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

niart17

Members
  • Content Count

    4,239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About niart17

  • Rank
    Life Member (Mon-Key Handler)

Recent Profile Visitors

20,428 profile views
  1. lol. oK. But I think it's a legitimate question.
  2. I agree the builds are looking good and the kit certainly looks nice....but I thought there wasn't supposed to be criticism until the kits were actually being built and could be analysed. Now no one is supposed to critique the kit at all? I'm so confused.
  3. I can't recall which markings actually came with the kit. I used Cam Models Pukin' Dogs markings on mine. Always loved those paint schemes.
  4. Yup. Again, some really nice things. I kind of like the wheel, hub, brake assembly. That looks like a nice way of breaking it down for painting. And the canopy does look good so far. As for shape, it likely won't stop me from buying. But I certainly understand those that are concerned with it. but I mean afterall , I was one that was happy with the 1/32 scale Revell kit, obviously my shape criteria isn't the same as others.
  5. Perhaps it seems worse, but I have to ask, is it really? I mean, yes there's a lot of mess going around...But overall I think things aren't nearly as bad as some would like to believe. It seems like there's a group, maybe it's generational or something, but there is a group in search of a disaster. They are very vocal and they seem to be looking for their "defining moment". Their version of the 60's. But if you examine it at it's core, in my opinion it's simply not there. Not saying there aren't problems. But overall, is it really that bad? I think the medicine of time has helped people forget how bad things did actually get there right after 9-11. And also how great things also shined. As you said, it was a Pearl Harbor moment that helped to unite more than just our country. It also started a chain of events that got really bad. I simply don't feel we are anywhere near that level these days. I see a very positive outlook. A lot of challenges, yes. But an optimistic future.
  6. Touche'. Hope you didn't take my post as trivializing your job. And BTW, you do a great job at your job. I suspect even without the red crayons... LOL
  7. Just to point out, you are talking to a bunch of grown men (mostly) on a model building forum. I think the term "should get some life" could pretty much apply to every topic on this site. Just sayin'... none of this is THAT important.
  8. Whoa whoa...comon guys, no need for that. This thread has enough drama without having to add "Your country's conceded" comments and "shove it responses". I too felt like dehowie was a bit rude with his comment about Americans, but whatever. No need to escalate it beyond an "eye roll" or something in my opinion. We'll NEVER get to 300 if it gets shut down because of personal attacks. And I for one am shooting to get those 2 free kits, warts and all. LOL Bill
  9. Just a reminder of the date and a shout out thanks to all that serve, be it any branches of Military or all First Responders. Bill
  10. http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/302382-148-f-4-phantom-best-kits/page/4/ Here is a good example of how these conversations COULD go. The thread linked above has just as much, if not more specific and varied talk back and forth about shape issues of various kits. There are even templates cut out and held up on models showing very minute details. And the difference is no one seemed to get bent out of shape and jump on those presenting their findings. That I can see, there wasn't much "shut-up and build it" or "who cares?" kinds of posts. Just simply some dedicated modelers trying to find the best information they could. Isn't that what the forums are for?
  11. With all due respect I disagree. There may be a few here that have a "crusade" against AMK, and I can't speak for them. But not everyone here has some personal vendetta or anything at all but many (most) are simply critiquing a product or a proposed product, which by the way they ASKED and WELCOMED help with in the beginning until they didn't like the advice and suggestions they were getting. And further more, I suggest maybe you look at some similar threads about some Trumpeter kits, ANY of the P-51 kits and more recently some of the F-4U Corsair and F-4 Phantom models that came out. I'm sure there are others out there too. In those you will find very similar posts with red-line drawings and very honest and sometimes brutal critiques. Some of them have gotten so heated people were banned form the site. And also in those threads you'll see some of the same defenders saying the same "just shut up and be happy we have a new kit and build it" message as they have in this one. This is not a new argument at all. There are MANY MANY threads about the "battle" between "rivet counters" vs "good 'nuffs" and there will always be those conversations. If anything, the attack has been the other way, not the way you've suggested. Yes, there has been some ugly comments about the model and even AMK itself. Most of those toward the company were frustrated customers that placed pre-orders and felt slighted. That kind of response is somewhat expected in this case and I would venture to say has a lot to do with this particular thread being as long and potentially volatile as it is. But it's not a "crusade" against this kit or company that's bringing about the red line drawings. It's simply the assessment of what's been presented. Bill
  12. Here was one site that came up from a search that seems like it might have some insight for your case. https://www.injuryclaimcoach.com/property-damage-claims.html I do know that in my case when we lost all of our belongings due to Hurricane Ike, the value of built models vs un-built was the same. The way the adjuster explained it to me was that in order to recover any value of workmanship I would have had to prove that I was in the business of selling built models and have an on-record cost and proof that it would be lost revenue from having lost the models. They told me that even if I sold built models, the ones that were personally built for myself wouldn't qualify unless I had them listed as a for-sale item in inventory. In our case none of that mattered since we'd totally maxed out our full coverage amount for personal items anyway. But I did ask the question for curiosity sake. Keep in mind, the information he gave me may be different from company to company and even state to state depending on governing laws. But unfortunately, I don't think you can recover the value of building a model, only the fair market or replacement cost of the kit in it's un-built state. I HOPE I am wrong so if anyone has different information please chime in and give Lucas some good news! Good luck, Bill
  13. Good deal Terry, thanks for posting those comparison photos! But I THINK (someone correct me if I'm wrong) but the shape behind the bladders is also what's being discussed. It appears that the structure immediately above the tail plain pivot point is too thick, or at least has too much of an angle in it's transition to the side. So it may not be too "wide of a hip" but rather too thick. I will say though with the flatter bladder part, that does help make it look a little more correct to my eyes. I just wish that people could understand that this is simply an academic conversation about shapes. It's not a slam against a company or any of the builders that are working on the models. And as many have said, there are no perfect models. If things such as exact shapes and/or details don't concern someone, they don't have to use ANY of the information in the thread about shapes and simply enjoy their build when they get the model. I think some of the work being done by the guys that have it already is REALLY REALLY good. I think it's a beautiful model. And to slightly misquote the movie Amadeus "it's a beautiful model, a first rate effort. And there is simply too much tail. Just remove a bit and it will be perfect"😀 But I find these conversations about really really detailed shape analysis etc...extremely interesting and helpful. And it's also encouraging that people like Zactoman are taking notes. That may mean that there could correction kits on the horizon that would please the "rivet counters" and possibly help AMK sell even MORE kits that might not have been sold before. So maybe think about that when commenting everyone. Bill
  14. Something that looks odd to me is what I'd call a "thumb pinch" just fore of the tail surface pivot that just looks too pronounced. It's possible that's just a surface reflection that makes it look too bold in that last pic, but in most of the other shots it looks like there's a concave surface that's over done. Not sure if I'm explaining that very well. Edit, I believe what I'm seeing is a result of what Zacto is saying (If I understand his post) the angle is too steep so in order to get the transition to the flattened side panel, they had to make a curved dip. It looks more like a smooth transition on the pics of the real plane. That also explains why the vent up close to the tails isn't in the right projected plane. it's angled too much as well. On the real plane it's more "on top" of the surface.
×
×
  • Create New...