Scale model kit FROG F217 Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress

Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress

FROG 1974 Black series logo

FROG F217 Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, Rovex Models& Hobbies, 1977


Aviation News Vol 5 Num 17 21 January - 3 February 1977

KIT COMMENT
FORTS COMPARED
Two too-good-to-hurry kits from Hasegawa and Frog

MOST modellers are not plagued with the problems we have in reviewing plastic models in that they can take their time to produce each masterpiece according to the detail they want to incorporate and the elaborate nature of the paint of markings scheme they want to adopt. On Aviation News, however, we have to turn out one or maybe two models a fortnight, come what may, so when the chance comes along to spend more than our usual average time on a kit we welcome it.

Such was the case over the ten day break at Christmas. Our printers had decreed that in order to get the issues immediately before the festive season out on time the copy was needed up to five days earlier than usual so whilst they went off and enjoyed their holiday we settled down to produce two kits that had been on the review bench for some time waiting for such an opportunity as this.

The B-17 Fortress has always been a favourite aircraft as far as we are concerned, so the chance to build two rather than one offered not only the pleasure in doing the job but the opportunity to compare both kits in the process. In the last four months Frog and Hasegawa have both issued 1:72nd examples of this famous bomber, the former producing a B-17E, that's the one without the nose turret, and the latter a B-17G that saw most service in wartime England and is possibly the best remembered.

PRICES AND STANDARDS

The first comparison was one of price. The Hasegawa B-17 costs £2.25 and the Frog one £1.85. There is only 40p difference but there are virtually no differences in the number of parts provided and each has excellent surface detail that cannot be faulted.

It is also interesting to see the two different aproaches made by the respective designers to the production of the kit and what each must reckon the modeller wants. The Frog one has provision for leaving the bomb doors in either the open or closed positions, and although rather crude, two bombs are provided to go inside if the modeller requires the bomb bay to be in the open position. Hasegawa on the other hand has concentrated on superb cockpit interior detail but for some obscure reason has left the bomb bay area out. In another instance Frog have provided the tail wheel in two separate halves which only adds to the job as the wheel has not been separated from the leg which might have been a handier solution. Hasegawa have provided engines separate from the cowlings whilst Frog have not. One can argue for a long time on the pros and cons of doing his but We felt that no detail had been lost on the Frog model by incorporating both parts in one.

Although the construction and detail needed to go into the B-17G was far more complicated than in the earlier aircraft it was the Frog model that gave the problems in getting the two fuselage halves together correctly. It became something of a struggle of wills which ended by the model giving in faced with a little brute force.

Hasegawa have thoughtfully provided operating flaps on their model which are fully detailed on their interiors and added a nice touch to the model when completed with the undercarriage down.

They have also had the modeller very much in mind when considering the sequence of placing the parts in position. This is something about which all manufacturers could well take note as we found simple things like being able to put the guns in position after painting, the top turret being removeable to help in the rubbing down and the smooth way in which the wings clipped into position very gratifying.

The Frog model on the other hand required all parts such as guns and turrets to be cemented in place before the fuselage halves were joined. This involved a lot of careful work around the turrets and — you've guessed it — we broke the tail guns and one from the top turret in the process.

The Hasegawa instruction sheet was also a very helpful guide to construction as not only were drawings provided but photographs of the processes involved as well. Small notes such as advice on masking the fuselage windows with setotape before sticking them in position and then cutting off the surplus after; painting are all things that the experienced modeller knows about, but those faced with such a complicated kit in the first instance are not necessarily so well versed in the science of the craft.

One further point in praise of the Frog kit is worth noting. One of the aircraft depicted is B-17E 'Suzy Q' of the 93rd Bomb Squadron, 19th Bomb Wing operating in the Pacific in 1942 This aircraft did not have a ball turret and Frog have provided a blanking plate for this version if the modeller wants to use it. At the same time this plate is most useful if other versions of the B-17 are considered as in making a conversion the job of filling a hole this size can sometimes be a formidable task. Although we have criticised the model for having the guns fixed in position too early when compared to the Hasegawa example the thought in providing this blanking plate makes up for it!

