Jump to content

Sleepy

Members
  • Content Count

    185
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Sleepy

  1. 10 hours ago, niart17 said:

    Yup. And also as the old saying goes, there's no such thing as bad press. This thread is helping AMK in many many ways. Some who would never even consider buying an F-14 might get this kit just to see what the hubbub is all about. The thread that just keeps on giving. Ya' can't stop it. 300 300 300 300 300

     

    You realize, of course, that probably about 0.00000000000144298% of modelers worldwide have ever heard of ARC, much less read this entire 208 (and counting) page thread, right?  

  2. Don't forget to look at car colors.  There is a veritable rainbow available, and while not FS595 matched, you can usually find something really close to help you mix you own.

  3. Actually the Sabre Mk.4 *was* an F-86E.  Canadair built a number for the USAF on the same assembly line that they were building Mk.4s for the RAF.

     

    Also, an updated E is essentially externally identical to an F.

  4. If you've ever been in the military, or around real airplanes, you'd know that if the Chief said to touch up November Hotel one-eleven, you touched up November Hotel one-eleven, and you didn't worry too awfully much about exactly what color the touchups were.  If the Navy doesn't stress about exactly what color the touchups are (and they demonstrably didn't then, and still don't today), then why should we?

  5. The VC-12 maintenance officer (who was also an IPMS member) at Oceana once told me they had one of their airplanes out for the Oceana open house.  He noticed a little group of guys clustered around it, holding their 595 fan deck up to the touchup paint.  He said he stood there and watched them argue for several minutes before he went over and told them the touchups were Craftsman automotive primer purchased at Sears.

     

    Don't sweat the exact color.

  6. 8 hours ago, PouK9 said:

    It seems like AMK waits for this tread to reach 200 pages to set the modelling hype record. Get on it, gents and ladies 🙂

     

    The kit will be released when the page count hits 500.  And not a minute sooner.

  7. 15 hours ago, Mstor said:

     

    I left a message for GWH on their Facebook and posted on their timeline (or whatever its called). You're right, the page is not active, but can't hurt to try.

     

    Unless they have someone in the west with access to updating their FB page, it will never be updated again.  The Chinese government blocks all access in China to Facebook, and its citizens risk arrest if they are found accessing it.  

  8. As I said, if you're having someone build one that you're putting in your company newsletter, wouldn't you want to make sure it was absolutely built correctly?  And if it's that easy to screw up the main gear position, perhaps you need to rethink your engineering design.

  9. 1 hour ago, nachjager said:

    Hi Sleepy, you are quite correct on your observation. Should be a simple fix thou.

     

    "Should be" and "is" are two totally different things.  And honestly, in 2019, should it be necessary?  I have memories of Eduard's Bf109G disaster.  How it's possible, using CAD design, for a basic mistake like this to happen (assuming it's not just the builder's error) is inexplicable to me.  It's as obvious an error as putting a three bladed prop on a P-51D to me.

  10. Compare the photos.  The model looks like it’s standing on its tiptoes.  The struts appear in the photo to be mounted at 90 degrees to the wing chord plane, not angled forward like the real thing is.

  11. I hate to break the news to Eduard, but the P-51D’s main struts are not mounted perpendicular to the wing.  I sure hope this is just a boo-boo by the builder, but you’d think if you were putting this in your company newsletter you’d want it to be built properly.  

     

    FLclgz.jpg

     

    GC5G7K.jpg

×
×
  • Create New...