Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

Darren Roberts

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Darren Roberts

  • Rank
    Devoid of ANY Social Life
  • Birthday 12/09/1969

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Olathe, KS

Recent Profile Visitors

25,796 profile views
  1. That counts for about ten positives!
  2. That's only check. Here's checkmate! Dictionary definition of toy: an object for a child to play with, typically a model or miniature replica of something. As far as the "child" part, my wife will attest that every modeler she has met is a child in an adult body. In regards to "play", we all know we play with our models during the build process. 😁
  3. The step wells in the Tamiya kit are almost the exact same depth as on the AMK kit! Go back and look at the picture of the VF-1 jet. The wells are deeper than on the Tamiya kit. There's also the panel line running just below the canopy sill on the Tamiya kit that you pointed out shouldn't be there. I could literally make many of the same claims about the Tamiya kit from this picture that you made about the AMK kit. - step wells too shallow - engraved line that's invisible on the real thing - soft detail in the cockpit - fictional detail on the instrument and side panels - ejection/face curtain handles too thick/out of scale - no detail in the ladder bay - no throttle - canvas shroud covers lack detail/unrealistic Here's the deal. It's fine if you don't like AMK or their Tomcat. But at least be unbiased in your assessment if you're going to list things about it. The fact that you said the Tamiya step wells were plenty deep and the AMK were too shallow when they are almost identical shows the bias you have. Many people find AMK kits to be very nice, so they must be doing something right. Here's an exercise I'd like you try. You listed a string of negatives about the AMK kit. Find three to five positive aspects of the kit. That will create a much more balanced critique.
  4. I think this is the root cause of much of the angst around this kit. This, and the whole "preorder" fiasco. If AMK had simply released this kit when it was ready, I think it would have been much more well-received, and the things listed as negatives would have been passing comments instead of deal breakers. Look how long we lived with the Hasegawa kit, and that has a myriad of issues. But no one really talks about them as deal-breakers and, aside from the fit, the Hasegawa kit is looked on as one of the nicer kits. In the end, AMK probably dropped the ball with the PR they did on this kit. They were trying to generate enthusiasm, but due to circumstances (either in or beyond their control...we'll never really know) that created a perfect storm, they got bit in rear.
  5. I hate to say it, but they're all toys.
  6. So, all negative and not a single positive? That speaks volumes about the bias you have with this kit. Let's address each one of your criticisms. - If the proportions of the headrest are off, it's not that noticeable. The seats are serviceable, especially if you're going to put aircrew in them. I would assume most will get aftermarket seats anyway. - Most, if not all, Tomcat kits have step wells that are too shallow. The vast majority of builds will have them up, so it's a trivial thing. - Which details are you referring to that are too shallow? The cockpit detail looks pretty decent to me. - Are there more pictures that I'm missing? There are only a couple of visible panel lines in the picture. I'm not sure any definitive conclusion can be drawn from this single picture. - If you a referring to the line beneath the canopy sill, you would be correct. - There are a lot lines on various models that exist but are invisible in real life. - I'm not sure "warped" is the correct term. You can't judge fit by one picture. We have no idea who put the parts together. We tend to think that everyone who works at a model company is a modeler. That is totally false. The lack of fit can very easily (and probably is) because of the builder, not the parts. If I were judging the kit just from this single picture, I'd probably put it at a 7.5-8/10. If released right now, it would probably be in the top three or four, depending on what you want out of a model. However, I'll wait until I can actually build it and then I'll make some decisions.
  7. What's funny is I have just the opposite view. The Hornet looks old and tired and ready to be put to bed. The F-35 looks advanced and ready to fight. When the F-14 came out, people said the same thing about the F-4. Same goes for when the F-18 replaced the A-7. Of course, no one said anything like that when the F-18 Super Hornet replaced the Tomcat. That it was a step backwards was obvious to all. 😂
  8. Is that a 442nd A-10 out of Whiteman? I knew they started putting the warthog faces on their jets.
  9. That would make the A=10 the Rodney Dangerfield of models. "I get no respect!" All I can think about now is Caddy Shack! 😂
  10. I'm still trying to confirm, but I think the navigation lights on the B were the small round ones found on the A instead of the wingtip ones found on the C. Other than that, everything else you need for the B is in the C kit. It's the A that takes a bit of work to get to. I wrote a Finescale Modeler article awhile back that has all the changes. I can't recall what issue it was.
  11. You could always go with this. It will probably be cheaper than getting sprues from Hasegawa. A-4B nose
  • Create New...