COLOUR SCHEMES

Colour schemes in B-17s range from the rather dull grey and green of the early wartime aircraft through the white of RAF Coastal Command to the all-silver Forts of the 8th Air Force in 1944 and the multi-coloured formation ships used by the Americans to assemble their aerial armadas before battle commenced There is a great' deal of variety from which to choose and as a compromise we selected the Hasegawa kit to be completed in markings provided by the manufacturer and our own Coastal Command version on the Frog kit.

Unfortunately, in our opinion, Hasegawa have selected the same aircraft in their all-silver version as Airfix did many years ago Named Bit o' lace' it is a highly colourful aircraft with yellow and green tail markings which make up into a very pretty model indeed. But as our Airfix model is still as good as new there was little choice but to decide on the olive green and light grey B-17G named 'Chow Hound' of the 91st Bomb Group, 332nd Sqdn., 8th Air Force. In spite of its dull camouflage it has large all-red areas on the tail and wings and also presented a complicated masking task to overcome before painting could begin.

Windows, nose cones and turrets not masked by selotape, as suggested earlier, were given a coating of Humbrol Maskol before beginning and the whole job sprayed quickly with watered down colour starting with the red areas. The decals are good and comprehensively cover all that is required. They adhered well and with a cost of Microcoat flat merged with the matt paint effectively.

One of the two camouflage patterns in the Frog kit has already been mentioned. The other is for an aircraft of the 97th Bomb Group stationed at Polebrook in 1942 and has the typical green and brown camouflage scheme that appeared on some B-17s which arrived with the first contingents of the USAAF in England. In order to ring the changes, however, we decided that patriotism was worth following and therefore produced a No. 220 Sqdn. Coastal Command aircraft which fits exactly the same specification as far as turret positions and overall shape as the B-17F supplied in the kit. Other aircraft of this unit had early ASV radar aerials under the wings and nose but according to pictures found in Aircam No. 15 for Fortress HA FK189 'S' these were not present.

Once again the task of masking the model after the white areas had been painted was a long job but eell worth while. We sprayed the upper surface grey and green camouflage without masking up the separate areas prefering the colours to merge somewhat as they appeared on the real aircraft. Decals were provided from the spares box and we soon found the required size of national insignia and the serial and codes amongst some Dridec rub down sheets we have had by us for some time.

Both these models took a full ten days to build, allowing time to overcome the festivities. There is little too choose between them as far as standards are concerned though, if pushed, we are bound to say that the Hasegawa model has the edge over the Frog one. This is mainly due to our liking for interior detail on a large model of this kind but at the same timecredit should be given to the Hasegawa instruction sheet which is really helpful during both the constructional and painting stages. We also feel that they have produced a far more practical model giving full thought to the modeller and the standards now being set by the experienced amongst us. Even so it is comforting to know that both B-17E and G versions are now readily available at the model shop, both of which are excellent kits. Our own Model Mail has both available and readers are advised to consult the advertisement on page 11 for details.

Aviation News Vol 5 Num 17 21 January - 3 February 1977


Boeing B-17E Flying Fortress
F213 1976-1977 H 20000 2xUSAAC

The Lancaster and the B-17 were the last new Frog kits ever to be put into production, the release date for both being September 7th. They were thus in production for three months only, if that.

1976

For the final year of trading, FROG really got its house in order. A delightfully produced catalogue came out illustrating precisely 70 kits. There had been some sensible rearranging between the colour series to give 12 each in the black, blue, red, green and orange groups, plus 5 large aircraft and 5 ships. This was just about an ideal range both from the commercial and consumer standpoints.

An analysis of the kit wingspans and part counts in the colour series shows the black series having an average span of 6" and 31 parts. The blue series have spans of 7" and 47 parts, the red 7" and 43 parts, the green 8.6" and 68 parts and the orange 8.6" and 68 parts. The figures are a little distorted by some modern jets having a small span and a long fuselage. The blue series has some unduly large part counts on the Me410 (74) and Lockheed Lightning (70) thus inflating the average.

The range was well balanced throughout and the four new releases for the year were all interesting subjects. The Arado 234 with its piggy back flying bomb represents the ingenious late war German developments, the Lancaster BMk. 1 and Flying Fortress B-17E two of the Allies most potent bombers and the Sea Vixen a much requested naval strike fighter.

