1. Copying kits is a crime that hurts original artists & producers. Help support your favorite artists by buying their original works. PlanetFigure will not tolerate any activities related to recasting, and will report recasters to authorities. Thank you for your support!

WIP B-17 flight crew

Discussion in 'vBench (Works in Progress)' started by PLG, Apr 22, 2021.

  1. PLG Well-Known Member

    Many years ago I saw a Verlinden figure of a B-17 waist gunner with part of the fusilage which I thought wax a great idea. An idea which never left me.

    Fast forward to a few months ago and I decided to jump in and bought the HK models 1/32 B17G and some crew figures from Masterdetails.

    6EBAA23C-7B2B-491A-8A7C-54219D45CAE7.jpeg

    I am not an aircraft modeller and in anycase have nowhere to store such a large model so I'm going to take drastic action - chop it up! Apart from easier storage this has a number of advantages; smaller manageable projects and the figures will not be overpowered by the size of the plane - I want the figures to be the centre of attention not the plane.

    this idea worked with my Huey diorama.

    the idea is to build a series of little vignettes:

    1 - navigator/bombarier section featuring the bombardier about to release the bombload,
    2- flight deck,
    3 - bomb-bay and radio room, possibly with a figure walking through the bomb-bay
    4 - two waist gunners
    5 - tail gunner
    6 - a few crew figures walking under the wing, near the engines/landing gear.

    each will be a stand alone vignetter focussing on the figures, but together create the impression of the B-17.


    The first 'i am going to tackle is number 6.

    For this 'i am using the ICM figures:

    FEDDD3C8-FB29-436B-999F-A709136A3555.jpeg

    I am using a section of the wing, enough to create the impression of the size of the wing. But not too overpowering.

    i have not decided the exact composition and have a number of options:

    1 - 2 engines and the full width ov the wing:

    D98165E0-EB39-440D-8DC4-3DD715D133A7.jpeg 112580C3-F0AF-486E-A08A-BAE7A3708B38.jpeg

    option 2 - just one engine:

    AAEF4F46-620A-4506-AB41-884A5AB2D6F2.jpeg 7E41EA07-D6D4-4E28-BCCA-83C954F10607.jpeg

    Option 3 - 2 engines but only 1/2 of the width of the wing

    76EE512E-48C5-43D2-911E-DF78167CBA2C.jpeg

    Any thoughts as to which is the best option?

    Peter
    NeilW, MCPWilk, franck edet and 18 others like this.
  2. grasshopper A Fixture

    Country:
    Canada
    Option 3 would lose sense of the wing..just two engines..the decision might come down to how you will view the diorama...two and big hunk of wing does have more impact, but one engine give more emphasis on figures. As well, the wheel and single engine seem off, vs two and wheel..landing gear..I prefer two
  3. callmehobbes Active Member

    Country:
    England
    Not sure which is the best but I love the concept.
    Oda likes this.
  4. Peter Day PlanetFigure Supporter

    Country:
    United-Kingdom
    Bloomin' great idea Peter. I kike the one engine option myself.
    Oda and razor like this.
  5. DaddyO A Fixture

    Country:
    United-Kingdom
    Fabulous (if expensive) idea (y)

    For what it's worth I rather like the single engine idea when viewed from the front and above - Gives a nice balance to the composition (rough area of figures equalling the engine), but I think the one with twin engines works best. :) The figures are a bit dwarfed by the massive wing and powerplants giving a good impression of the size of the full aircraft.
    Personally I don't like the reduced wing version much although the only reason I can give is that it looks a little 'chopped to suit the base'; a bit like those tiny wedges of tanks on single figure bases. I like the figures to give a sense of scale to the hardware rather than a cropped close up view - It would certainly work in a box diorama though.

    Cheers
    Paul
    Oda, dmcHobbes and razor like this.
  6. housecarl Moderator

    Country:
    United-Kingdom
    I'm with the crowd, one engine for me too.(y)
    razor likes this.
  7. Dolf Well-Known Member

    Country:
    Portugal
    Hi!


    For what it's worth. The B-17 being a 4 engine aircraft, if showing only 1 engine, IMHO one may not necessarily be able to ID the crew as part of a B-17 crew.

    For this reason I'd go for option 3.

    As I love WWII aircraft, and can still build one on occasion, in my case (if I was building such a dio) I'd even go for option 1, but that's me of course ;)

    Btw, very nice concept!


