Jump to content

LinerLover

Members
  • Content Count

    158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About LinerLover

  • Rank
    Rivet Counter
  • Birthday 10/21/1962

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
  • Interests
    Airliners & anything related to commercial aviation, trains (being a train driver) and many more...
  1. AModel seem to improve on every large kit they release (I bought both at the same time, I was impressed with their 1/72 Il-76 and An-32 kits) so if they improved again on this one, I'm in for one kit.
  2. Wasn't asking for the moon, just an unbiased comment... as the photos on the RoG site are simply too small to give a good idea of the recessed details depth/width. Thanks anyway. Yes, I think we are all starting to know that the Anigrand 1/144 C-17 is average. Thanks anyway.
  3. Hi J, Are you now allowed to share some details with us ? I'm thinking mainly about the molding quality of the kit and, though I know it is an early test shot, can you say if it is more on the RoG L-1049 side (just too heavy recessed details... did we say China tooling ?) or RoG 767 side (nice recessed details... did we say Korea tooling ?) ? I just miss those Korean-tooled Revell kits from the '90, they had such uniform and nice recessed details. I'm thinking especially about the 767 kit (not sure if the A320/A321/A330 and A340 kits were Korean-tooled though). Now they seem to have switched
  4. Hi, Actually I think credit has to be given to Kurt as HE is the guy who created the moulds for the 727-100 and -200 kits, originally released under HIS Authentic Airliners brand. The original castings were absolutely delightful and I am quite impatient to see if Flying Fish improved over it. Or if the new parts are plaggued with that problem seen on their DC-9 range kits, the "resin shrinkage" on the belly... Regards, Stéphane
  5. Too much choice : que ce supplice prenne fin, pitié !!!
  6. Hummm, interesting news. Knowing the excellence of their 2 first airliner kits (though I still haven't seen the Tu-154M for real), this 767 "should" be a banger now... is the type sufficiently popular with Russians in order to sell in big numbers ? The Revell kit is indeed a very good representation of the 767 but, apart from the PW/GE mix engines (and not perfect RR regines too), I found the front part of the wing/fuselage fairing, and the wing dihedral to be dreadful, especially the angle of the section between the fuselage and engine pylon. The airfoil section in that area is also weird, e
  7. Hi Ben, Strange, the following link shows it well : http://www.airliners.net/photo/Lufthansa/B...-130/1310834/L/ the 737-100 belly fairing seems to be a tad more than 17 complete frames long (regardless of their weird spacings). If you take a look at this link http://www.airliners.net/photo/Braathens-S...-Adv/0441072/L/ , you will notice that the 737-200 belly fairing is a tad less than 17 frames long, maybe around 2-3in shorter than the 737-100's. Maybe because of variations between the frame spacing between 737-100s and -200s ? Interesting. J, superb artwork, I love this scheme ! Regards
  8. Hello, Yesterday I made a trip to my favourite aviation related bookstore and managed to secure a Revell 1/32 Hawker Hurricane kit as well as a Revell 1/32 Mitsubishi Raiden kit at dirt price but more on that later. The Hurricane kit obviously dates back to the early seventies, featuring nice raised details, BEAUTIFUL fabric effect on rear fuselage and simplified engine/gear/cockpit details but I was wondering if it could be considered an accurate kit, speaking mainly of the fuselage outline and wing shape ? I can't be bothered with the basic details since I guess they can be corrected/impr
  9. :P--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mr B @ Feb 2 2008, 03:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> thanks guys much obliged rgds mr b Hey, Selangor ? Where are you from ? I'm half Malaysian from my mother. We use to spend every Xmas in KL (PJ) and Malacca... Will locate for you the part photos. Regards !
  10. Outch ! That Trident photo is just freaking ! What a nice looking aircraft, as good as the 727. And you are true, your modified 727 looks quite the same, I just think the Trident's wings are greatly swept and feature a double dihedral. Gaaahhh, these Brits... Great airliner designers if you look at the Spitfire, VC10, Trident...
  11. Hi Mr B, I would say it is okay, nothing more. I still find it a little expensive regarding what you get in the box (that is my personal thought, please), though I have to admit the resin, vac and white metal parts are nicely cast but... the lack of detail is clearly appearant : nose section could be more realistic (I got the resin hollowed nose section made by Authentic Airliners for KMC's 727, what a beauty but it will need a few adjustments to fit the 737 fuselage), main wings do not feature an accurate airfoil section, trailing edges are rather thick, engines are simplified (2 parts, inta
  12. Hey guys, thank you for the review ! That's sad... I just can't understand some producers's "bad" habbit of having their new kits based on old "flawed" kits. I mean, why produce a kit you KNOW won't be accurate from the beginning, and compromize your reputation ? Or maybe it is that : "why would I bother to do some research in order to produce the definitive kit, knowing that the "simple way -> lack of research" will bring me the same cash" ? It's not the first time I hear something like this ("ahemmm's" F-16XL conversion kit... Ooops I did it again... but you will notice that I didn't me
  13. Hi, the title says it all. I heard about this 100% resin kit being released during the Telford Modelworld 2007 show :( but... has anybody bought the kit ? Thanking you in advance. Regards, Stéphane
  14. cmhjets, is there any chances that you could post photos of that beast ? I happen to have the Qantas 767-200 and Austrian MD-81 (or 87 ? Can't remember) and wanted to compare the quality of both kits. Thank you in advance. Regards, Stéphane
  15. I totally agree, their kits still don't display that "quality" feel upon the opening of the boy, though they are recessed detailed and reasonnably detailed... AGAIN with this kit, bought about a week ago for CHF 55.- (around US$ 47.-), I'm a little dissapointed : it is indeed reasonnably detailed but the bloody recessed details on the fuselage are fine and well defined on the left fuselage half and vague on the right fuselage half. So vague you simply can't do the paint wash. Just getting fed up with these bloody rushed kits... Regards, Stéphane
×
×
  • Create New...