Sadly these were to be the last FROG kits to be produced. Although plans were in hand for the 1977 range, the rate of despatch of moulds to the Russians was gaining momentum and the decision to close down FROG was taken mid-year. From then on production dwindled with the final models being packed in November.

The subsequent lives of the moulds are detailed in the FROG spawn section of the Compendium but are not a direct part of the FROG story.

FROG model aircraft 1932-1976, R. Lines, L. Hellstrom


NOVO logo

NOVO cat.No.78192 Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, NOVO Toys Ltd, never released


NOVO logo
Novo Novo Toys Ltd., Maxey, Peterborough, England PE69HQ Period: 1976-1981

Few, if any other kit companies have been subjected to as much rumour spreading, speculation and ill-informed guesswork as Novo. Neither has any other company name been so misused, and perhaps it is best to start by putting this straight.

As can be seen above, Novo was a British company, and it always was. Although the company name itself was derived from Novoexport, their Soviet trade partner, Novo was never owned by the Russians. In recent years, Novo has been used as a collective name for any ex-Frog kits coming out of the USSR, but nothing could be more wrong or misleading. Only kits actually packed in Novo packaging should be called Novo kits. Anything else can only be described as kits by the Soviet factory in question (BFI, Krugozor, Tashigrushka etc.). If a collective name is really necessary, then one might perhaps use MLI (for the Soviet Ministry of Light Industry, who supervise most of these factories).

The events leading up to the creation of Novo have been covered in the Frog history section of this book and will not be repeated here. Suffice to say that a General Agreement was reached between Dunbee-Combex-Marx (the owner of both Novo and Rovex) and V/O Novoexport in August 1975. This agreement stipulated that DCM was to deliver moulds, tools and materials to Novoexport, who would pay for them by sending back finished goods from the same moulds. It must be pointed out that apart from model kits the agreement also covered a wide range of other toys. Novo Toys Ltd. was set up by DCM in 1975 to handle this business.

The finer details of the arrangement were set out in twelve contracts, three of which concerned the ex-Frog kits. A theoretical value (based on remaining production life and other factors) was set for each mould. These were totalled for each contract and a suitable mix of kits to the same amount was worked out, meaning that payment for a particular mould did not necessarily consist of kits from that very same mould only.

Once the agreed quantity of kits had been delivered by Novoexport, the moulds were considered their property and all future purchases by Novo had to be paid for in cash. In the event, no such follow-up orders were ever placed by Novo.

The first moulds were sent out to the USSR in early 1976 (i.e. almost a year before Frog production by Rovex finally ceased) and these were distributed among the several Soviet factories undertaking the actual production. With the exception of the Dennis Ambulance, Firefly Dinghy and the Axis aircraft sold to Revell, all Frog moulds still with Rovex in 1976 were shipped to the Soviet Union over the next year or so. Of these, the Britannia, R-100 and the car kits were considered to be of little interest to the Western market, and consequently no Novo numbers were ever assigned. Although not specifically mentioned in any contract, it is believed that the Soviets also took delivery of the old Drifter and Tug Boat moulds.

The Novo kit number incorporated the original projected year of release (e.g. 76001). Some kits were in fact delivered to Novo in 1976, but not until 1977 was a marketable range available and released. Due to this, no additional kits were planned for 1977, but instead delayed until 1978 and given numbers starting with 78. The many gaps in the sequence were partly filled by other Novo products.

Getting the Russians to keep up with the delivery schedule was the main Novo headache. From the very start and until the very end, Novoexport were constantly behind in their deliveries. The reasons were of course many, but a few of these warrant some comments.

Problems with production facilities and moulds were common. Although certain Soviet factories were fairly well-equipped, others had obsolete and unsuitable machinery. Staff competence and maintenance levels also sometimes left something to be desired. This not only slowed down production, but also led to some moulds being damaged. The Mirage mould, for example, was left out-doors one winter and was of course thoroughly rusty by spring! (It was later restored to usable condition.)

The mould for the old Typhoon, when returned to the UK for repairs, was found to be missing all six original locking bolts holding the two halves together. These had been replaced by four new ones of inferior material. Had these broken during operation (remembering that plastic was being injected with a pressure of over 500 p.s.i., or 35 kp/cm2), the mould would probably have been completely destroyed along with the injection machine and its unfortunate operator. The same mould had also been repaired by the Russians, using brass instead of toughened steel.