    Cheers!
    Babelfish and Oda like this.
  8. Nap Moderator

    Country:
    England
    Hi Peter

    What's a plane ?? ....seriously what a great project , I think it might depend on display space both idea are good but I like tge 2 engine version but would use full wing .......not sure I am helping here !! ......allowing more ground space under for figures

    I remember the Verlinden ones , 120 and 1/32 .....not seen before when it was released

    image.jpeg image.jpeg image.jpeg

    Following with interest on this

    Plan carefully and enjoy

    Look forward to seeing more updates

    Happy benchtime

    Nap
    DaddyO likes this.
  9. Steve Brodie PlanetFigure Supporter

    Country:
    United-Kingdom
    wow, now that's a project, I suppose it depends on what you want the end result to portray; if its the size of these aeroplanes then it would be option 1, as it fills that brief, however if its to concentrate on the brave crews who flew into battle not knowing if they would come back then i would go for option 2. I know that is of no help at all :(:). As you have two wings, why not do one of each ? , or give me a wing and i will build one lol :LOL::ROFLMAO:
    Nap likes this.
  10. blaster A Fixture

    Country:
    United-States
    Great project!!!
    I like option 1 - 2 engines and the full depth of the wing.

    Rgds Victor
  11. Larsen E. Whipsnade Moderator

    Country:
    United-States
    I favor option 1. It shows how massive the B-17 was without overpowering the crew rather, imo, the wing serves to frame the picture. I had the good fortune to fly in the Nine 0 Nine, a B-17, about 10 years ago. That's me standing next to one of the engines.
    Screen Shot 2021-04-23 at 5.25.58 AM.png Screen Shot 2021-04-23 at 5.26.26 AM.png Screen Shot 2021-04-23 at 5.26.36 AM.png Screen Shot 2021-04-23 at 5.22.02 AM.png
    A sad note: The Nine 0 Nine crashed two years ago in Connecticut killing the pilot, co-pilot and 5 passengers.
  12. Babelfish A Fixture

    Country:
    United-Kingdom
    After much consideration, Option 1 gets my vote. Conveys the size of the plane but (IMHO) doesn't detract from the crew. But whatever you decide, I think any of them would work. Great concept.

    - Steve
    Dolf likes this.
  13. Merryweather A Fixture

    Country:
    United-Kingdom
    Option 1 for me, Peter.
    Excellent idea!
  14. tock24 Active Member

    Country:
    United-Kingdom
    Option 1 for me! Shows the sheer size of the B - 17! [I have the Verlinden 120mm kit to do - perhaps this will inspire me to get it out!]
    Ian
    Nap likes this.
  15. Steve Jones New Member

    Country:
    England
    Hi Peter. Finally made it aboard. Great idea for your next project. Looking forward to seeing how it turns out
  16. PLG Well-Known Member

    Hi Guys


    Thanks for all of the feed back - all very useful, a lot of very good points raised. I think the third option can be discounted, the other two each have their own pros and cons. Fortunately I can avoid making a decision for a few days - I'm working on the figures first and delaying the decision.

    Paul - I'm thinking of a boxed dip for some of the other vignettes.
    Nap - yes those are the kits which sparked all of this off!
    Larcen - I am envious of your having flown on a B-17 - very fortunate.


    Peter
    Nap, DaddyO and Steve Jones like this.
  17. MattMcK. PlanetFigure Supporter

    Definitely One! I'm working on the full B-24 from Hobby Boss, and went the other way, full plane, lots of crew and ground vehicles. I almost wish I made your choice and chopped it :)
    Nap likes this.
  18. Sergei Active Member

    Country:
    United-States
    Fascinating project, I have always liked the B17, though never got around to building it. Generally, I would go for Option 1, but I think there is one more issue to consider. Judging the photos of the lucky Larsen E, the B17 was of course large, but still not as large as to allow a person to walk under its wing without tilting his head. Or am I missing something?
  19. Larsen E. Whipsnade Moderator

    Country:
    United-States
    Love your avatar: an original GI Joe head before Life-like Hair and Beard (not to mention the Kung Fu Grip!). Way cool....
    MattMcK. likes this.
  20. Larsen E. Whipsnade Moderator

    Country:
    United-States
    Good catch. You can walk under the engines and the leading edge of the wing but because the B-17 is a tail dragger not under the trailing edge.
    Rick
    Sergei likes this.

Share This Page

planetFigure Links

Reviews & Open Box
Buy. Sell & trade
Articles
Link Directory
Events
Advertising

Popular Sections

Figure & Minis News
vBench - Works in Progress
Painting Talk
Sculpting Talk
Digital Sculpting Talk
The Lounge
Report Piracy

Who we are

planetFigure is a community built around miniature painters, sculptors and collectors, We are here to exchange support, Information & Resources.

© planetFigure 2003 - 2022.