Berkut

Members
  • Content count

    6,075
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Berkut

  • Rank
    Push the envelope,watch it bend.
  • Birthday 03/20/1991

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Norway, Kristiansand
  • Interests
    Writing down my stupid interests so whole world can see my stupid interests.

Recent Profile Visitors

20,640 profile views
  1. It will honestly be forever a mystery for me why in the world people are buying from Hobby Terra. They overcharge so much it isnt even funny. Case in point; http://hobbyterra.com/product/-vladimir-monomakh-russian-borey-class-submarine-zvezda-9058.html http://www.luckymodel.com/scale.aspx?item_no=ZVE-9058 (in Russia it is ~12USD, so Luckymodel price is completely fair) Same story with pretty much everything else. Maybe i should set up a business where people order for HT prices, i order it in other better places for cheaper and pocket the difference...
  2. Thanks for that, i will see, might attempt something on my build. Yup. 5 of those are not really what i would define as accuracy issues but detail issues. I have yet to see anything that would be a complete "deal breaker" on the HB kit too. In terms of accuracy it is absolute light years ahead of lets say their YF-23 which looks terrible. There are no major shape issues on the HB MiG-31 kit. So if it was the only MiG-31 in 48, it would have been completely fine unlike the mentioned YF-23 for example. On balance however, i feel AMK is far superior with its engineering, accuracy, level of overall detail, intake trunking and one piece missiles.
  3. I could cover your points in a lengthy post point-by-point, but frankly i dont think it will achieve anything and neither do i believe anyone would be interested in reading it. If you want to continue it or want clarification from my side on something feel free to PM me. With that being said, i most certainly do not appreciate the insinuations you are throwing around. I helped AMK because i wanted to, because i wanted an accurate MiG-31 kit, and whether you buy that kit or not, that did help many modelbuilders that bought the kit in form of it being more accurate. Regardless whether they realize it or not. I never asked for payment from them in any form. I got sent some kits from them as a thank you purely because Sio appreciated my help and was kind enough to do so. If i couldnt comment on a subject because i have at some point helped a modelcompany with it, i couldnt comment on most of the modern Soviet/Russian aircraft. And i will help whoever i want to regardless of what you say, i prefer doing that than sitting on hands and being proud of it. Here is the list of the known issues to me; 1; Intakes - the inside part G18/G19 in the 1/48 kit. The angle that is in the middle, is too horizontal, it should angle down more. 2; One panelline was removed on top of each wing was removed in the CAD but it was already tooled at that point. (Also on HB kit) 3; Raised panellines, weld lines on the real thing. 4; Weak wheel detail. 5; Angle of the airbrakes*. Was fixed in CAD, but not caught up by the tooling. Easy to "fix", just glue the piston more extended than its natural position. 6; Area under parachute housing is vertical. It should angle inwards. 7; 3 small bumps around the engines on top between the tails. 8; Pitot blades need adjustment. *Picture of the airbrakes.
  4. MiG-31 is available for pre-order on luckymodel for 35USD; http://www.luckymodel.com/scale.aspx?item_no=TP01680
  5. Considering the thrust of the engines they plan to use, it wont really be MiG-29 class. If it ever will be built, it will be more like Yak-130/L-15.
  6. The area overall looks quite weird. The doors are mostly at wrong angle (they should drop down more) and that creates wrongly dimensioned piston that holds them. Should be possible to correct the angle with some chopping of the piston, but i think the bottom half of the doors is still too short. And since they are too short, they had to cover the lost space somehow which is why the airbrakes looks twisted inboard on the outboard sides. The airbrakes should face the airstream directly, not at an angle. Hmm, inserting plastic is an interesting idea. Maybe insert pieces of plastic sheet, the go over with an x-acto blade to trim to a certain height? The blade can have something taped to it to give a certain height above the surface so that the plastic sheet sticking out is trimmed to an even height. But i dunno, the panellines are so thin i am not sure there is actually enough space to fit any plastic sheet or get it to grip well. Probably better off to pick up some tips from the armor guys as to how they make theirs (much larger) weld lines or use stretched sprue as suggested above by Erik. If you do anything re the weld lines, please document it, would be interesting to see. :)
  7. If you have time/can be bothered, fire them an email. They are open to critique.
  8. Um. That seems rather like an over reaction. I think i asked a fair question... You dont have to agree with me or anyone else, i asked purely what your opinion is.
  9. Serious question; if it is not about bumps, rivets, fences, panels (and i agree, 99% of it is not), in what way is HB MiG-31 more authentic representation of the real aircraft than the AMK kit? Because the way i see it, those 7 mistakes i pointed out (among with others, like the tail between the exhaust being wrong and possible nose issues) qualifies it as a weaker representation of the real aircraft than the AMK kit. Yes, both AMK and HB kits have their faults, but the number of them and the severity is quite different. Really, the largest accuracy issue with the AMK kit is the shape of underside of the parachute housing. But atleast the landing doors look correct... And on a more general note the the hinges on the nose for AMK kit could not be added due to technology limitations apparently. But i dont have any more details on that.
