Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Laurent

  1. The SUABs are often very vocal when stating they are Right while RC's are Wrong and that they should get a life. I believe there's an actual split between the SUABs and the RCs because their approach to scale modelling is different. The SUABs are more Miniaturists when RCs are more Modelists. A Miniaturist perceives scale modelling as some kind of art. He enjoys building kits, painting and weathering them but the subject doesn't really matter. It could be tractors, figurines. He'll buy scale modelling magazines to admire builds and improve his technics. The subject matter
  2. Some members of the ARC (your definition)'s crowd may end up being contributors to the development of model kits. The SUAB (Shut Up And Build) crowd will never be. Such discussions can be useful to the producer during the design phase, not so much when the tooling has been done. I wouldn't expect a reaction from AMK.
  3. Er the guy didn't do the CAD apparently. Reminder: https://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?/topic/38237-132-b-25j/&do=findComment&comment=367796
  4. The Mirage III/5 is like the MiG-21 or the A-4. It doesn't take a lot of shelf space once built and the number of marking options is huge so it's likely that a modeller would want to buy and build several of them. It won't happen if the retail price is too high. I expect the Modelsvit kit to be expensive as it seems to be a sophisticated kit. The HPM/PJ kit also isn't exactly cheap. Also of all 1/72 Mirage III/5s with a "Cyrano nose", I think the SH may end up to be the more accurate.
  5. Hey you stole Galfa's line ! 🙂
  6. "We" includes Chinese modellers. A KH MiG-25PD/PDS on Taobao is 52USD. Not quite cheap. It's true that retail price depends on demand but on other factors also (intent to undermine an exisiting Chinese competitor product, etc). Yes but apparently accuracy isn't always a requirement.
  7. Scale modeling business isn't a high profitability business. Once the retailer, the distributor and the subcontractors have taken their margin, not that much is left for the producer. Few companies can afford to have a research department and few can afford to send a pair of employees from China to some part of the world to collect material to work on a project. Or even pay some local consultants. It would eat a good chunk of the whole project's budget. That's why producers rely on subject enthusiasts I think. I also don't have a clue why a museum would refuse people scanning a WW2 aircra
  8. The Su-33 1.0 story has been discussed some time ago... I don't know anything on the story about the Su-33 2.0.
  9. Considerable net sum though ? What's left once the retail shop & distributors margins, subcontractors (toolshop, decal designer, printers) payments, wages have been deduced ? Enough to finance the tooling of next kit hopefully. If so the machine is still fuelled and the machine can keep on running. If not, it stops sooner than later. Is somebody in Macau, Shenzen or Honk Kong in a good position to research a Soviet aircraft ? I doubt it so the producer will have to try and find external contributors to the project. If those contributors have visibility on the project, if they don't ju
  10. '"Totally new model" I'd rather say. "Kit" implies plastic parts and so far we've seen CAD only.
  11. I bought the latest F-16 boxing (Polish D block 52+). There's some flash indeed but I don't seem to have short shot areas.
  12. I don't see better option. For instance the Pavla seat... ... has a stretched headbox as the Stencel variant used in the AV-8B but it isn't good for the AV-8A IMHO.
  13. I'm not 100% sure but I believe the Wingman Models German/Portugese Alpha Jet seats could do the job.
  14. https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234983899-148-grumman-f-14ab-d-tomcat-by-avantgarde-model-kits-3d-rendersschemesspruesbox-art-f-14d-release-summer-2018/&do=findComment&comment=3104419 https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234983899-148-grumman-f-14ab-d-tomcat-by-avantgarde-model-kits-3d-rendersschemesspruesbox-art-f-14d-release-summer-2018/&do=findComment&comment=3104422
  15. So do I but because it looks like... 🙂 I'd kill for an AZ version.
  16. I believe your request is technically impossible (numerous holes, part would be too thin to be injected). In fact I think there should be no opened spoilers option as the spoilers are only opened in flight or when the pilot tests the controls when taxying.
  17. The lengthening is barely visible but the added skinning (with the oblique edge on the sides) and curvature discontinuity at the bottom of the front fuselage is visible.
  18. Nope.... ejector seat changed for a stool 😉
  19. It's not the first time this question is raised. It happened with the Eduard Mirage IIIC also. I think it's related to reference material misinterpretation by the designer. If landing gear technical drawings were used it's likely that in these the gear isn't represented weighed but rather extended.
  20. I know someone who used to be a contributor on Dragon armour projects. There was active collaboration some year ago but I believe policy changed and not really in a positive way.
  21. The relationship between the producer's design team and the contributors should be bilateral. Contributors provides the reference material on which the CAD model is based on but in turn the design team should submit the CAD model to the contributors and ask them to review it. What puzzles me is how contributors accept to have their name associated to a certain project when the producer-contributor relationship is unilateral. It's like handing out the producer a blank cheque. Unacceptable to me.
  22. I agree. In fact this applies to any kit released by any producer. It wouldn't make a lot of sense to take the Sea Harrier FRS.1 as a reference of Tamiya's current productions quality.
  • Create New...