space. the 321 is a really well done kit, perhaps by the builder.
Reply to
e
Flying Frog wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@MPLEASEffsmc.com:
If you believe Airfix from when they span off the Heller part then Humbrol/Airfix did indeed retain the moulds.
As to whether they are included in the deal is another matter...
Reply to
Peter Baxter
"Don Harstad" wrote in news:ejl0db$lhc$ snipped-for-privacy@news.netins.net:
How long did it take you? It's on my 'to do' list, and is more than a bit intimidating.
cd
Reply to
Carl Dershem
Three and a half years so far. I did two of them, one to gain experience, the other for real. I junked the Heller rigging instructions, and got a copy of James Lee's "The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War, 1625-1860", Naval Institute Press, 1984. Then I got a copy of "The Anatomy of Nelson's Ships" from the same source. I pretty much figured that, since I'm gonna make this a mini career, might as well do all the improvements and additional detail I could. Then I began adding aftermarket stuff.
It was worth it, but it just about drove me nuts. I was about half way through the rigging when I had a heart attack (Not related, I'm sure?). Got to start it up again when I get some of these @$&#*! 72nd scale aircraft done.....
Don H.
Reply to
Don Harstad
Out of curiosity, why didn't you use the Heller instructions for the rigging? I'll be starting mine before long and have both books too but... Grandpa John
Reply to
John DeBoo
"Don Harstad" wrote in news:ejm763$vso$ snipped-for-privacy@news.netins.net:
Sounds fair. I'm using the Revell 1/99 USS Constitution for my work-up to the project, and have been on that for about a year and a half.
I use "The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor" for my rigging reference, and if you think the Heller instructions are bad (I haven't looked yet) the Revell ones are worse. Of course, I have the advantage that, when I want a very accurate representation, the Maritime Museum is only 3 blocks from my office, so I can just wander over with my digital camera. :)
cd
Reply to
Carl Dershem
They weren't as accurate as I needed. I was getting into things like the proper way to do a garnet pendant guy and fall... even the correct method for rigging the bundle that represents the fore stay collar, and the method for seizing the heart.... seeing actual diagrams of very small portions of the rigging makes it much easier to do the windings and loops yourself.
Don H.
Reply to
Don Harstad
Photos are really indispensable. I was fortunate to make four trips to the UK during that period, and each time I wound up in Portsmouth taking photos of the rigging on the real Victory. It REALLY helps to be able to take shots from different positions of the same area. For some reason, being able to stand under the bow and shoot upward got me some great perspectives on the rigging there.
Isn't it weird how nobody else ever seems to take the photo of the area you're concerned about? Just outside of frame, or so far in the background.....
Don H.
Reply to
Don Harstad

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.