  10. Sigh. In what way am i biased, exactly? Because i worked on the AMK kit? Well, that is news. Looking forward to your next statement that the Earth is round and water is wet. Just because i worked on the AMK project in no way disproves the things i pointed out in just that frontal view. Those are mistakes in the HB kit unless you are able to prove otherwise. And you are clearly not able to do that. And i have listed AMK's mistakes previously (several times) and i am not trying to kill the conversation and try to "hide" anything about the AMK kit. That is just pure nonsense. I have pointed out errors with AMK kit, in public, that no one else previously pointed out. That is literally the opposite of "hiding" anything. I welcome critique of the AMK kit and i have in fact been keeping a list of the bugs i am aware of. I have for example learned about the small engine bumps that AMK missed because Gabor pointed it out. Your post is just noise. It contains no argument, it doesnt provide any new information to anyone. Gabor, Mofo, Janman etc, all of their posts contain information or some sort of critique. You on the other hand, as usual, is just trying to kill the conversation. At best you are acting like a heckler, you dont provide any arguments or provide any information. As to the last point, MiG-31 is not able to fly at Mach 3 for your information. Welded panellines or not. You trying to pass it off them being as some sort of radically important details is just silly. They are just a manufacturing solution to a problem, like anything else. Again, they are nice details in HB kit but that is pretty much it. Using your logic, i could claim MiG-31 couldnt fly at all just because HB kit doesnt have actuator on the wings, let alone Mach 3... Yeah, they should be angled with the wing and be 90 degrees vs the wing, not vs the ground. Should be possible to fix i think, but none the less, it is a bug.
  11. Mostly around the center fuselage; It is a nice little bonus on HB kit, but no deal breaker for sure. It is really super specific detail... Was mentioned to AMK during design, but they simply forgot to add it.
  12. "I am no expert but looks like B-52 to me." Seriously, looking good, hopefully B-52 experts are on top of it and suggests possible fixes to Modelcollect etc.
  13. True on the first part, agree on the second one. Yup. I just disagree it is some sort of groundbreaking major issue with AMK kit. Just a different focus, that is all. HB is more "accurate" than AMK kit in the same way Trumpeter 1/72 Su-27's are more accurate than Zvezda's Su-27's. Because the former contains some details that the later doesnt. Yet Zvezda's Su-27's are clearly more accurate. Just because HB MiG-31 has some bumps around the engines (that are inaccurate...) that AMK kit doesnt have doesnt make it more accurate. Considering the sheer amount of bugs AMK fixed during the development of the kit, i wouldn't be shocked if majority of them are found on the HB kit... There are a few accuracy mistakes on the AMK kit that has slipped through the design process that i have yet to see pointed by anyone. I think it is fair to say that is true to HB kit too, especially since it is new on the market, and i have yet to see a build of it personally. (please link if someone has) There are a bunch of highly suspect areas on HB kit like the nose. I mean by just using this picture; And comparing to this; I spot half a dozen of mistakes (in picture form here); 1; Fencers should be angled with the wing, not be completely vertical. 2; The flat antennas on the vertical stabs are just a mess. 3; The airbrakes are angled ?!?!? (shape issue with where they meet the fuselage it appears) 4; Shape of the landing gear doors are not even slightly wrong... They just completely off. 5; The "hooks" on the inside of the doors are wrong too. 6; Windshield front window is not quite there, but that is a pass since it overall looks completely fine. 7; No actuator details on the wings whatsoever. (yes, not just on this graphic, none found in the instructions either) See the whole instruction here. And all this just from the front view without breaking a sweat. Some of the issues listed above were issues on the early AMK CAD's but the difference is that AMK fixed them all or did not have them to start with. HB did not fix them and introduced some new ones. I guess i find the mess of landing gear doors and airbrakes to be a bigger issue than 3 bumps around the engines that are barely seen on the aircraft and can easily be added, but that is just me...
  14. And even with all that, the vast majority of modelbuilders will still build either; a - BM/BSM b - Russian Air Force frame ...and not the super specific early soviet under 6 years lasting vanilla MiG-31's. How many soviet era AMK MiG-31B/BS builds have you seen? That wont be changing much over the time, and neither will it with HB one. Because the markings and references are for the options a+b as above. So my point stands. It is a niche thing and peanuts in the bigger picture. With all that being said, i would be curious to see whether the early exhaust fit on AMK kit somehow... You know, for science.
  15. The early exhaust were quite short lived and for 99,99999999999% of the options and people, they just simply dont matter as the early exhausts got switched to the later ones anyway. So no, you dont "need" HB kit to build Soviet-era MiG-31. MiG-31B is Soviet era, so is MiG-31BS. Building MiG-31 ("Izd.01") from AMK B/BS kit is uber easy. Heck, even if one builds that boxing purely OOB with Soviet era markings it can easily be passed for Izd.01 (without refuel probe) or MiG-31DZ (with refuel probe). There are something like dozen people world wide that would be able to tell the difference... But if one wants to build a true Izd.01 or DZ, and a 5 min of conversion doesn't kill one, one has basically has to remove the double raised sections around R-33's on the belly and add "odd rods" on the nose. Without getting much more into nitty gritty, that is pretty much it. Hardly a monumental task.