All in all, Novoexport complained about problems with some two dozen moulds. Of the eight subsequently repaired in the U.K., five had damage caused by the Russians.

But the main problem was the inferior plastic used in the USSR. All Frog moulds were tuned to use Shell SI73 polystyrene (or equivalent), having a Melt Flow Index of 35. Soviet polystyrene, on the other hand, was found to have an index of around 4! This meant that, in order to make the plastic fill the mould, the temperature had to be increased by some 50°C and the injection pressure up to 100%. Not only was this very damaging to the moulds (several subsequently had to be repaired), but also often led to sub-standard mouldings. This since the extreme pressure forced the mould halves apart, letting plastic overflow into the gaps and form flash.

Neither was the low MFI the only problem with the plastic. An independent evaluation carried out in 1978 reads like a catalogue of faults: "Izod (= impact strength) very low .. . abnormally low I.V. (= inherent viscosity) . .. colour is poor and contamination excessive ... poor surface finish and gloss ... extremely brittle and not very rigid .. . must make good colouring difficult and appearance of finished article to be doubtful quality."

The third major problem was politics. Soviet laws take a pretty grim view of anything "fascist", which was why all German, Italian and Japanese aircraft were sold to Revell instead of being sent to the USSR. But other problems were to come up.

The original boxes for the Tupolev SB-2 showed one Luftwaffe marking alternative. Novoexport refused point-blank to touch these and Novo eventually had to print a replacement batch of some 105,000 box bottoms. The Luftwaffe portion of the decals were also cut away.

Later on, the Soviet Ministry of Culture classed the Fokker D.XXI as a "fascist aircraft" since it had been used by the Finnish AF in WWII. The fact that the Finns also used e.g. M.S.406, P-40, Lysander, SB-2, Hurricane, Gladiator and Blenheim - all of which were also included in the Novo range - did not seem to bother them, however. Subsequent Novo attempts to get this decision changed were all in vain. It should be noted that Novo had replaced the original Finish AF marking alternative with a Danish one, to avoid this very problem.

The next casualty was the Sea Fury. Due to a slip-up, the 1980 Novo catalogue described it as having shot down some MiG-15s during the Korean War. Novoexport were much upset by this and refused to deliver any more Sea Fury kits! Only a few kits from an earlier trial consignment ever reached the market. The same fate probably befell the Sea Venom, only this time the catalogue mentioned Egyptian MiGs destroyed in 1956. Only a small number of Sea Venoms were delivered, anyway.

Despite all difficulties, business was good for Novo and their kits sold well - mainly due to very competitive prices made possible by the unique set-up of the production. The downfall of Novo was thus not caused by economical problems as has often been suggested, at least not directly. However, Dunbee-Combex-Marx Ltd. fell into severe financial difficulties in 1979 and eventually had to go into receivership. Since DCM owned Novo, legal requirements forced Novo to do the same and the company passed into the hands of the receivers in February 1980. No buyer could be found in time and Novo Toys Ltd. was wound up later in the same year, although formal liquidation only took place five years later.

The last Soviet deliveries were made in mid-1980 and all kits had been sold out by early 1981. Remaining stocks of boxes, decals and instruction sheets (all printed in the UK) were handed over to Novoexport together with some original box artwork and other bits and pieces.

Box styles, artwork, decals and instructions were in general very similar to the late Frog issues. Indeed, early box mock-ups were almost identical to the Frog boxes except for the removal of the Frog logotype. Apart from the mock-ups, a small batch of similar test boxes were also printed before the style eventually used was finally agreed upon.

Although most Novo kits were boxed, it should be pointed out that kits 76001-76031 were packed in plastic bags with header cards.

Apart from box style, there were also some changes in artwork and decal sheets. Sixteen of the kits used completely new box top art and a few others had slightly changed versions of the Frog originals. In addition, five kits used art previously only utilised on Air Lines boxes.

