Everyone's waiting for NG doing 747Classics in detail and correct all the way - so how many differences are there on a "747Classic"?

[LeoMuse747]

I think this Aerolineas Argentinas B.747-287B, LV-MLO, had the -70A engines fitted as well for a short while, on delivery in 1979:

Fantastic catch, I didn't know Aerolineas had operated this one with JT9D-70A engines.
They look huge, so nice!

 

[Jazajia]

What a wonderful post Phantom! Danke schön.

Thank you Phantom for your B747 Classic summation! I agree that we kinda need an array of moulds to manufacture the variety of versions. I have made a small post regarding the difference in B743 visual appearances, posted on MAF: https://modelairlinerforum.com/thre...tiglare-b743-visual-differences.149/post-2662
From my perspective, to accommodate the B741 to B744, we require at least these different parts:
- Fuselage (4): - original upper deck with 2 different wing-to-body fairings (classics and modern - used for B744 Freight as well), Stretched Upper Deck with 2 different wing-to-body fairings (classic is suitable for B742SUD and the majority of B743).
- Wings (5): standard WBF with HF/non HF, modern WBF with HF/non HF/B744 winglets
- Engines (around 7): PW JT9D (-7R4G2, -7, -70A), GE (CF6-50/80), RR RB211 (-524C2/D4 and 524H/G/T on B744).
I hope that you can add more points to my reply. Cheers!

I thought about your recent posts regarding the 747-300, I learned a lot myself reading through them.

Let's put it this way: it's better than the others but it's far from good.

Back 20 years ago when the BB400 747s appeared they looked great due to their gears, wingtip-antenna and crisp printing, but they were less accurate to shape than DWs 747s.
There's actually two things why I never was a fan of BB400 747s:
- the v.tail is just off in shape. As much as I tried I can't ignore it
- the "pylon-in-wing" mould was so outdated already 20 years ago. Even if you'd try, you just can't create any detail/accuracy with such design and BB400 engines going with it were extremely crude.

I don't care who'll come up with a new 747Classic mould, but my hopes are with NG, simply because they try to do what certain other brands cannot or will not: deliver a detailed and accurate product. And if it's 20% more expensive, so be it.
Luckily, NG are usually equal or even cheaper to have than AC for example, at least over here.

The BB747 is proof that a pretty face can go a long way... . I have to be honest, many of the subtle details usually go unnoticed by me (similar-looking engine nacelles, shape of pods, etc...) but the vertical fin is so crude...

Very informative post, with the usual throroughness, thank you Phantom. I would not ever part with any of my BB/AC 747s despite their flaws, however I'd definitely welcome a new and updated version in 1:400 for the 2020s. As others have mentioned, it is nigh on impossible finding the BB/AC 747s at a realistic and affordable price these days, locking many new collectors out. There are also some missing classics still to be made, plus it would be good to see some of the previous 'grails reissued with correct artwork, as a few have errors.

Exactly!

 

[Barison82]

Fantastic catch, I didn't know Aerolineas had operated this one with JT9D-70A engines.
They look huge, so nice!

Yeah they are massive! She didn't have them for long, trying to find out more but I'd hazard a guess that they were replaced circa 1980. Looking her up and most of what I find out about was the fact that she was haunted!

 

[Purpleplane]

I had no idea there were so many variations. Very informative.

 

[AKlein707]

Very informative post, with the usual throroughness, thank you Phantom. I would not ever part with any of my BB/AC 747s despite their flaws, however I'd definitely welcome a new and updated version in 1:400 for the 2020s. As others have mentioned, it is nigh on impossible finding the BB/AC 747s at a realistic and affordable price these days, locking many new collectors out. There are also some missing classics still to be made, plus it would be good to see some of the previous 'grails reissued with correct artwork, as a few have errors.

I would never call anything on the AC/BB 747s flaws; they may not meet up to the standards of someone using calipers and micrometers, but they're certainly EXCELLENT models of the 747. Their continued popularity and high prices 15 years later only prove that point!

 

[1/400collector]

I would never call anything on the AC/BB 747s flaws; they may not meet up to the standards of someone using calipers and micrometers, but they're certainly EXCELLENT models of the 747. Their continued popularity and high prices 15 years later only prove that point!

I agree with you the only people who say they have flaws are people with microscope, i have almost 20
BB400/AC 747 and they all look very realistic.
The only problem is that there's low stocks of them with high prices

 

[Barison82]

I would never call anything on the AC/BB 747s flaws; they may not meet up to the standards of someone using calipers and micrometers, but they're certainly EXCELLENT models of the 747. Their continued popularity and high prices 15 years later only prove that point!

We may have to agree to disagree on the flaws - however nothing detracts from my enjoyment of these, I still regard each one I have as a gem. Most have taken years of searching to collect...and the high prices are definitely an indication of their popularity, sought-after by those that missed them when originally released, and only getting harder and harder to obtain. The demand is very much alive and well for the classic Queen of the Skies, and I would not be against any new blood for this type in 1:400.

 

[Phantom]

..the only people who say they have flaws are people with microscope..

I don't have one, but kind of a photographic memory and a pretty good estimate of proportions - both of which certainly doesn't help in this hobby