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

Laurent

Members
  • Content Count

    4,513
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Laurent

  • Rank
    Life Member (Mon-Key Handler)
  • Birthday 05/15/1972

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://perso.orange.fr/fishbed/fishbedModeling/index.html
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Saint-Leu-la-Forêt (France)

Recent Profile Visitors

19,992 profile views
  1. KP and HB front fuselages look the same. Windscreen and canopy are too narrow so the windscreen doesn't wrap around the nose enough. Only the 1/72 Modelsvit and 1/48 KH kits have "Su-17M3 and later"ish look.
  2. AFAIK this isn't a sensitive subject at all. Sales figures, profite margins, future projects are. I've bought just one IIIE but I'll buy the E/EBR boxing as I appreciate the fact they reworked the nose and separated the elevons.
  3. Mmmh I rather think that Modelsvit uses two types of toolings. A short-run type ("red Limited Edition" boxings... galvanized resin tooling ?) for the "exotic" subjects (Soviet prototypes for example) and a mid-run type ("green Limited Edition"... aluminium tooling ?) for more mainstream subjects like the Mirage family. I'm not sure about the "yellow Limited Edition".
  4. It may be related to the fact that Eduard produces the toolings in-house while Airfix mold making is outsourced to a Chinese company. Mold maker used by Airfix may want to avoid undercuts that may arise if the panel lines are too deep.
  5. It's not a matter of being in a hurry. It's a matter of having a CAD peer review process or not.
  6. Maybe critical thinking is not welcome ? Because some of the expertens do not have the kit in hand yet ?
  7. The tooing is done so it's unlikely any issue would be fixed. CAD models need to be peer reviewed if accuracy matters. Some producers do it, most probably don't.
  8. They could be drawings made by Furball also.
  9. I wouldn't be surprised if a factor of compressor/turbine stage design is avoiding some resonant vibration modes.
  10. Interesting but are you sure about that ? I have verified this for KH, HB/Trumpy and GWH who make the decal designs themselves but in the case of AMK it's Furball that did the decal design so things could have been different. In other words I think you may have done a Tamiya vs Furball overlay.
  11. Parcel dimensions restrictions perhaps ?
  12. Is it supposed to be about the MODEL also Terry ? I like to check if a plastic model or CAD model ends up as an accurate representation of a real aircraft. Take the KH 1/32 OV-10 discussion here... ... yup was there bought the T-shirt. I've built a Special Hobby Mirage F1 test shot. I've provided them some material, checked some CAD snapshots for the Mirage III/5 and Super-Mystère B2. Recently I've looked at a HB 1/32 A-26C test build photo and I wondered if the engine cowlings aren't off: diameter decreasing continually from rear to front while I believe the rear 2/3rds should be cylindrical. Some play(ed ?) Sudoku, I play the Seven Errors Game on physical and virtual models. Kinetic has asked me for feedback on CAD models just like DML did some years ago. Now there are numerous F-14 model kits around each with their pros and cons. Why should I keep my mouth shut ? Because my factual findings don't please a kit producer ? Should modelling forums turn into extensions of closed Facebook groups ?
  13. Several years ago it wasn't because AMK was a subcontractor for Kinetic and that Kinetic's project manager was hired by AMK. Nowadays I think it's related to the MMCT (Military Modelling Club Taiwan) that supports FMK & AMK and bashes Kinetic.
  14. Lets be pragmatic. What's the best turd: DML or Airfix ?
×
×
  • Create New...