Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About erik_g

  • Rank
    Step away from the computer!

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Konungariket Sverige

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Pity if it is true. I love to read posts where people who don't have the kit tell us who have it, that the scratches, toolmarks, poor fit and other things we don't see with our naked eye, holding the plastic in our hands actually is there, we're just too biased/blind/stupid to see it. I especially love when those who are building it get a bollocking for not having fit issues or thinking that applying a small amount of putty is no big deal. Apparently having to resort to dry-fitting, puttying and a slight touch of sanding is a cardinal sin nowadays, and one should not have to apply any of that
  2. You can build it with the wings swept if you like. But you have to choose for some reason.
  3. Somewhere after passing page #200 I believe. Can´t remember exactly, it was a while ago.
  4. Why? Why hope that AMK should fix one issue on a kit you have stated about a gazillion reasons not to buy? Why not buy ANOTHER F-14 kit and, you know, just build it. Just buy the Tamiya F-14D already or wait and see if the GWH will be the #1 Tomcat. Man, you should really move on. Don´t buy the AMK kit, don´t waste another minute on it. It´s like throwing good money after bad.
  5. The first to post on page 300 was promised two free Tomcats by AMK, that´s why! 😄
  6. It depends on what you value, it´s easily twice the part count. More details, more options, like clean or dirty wings, more weapons and so on. If you want clean wings, already have resin exhausts and a resin cockpit, or does't care about those things, well, then the extra money maybe wasted on an AMK or even a Tamiya. Can't say if the AMK is easy to build. There are conflicting views represented in the thread. It looks to me like it will go together with not too much fuss. But it is a more complicated kit than the Italeri, so it might not be for the novice.
  7. I meant "not followed" above. I have not followed the sequence in the instructions for the last 36 years.. I am not following the build sequence in the instructions because of various reasons, like adding a certain antenna at a certain stage will invariably lead to it being broken off during handling. Not building the ejection seat as step one, since I don´t know if it will be replaced by a resin seat later, or just because I don´t want to. (Seats are boring) I will often leave the landing gears off until last, after painting, decaling and weathering. Sometimes leaving parts
  8. Ok, I have built models since I was seven years old. That is 37 years of model building. Do you know for how many of them I have NOT followed the instructed build sequence to the letter? Maybe about 36. Hand up, any actual model builder in here who follows the sequence in the instructions to the letter. Shion, I don´t have the time now, but in 2020 I´ll build the AMK tomcat, just for you, in effing SEQUENCE if that is a REQUIREMENT. You can come over and watch me do it, if you like. Now, could you guys that has NOT ordered an AMK Tomcat, and who do not have any intention to do that
  9. The box art sold this kit to me. I really don´t need another hornet.. but I guess I do. The original release had quite a pair of aggressor options. But silly me, I went for the "most boring" of them all, the Finnish one, since, when I built it in 2018, it was the centennial of the Finnish Air Force.
  10. Ok, I might not be the most anal guy regarding shapes that you can find in here, but when I was shopping for my first 1/48 tomcat I took one look at the Academy and said "no way". That nose looks weird even to me. So I bought the then brand new Hobbyboss kit. Instead I had to fix those intakes that are not properly angled. I haven´t seen anybody mentioning the intakes of the AMK kit in this thread, so I take it that they are at least ok shapewise. I prefer to display my aircraft with the nose toward the viewer, slightly angled, so I think I will be able to live with the inaccuracies of the rea
  11. I finally got my kit yesterday after ordering it through Indiegogo 2,5 years back. A lot of plastic in the box. Managed to do a complete unboxing of all the sprues and fit everything back in the box again. That skill should mean that I am skilled enough to put the kit together as well. 😄 You all know about the kits shortcomings by now, so I won't beat that dead horse more than necessary. If I hadn´t read this thread I´d say, out of the box, the things that I noted were: cockpit details being on the soft side and TARPS pod not having glazed windows. Panel lines looked OK. Sharp and
  12. Ha ha ha, I got confused there for a while. I had to check which forum I was scanning. I don´t think you can blame Jester on AMK! 😄
  13. To be honest, I have not used my MRP paints yet, so I can´t say for sure that they are OK. But I sure hope so. Last time I painted a Viggen I used a mixture of Tamiya paints. They look nice in the jars anyway, and their grey SwAF paints looked great. Didn't know Hataka made the viggen camouflage colours too. The important think I think, is not to let any of the colours stand out. Most of the time people get the light green too powerful. The black should not be really black either, just a drop of green or gray would do the trick. The black we had when I did service definitively had a green
  14. If it is the splinter one, I believe it should be the same colours as used on the Viggen (It was painted that way to test the camouflage intended for the Viggen). MRP has Viggen colours in their range: MRP-175, Blue-Grey 058M MRP-176, Black 093M MRP-177, Dark Green 326M MRP-178, Mid Green 322M MRP-179, Tan 507M
  • Create New...