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

shion

Members
  • Content Count

    1,146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About shion

  • Rank
    Full Blown Model Geek

Recent Profile Visitors

8,656 profile views
  1. It's a visor for the side-looking camera pods Japanese RF-4EJ used. It's fixed on the canopy frame, there are some photos of this equipment in the model art Profile about the F-4 Phantom.
  2. I doubt these are CAD renders. First because there look like the same drawings we saw years ago , I mean these ones: Then, because they look a lot like vector drawings made from Illustrator or Corel draw. Third because they're lacking a lot of 2nd order details. Fourth some lines don't correspond neither other CAD renders we saw either the kit.
  3. One of those 46 stepped up recently elsewhere, pointing the fact he's still got no kit and no news, despite having contributed to a preorder to help a company, whereas some what he called "internet influencers" already got a kit for free. Eventhough his claim and anger were justifiable, instead of having info or clarification by the manufacturer, he rapidly became a target of personnal attacks (of the same kind we saw here).
  4. But in this case, when he's coming to this forum willingly to accuse individuals of working for competitors, why this kind of accusations and posts are tolerated?
  5. still the same old song. Beaver Corp booth at the actual All-Japan Show: Source:
  6. I'm just following the narrative. When/since first pics of these builds were released and some issues were perceived, narrative became "I don't see it"/"look, it matches Daco drawings" (in fact it definetly didn't)/look," it matches Tamiya kit (in fact it definetly didn't)". So there are not definitive pics, with definitive pics, you just have to post them and it definitely ends discussion. "This or that dimension is wrong", boom, pic of a measurement with a calliper, end of discussion. "This or that part is missing or is wrong", boom, pic of the area on the kit with a comparative pic of the real a/c, end of discussion. That's pretty much what Eduard do with every major release, an example here:https://www.facebook.com/pg/EduardCompany/photos/?tab=album&album_id=2760365137311749 It's obvious, if you master your subject, you can easily present and explain why you put this or that here, make this or that choice. The best example I remember is a pretty complete feedback Haneto made about the first GWH Su-35. I think it is one of the best advertisement I ever see about a kit, same level Tamiya post-project conferences. So you have this kind of mastering and expertise at one side and at the other, people explaining if the slide molds aren't aligned, "you just have to put some surfacer and rescribe it, otherwise you don't deserve to build the kit".
  7. It's just not a perennial way to promote and sell a kit. Like Tapchan says earlier "plastic needs no defender, bc quality defends itself". He's 100% right about these one. Normally, manufacturers just need to show pictures of their kit to sell thousands (see what happens with the Eduard P-51 first release at the Nats) Here, we are before a pretty new paradigm: a manufacturer who manifestly didn't and still doesn't want to show the kit (why? that's the question) , makes most of his promotion through promises/talks (not concret matters, no definitive plastic, no definitive pics), and restrains information the more it can (why? that's the question too). This does not give a good feeling about what will happen next. And contrary to the narrative some people are trying to infuse here, the way the discussion works on this specific topic on ARC, is not endemic. You can found the exact same way of discussing on other boards and social networks, as soon people talks about this kit and these brand in general. Few weeks ago, I made a reference here about a discussion I saw on Britmodeller, where concret proofs about the canopy suddenly disappeared. There was previously on the same topic a discussion about the same subject you talked about ironically in your previous post. And guess what? Nuked too. And it seems there is the very same "mood" in the famous AMK private fan page on FB. So it's not a surprise to see people here attacking others people because the formers have the gal to see something obvious or perceptible. There are different manners to deal with a bad news, some people prefer attack others, their choice.
  8. I think you didn't realize the build here was just primed with surfacer. So, no, if after some coats of surfacer, panel lines (aligned or not) stand out like this, they will stand out too with normal paint (which is airbrushed with thinner coats), and worse they could stand out more (if the builder like panel washs).
  9. Never notice them before, and never saw them on the real a/c. Placement is strange for a reinforcement plate and geometry and placement is strange for antenna. It's a good question to ask to GW8345.
  10. Talking here recently about slide mold misalignement. Another example:
  11. Just follow earlier today a interesting discussion about the kit on britmodeller, someone showed both Tamiya and AMK kit side profiles against Grumman drawings. Sadly this part of the thread vanished (not the first time).
  12. Here it is. You can find and see it here too: Same locations, other side.
  13. The step is fixable. If you look closely, both parts of the slide-mold arenĀ“t aligned axially (look at the canopy rib), and this is more problematic to fix.
  14. shion

    GBU-49?

    RCAF Hornets use it in combat. French SEM too. Swedish Gripen. German Eurofighters.
  15. In the last issue of Airfix Model World (oct 2019), it is said "GWH due for release their 1/48 F-14D later this year".
×
×
  • Create New...