I've found Information on this and GTP in general is extremely limited so if anyone has any insights or web links to try, it'd be greatly appreciated.



There's nothing underneath I'm afraid. It's tin to my basic knowledge.GHOSTHUNTER wrote:This is unusual, if it is diecast, because they have made no attempt to make separate engines, just cast a slight raised area and painted them on the wings. It does look similar to a Douglas DC-3 Airliner, but as to who made it is unclear. Any markings at all on the underside you can show us, anything may help, plus pictures of the wheels etc may help.
Ghosty.
That simply reflects the original British design for jet aeroplanes (e.g. De Havilland Comet, Gloster Meteor), with the engines incorporated into the wing structure. It was the Americans who came up with the ugly (but rather more practical) design of separate, uspended engine pods.GHOSTHUNTER wrote:This is unusual, if it is diecast, because they have made no attempt to make separate engines, just cast a slight raised area and painted them on the wings...
I was trying to point out that the 'GTP' model above would most likely have had a better representation of an engine if it were of diecast metal, but because it is of 'Tinplate' (which itself is still wrong, these are mild steel), it only has a mere suggestion of an engine pod, as dictated by the method of production and construction and it's intended market target, cheap so-called 'Penny Toys' sold on open markets and novelty shops etc.Idris wrote:That simply reflects the original British design for jet aeroplanes (e.g. De Havilland Comet, Gloster Meteor), with the engines incorporated into the wing structure. It was the Americans who came up with the ugly (but rather more practical) design of separate, uspended engine pods.GHOSTHUNTER wrote:This is unusual, if it is diecast, because they have made no attempt to make separate engines, just cast a slight raised area and painted them on the wings...