The worst box art

[Nick]

BTW What exactly is the ugly creature (coded "red C") with a tail turret (or maybe Star wars-guns) mounted in the nose section?

That, sir, is the Avro Shackleton which was flown by the RAF on Airborne Early Warning, Anti Submarine Warfare, Search And Rescue and Maritime Recon duties for nearly 40 years. The South African Air Force also flew eight of these between 1953 and 1984.
I've climbed into at least 3 of these and they are rather spacious inside. Newark Museum has a fine survivor on display. Shackletons are possibly the only machines to come in both tailwheel and tricycle undercarriage versions .

http://www.avroshackleton.com/

[The Rat]

Shackletons are possibly the only machines to come in both tailwheel and tricycle undercarriage versions .

Me-262, but I don't think the conventional gear version was ever in service.

[Stargazer]

Blackburn Blackburn is such a futuristic design - take the wings, the empennage and the wheels away, delete the propeller, add a one-piece bubble canopy (or two) and the thing becomes some kind of an antigrav racer-glider-scooter from the XXII century. And two ultra-laser-plasma-antimatter-whatever guns (sidemounted) will make the military model.

Ha ha, this is hilarious! 

BTW What exactly is the ugly creature (coded "red C") with a tail turret (or maybe Star wars-guns) mounted in the nose section?

That's the Avro Shock-the-town for you...

[CANSO]

That, sir, is the Avro Shackleton which was flown by the RAF ...
http://www.avroshackleton.com/

Nick, thanks for the explanation. Sorry, if I hurt your feelings about this plane - I didn't mean it seriously!
And shame on me   - I've seen the old guy "Shacky" many times, but not from near perspective maybe  ... And never "live"...
Mea maxima culpa!

[The Wooksta!]

They did plan to put a tricycle gear on the Attacker and the Avo Ashton started out with a taildragger configuration.

[Weaver]

...Then, because the single-pilot job obviously wasn't fat and ugly enough, they produced a side-by-side two-pilot trainer version:

Wow!!! Blackburn Blackburn is such a futuristic design - take the wings, the empennage and the wheels away, delete the propeller, add a one-piece bubble canopy (or two) and the thing becomes some kind of an antigrav racer-glider-scooter from the XXII century. And two ultra-laser-plasma-antimatter-whatever guns (sidemounted) will make the military model.
BTW What exactly is the ugly creature (coded "red C") with a tail turret (or maybe Star wars-guns) mounted in the nose section?

LOL - I think what it needs is to take the wings and tailplanes away and replace them with a small airship envelope: a lumpy, bent one with random ropes and bits of net around it....

[kitbasher]

Shackleton: 40000 rivets in close formation!  Had an 8.5 hour trip on one many years ago when I was an air cadet - unforgettable!  Highlight was formating on an EC-121 Warning Star over the North sea at about 3000 ft.

[Stargazer]

Shackleton: 40000 rivets in close formation!  Had an 8.5 hour trip on one many years ago when I was an air cadet - unforgettable!  Highlight was formating on an EC-121 Warning Star over the North sea at about 3000 ft.

Quite simply put, the Shackleton was to the Warning Star what the Sherman tank was to the Bugatti Royale... or what horror comics are to Renaissance paintings... an aesthetic abomination!

[kitnut617]

They did plan to put a tricycle gear on the Attacker .

Umm! According to an article that appeared in Air-Britain's Aeromilitaria, there was no plan for tricycle u/c on the Attacker.  The article has the original flight test report that one of the testing outfits made up attached, which says they 'strongely' suggest that the aircraft have tricycle u/c but Supermarine ignored the suggestion.

[PR19_Kit]

Umm! According to an article that appeared in Air-Britain's Aeromilitaria, there was no plan for tricycle u/c on the Attacker.  The article has the original flight test report that one of the testing outfits made up attached, which says they 'strongely' suggest that the aircraft have tricycle u/c but Supermarine ignored the suggestion.

When the last FAA Attackers were flying from RAF Benson when I liived there, being part of the Southern Air Division of the RNVR in 1956 or so, they were not allowed to hold on the taxiways as the exhausts tended to melt the tarmac after a short while! The hardstanding by their hangar was concrete so they had no problems there, but would taxi out in short order and take-off without pausing anywhere.

[GMendes]

Didn't see this one:

The ex-Lincon/Kader Short Sunderland, a "shrinked" copy of the Airfiz 1/72 Sunderland



To be realistic, I think that we must tought on boxart related to the times it was made. But I can't understand why a lot of them were simply terrible, in times where was perfectly possible to achive something more "realistic".  Some old Airfix boxart were based in photos, why artists didn't use this more times. As examples, the old Strombecker or Pinguin, Frog boxarts...Any medium college graphic art student could do it.

G_Mendes

[The Rat]

Didn't see this one:

The ex-Lincon/Kader Short Sunderland, a "shrinked" copy of the Airfiz 1/72 Sunderland

Truly horrifying 'art'. Been wanting one of those for years, but not at the prices demanded on the collection market.

[Alvis 3.14159]

Collectors want those? Cripes! They're...crap!


That said....I've got some Kader Dc-3s. ANyone want any?

Alvis 3.1

[Old Wombat]

I s'pose if you can't build 'em, you can collect 'em.

[The Rat]

Collectors want those? Cripes! They're...crap!Alvis 3.1

Really? If they're pantographed from the Airfix job they shouldn't be all that bad. At least, the fuselage and wings should be pretty good, I suppose teeny bits like props and such would be less satisfactory. But never having seen one I can't say for sure.