The only all-new decals were those for the Dart Herald, F-82, Baltimore, VC10 and Boeing 707, although the first three probably had the new designs completed while still with Rovex. Either way, the design work was carried out by Dick Ward of Modeldecal. Apart from the previously mentioned Tupolev and Fokker, the only other known change was that the P-38 had its Chinese markings alternative replaced by a second USAAF one. Although the HMS Trafalgar box art showed the ship with the "RO9" pendant number of HMS Cadiz, the actual decals gave "D77" which was the post-war number of Trafalgar.

A great deal of speculation has taken place over the last few years as regards which kits Novo actually released. And this with some right, since it is indeed a very complex subject.

To begin with, a large number of kits were undeniably released. The kit listing which follows gives production quantities for these.

Secondly, certain kits belonging to the third phase of the third contract were definitely never released. They arc all marked "t" in the list, and for these kits no boxes, decals or instruction sheets were ever printed.

This leaves us with some twenty-three kits which were never officially released but nevertheless had all boxes etc. printed. In the list they all have the official production quantity zero. Regrettably, this does not represent the whole truth, and that for two reasons.

The first one is that trial consignments were often received by Novo and, although not included in the official production quantity, these kits were eventually sold by them. It is also possible that a few batches of slightly faulty and previously rejected kits were also sold out at a discount when Novo closed down. These consignments might number anything from a few dozen to several hundred kits, in some case perhaps more than a thousand.

In connection with this, the Boeing 707 is a special case worth mention. A batch of some 3,000 707s were received by Novo and quickly distributed. However, it was soon found that most kits suffered moulding defects and in the end all but a very few were recalled by Novo or returned to them by irate buyers.

The second reason is that when Novo closed down, Novoexport held enough "paper work" to produce another 2,750,000 Novo kits. It is a fact that some of this has since been used by the Russians. In many cases only the box has been used, omitting the decals and substituting the instruction sheet with a Russian one (or a photo-copy of the Novo original). But sometimes all three original items have been used and the only clue that these are "fake" Novo kits might be the somewhat odd plastic colour (Novo usually managed to avoid the more disgusting ones of the strange shades apparently beloved by Soviet plastic producers). However, in a few cases even this gives nothing away. Since these kits are produced in the same factories as before, using original Novo boxes, decals and instruction sheets, they are - for all practical purposes - Novo kits.

To give some (admittedly subjective) indication of the quantity known to exist of the "zero production" kits, one or two pluses have been added. Thus "0+ + " indicates that a reasonable quantity - perhaps a few hundred - has found its way on to the Western market. "0+" indicates that very-few, or none, have yet been seen. But this may of course change at any time; who knows when the Soviets decide to make use of their 46,000 sets of Twin Mustang packaging...

Finally, the four Russian aircraft - Anatra, MiG-3, LaGG-3 and Yak-3 - must also be mentioned. Produced by Rovcx in accordance with the 1975 DCM-Novoexport agreement, the moulds were kept with Novo in England for many years. But for various reasons they were never included in any of the actual contracts with Novoexport, nor were kit numbers assigned. When Novo closed down, the Russians were most interested in buying the moulds but lacked the hard currency needed. Later attempts by the receivers to sell them to other kit manufacturers - including Lindberg, Monogram, Revell and Starfix - all failed. Not until 1983 were they finally disposed of, to Red Star (which see).

Throughout the list, the Novo number has been given as kit number. But all the kits also carried the old Frog number on the box; indeed, on the 76xxx kits this was more prominently displayed than the Novo number.

Qty
78146 N.A. F-82F/G Twin Mustang 0+
+ 78153 Lockheed PV-1 Ventura 0
+ 78192 Boeing B-17E Flying Fortress 0
+ 78193 Avro Lancaster I (1/72) 0
+ 78194 Vickers Wellington IC 0


+ Project only, never released

FROG model aircraft 1932-1976, R. Lines, L. Hellstrom


NOVO logo

78192 not released


Tashigrooshka logo

Ташигрушка Tashigrushka


Tashigrooshka logo

Semurg


Хобби


  • 18.03.Z0ZZ

  • Northrop P-61 Black Widow - дополнительные материалы


    Northrop P-61 Black Widow - 1/72 рисунок C.B.Maycock, 1/72,
    "Aircraft of the fighting powers" Том.VI, издание 1945г
    Northrop P-61 Black Widow - 1/72 рисунок C.B.Maycock, 1/72, «Aircraft of the fighting powers» Том.VI, издание 1945г