1:32 Jajuar

[JasonB]

3. unnecessary extra detail - it looks too late for that. I personally like to build with panels and engines closed which I've heard the same from many modelers here.

I too can do without things like complete engines and open panels. However, I think there are probably as many folks that like all the available open panels and internal detail as don't. I wouldn't presume that my personal preference either way is that of the majority. In cases like that, they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Usually its easier to glue a panel shut than it is to cut one open, though I do understand your thoughts on the subject and are of the same thinking.

I never heard too many people complain about Tamiya's complete engine in their 1/32 F-16 kit as being unnecessary and adding to the bottom line cost, though it surely did. I can recall the raves about how nice it was. It can only be displayed out of the aircraft, there was no provision made for it to be displayed seperately and have the kit buttoned up.

[song]

em ...

To make everybody pleasure is difficult, becuse everyone in the hobby wants something different... i will consider to close engine door or not use prudence..

and the price i can`t do more for yours. i`m just a employee ,sorry, i`m so powerless to do this..

whatever,while i come here one week, i have been get someone help , they send me more info about jaguar project, ARC is a good theater, kinds of different issue will make the model more perfect, that`s i need ,thank you very much to you all...

regard.

Edited November 14, 2009 by song

[The_Animal]

Mr. Song,

I would have to say that I am extremely impressed by the detail in the Jaguar in 1/32nd. And it is rare to even see any company take a step in approaching the modeler to find feedback as you have done...(as a Trumpeter employee), so my hat is off to you. In this forum you will find many dedicated modelers of varying skill from the new modeler to the vastly experienced.

I would like to take the time to welcome you to A.R.C. and thank you for joining and providing us with some "sneak"-peeks at the newest Trumpeter offering.

Animal

[Huey Gunner]

Mr. Song,

I would have to say that I am extremely impressed by the detail in the Jaguar in 1/32nd. And it is rare to even see any company take a step in approaching the modeler to find feedback as you have done...(as a Trumpeter employee), so my hat is off to you. In this forum you will find many dedicated modelers of varying skill from the new modeler to the vastly experienced.

I would like to take the time to welcome you to A.R.C. and thank you for joining and providing us with some "sneak"-peeks at the newest Trumpeter offering.

Animal

Ha-rumph!!

[richter111]

I speak for myself when I say that I am excited to have someone specifically from Trumpeter on these boards. I voiced my hopes and aspirations, merely as having someone that will hear me, and the hopes of others.

Never was offense meant, and hopefully none was taken.

[tomastewart]

Mr Song,

Thank you for this look at the Jaguar. I am so delighted Trumpeter are finally doing this kit. Personally,

I love all the open panels! Two engines is just fine by me. Give us more!

Tom

Edited November 14, 2009 by tomastewart

[OldGuy]

Mr Song,

Thank you for this look at the Jaguar. I am so delighted Trumpeter are finally doing this kit. Personally,

I love all the open panels! Two engines is just fine by me. Give us more!

Tom

What he said.

Tommy

[Zactoman]

Very nice work Song

Is this a computer made model (sterio lithography; SLA; rapid prototype) from a CAD model or a hand made model?

[Eric F]

Song - this looks very good so far. A few small problem areas though:

Hi Song,

First of all, thank you very much for designing these Jaguar. A lot of french modelers have been waiting for long to have a new and correct Jaguar.

This first result is realy good compared to the last 1/48 models. Congratulations Song!

For my constructive remarks I use DamienB post to illustrate my coments:

1- I think about the cockpit where, in my opinion, the dimension between aft bulkhead and windsheald seems to be too short. It appears on the single seat master and on twin seat aft cockpit. As a result, canon fairing also seems to be too short. Solution should be perhaps to increase fuselage length by few millimeters at that place.

2- Windsheald seems to be too flat on single seat compared to the twin seat where they have a good shape

3- Regarding belly tanks, forward section has to be larger compared to aft one.

4- To help you to correct the upper side of air intakes, it seems that fuselage upper side (just aft air intake) is little bit too rounded

5- Additionnal air intake are closed (spring loadded to close position) when engine is not running.

Finally these are hereafter some propositions for french Jaguar weapons.

- Barax, Barracuda and Phimat CME

- ATLIS lazer Pod

- AS 30 missile

- AS 37 anti radar missile

- Bombs: SAMP 250 kg

- BAT 120

- Magic II missile

- GBU 12

Once again congratulations Song for the whole job you 've done so far. I hope my remaks will help you.

Kind regards

Eric

[Kriegsketten]

Just a note: the panel under the missing forward probe looks too close to the two smaller panels to the rear of it. And the panel itself should be almost in-line with the two rear panels. Which brings to the question is the nose too short? Or are the two rear panels (and everything else) too forward? I think a good side view is needed for a much better comparison.

Cheers,

Lawrence

Edited November 18, 2009 by Kriegsketten

[Kriegsketten]

I've found one good image to compare - indeed the nose is shorter than it should be (quite prominent) - all the panels are misplaced because of this Also the glass area on the nose cone (under the titot tube) should be more slanted / angled - not 89/90 degrees angle.

The upper slope of the nose cone just before the long titot tube is too pronounced also - it should be sleeker and a straighter slope.

I can't post the image here, pm me so I can e-mail you the image of comparisons. It will help you get the shape proper.

Cheers.

Lawrence

[Zactoman]

Is this a computer made model (sterio lithography; SLA; rapid prototype) from a CAD model or a hand made model?

Solid?

Hollow?

Vacuumformed?

Hand-carved from a block of wood?

CNC?

[gregair]

Thats gonna be an awsome "Cat" looking forward to this one, then a 1/32 Mirage F1..........please..sigh!

[Laurent]

Just a reminder to insist on the fact that the ejector seats aren't the same between the RAF and the AdA Jaguars. I won't buy the kits as 1/32 is too big for me.

Me want an AMX injection kit. Any scale.

Laurent, traitor to the MiG cause

Edited November 22, 2009 by Laurent

[song]

Just a reminder to insist on the fact that the ejector seats aren't the same between the RAF and the AdA Jaguars. I won't buy the kits as 1/32 is too big for me.

Me want an AMX injection kit. Any scale.

Laurent, traitor to the MiG cause

Hi Laurent

Good morning, you said just eject-seat problem make you will not buy Jaguar. that`s a real reason?

I know my work has many fault, so i sent the pictrues in here for yours comment,but not for yourself hobby.

Finally, i can promise you, your like AMX big scale will not come true, because i don`t like it, and how many people like this plane?

Edited November 23, 2009 by song

[gregair]

Hi Song,

I think you missunderstood Laurent, what he said was quote " I won't buy the kits as 1/32 is too big for me", so he is only saying that the scale is to big for him and he does not build 1/32 scale aircraft.

I would like to thank you for posting those photos of your fantastic looking Jaguars, well done, I cannot wait to get one myself.

Do you know if a 1/32 scale Mirage F1 will be made in the near future? If its anything like your Jaguar I am sure a lot of people would buy them.

[song]

Hi Song,

I think you missunderstood Laurent, what he said was quote " I won't buy the kits as 1/32 is too big for me", so he is only saying that the scale is to big for him and he does not build 1/32 scale aircraft.

I would like to thank you for posting those photos of your fantastic looking Jaguars, well done, I cannot wait to get one myself.

Do you know if a 1/32 scale Mirage F1 will be made in the near future? If its anything like your Jaguar I am sure a lot of people would buy them.

OK, i`m miss the real mind.

[Zactoman]

Very nice work Song

Is this a computer made model (sterio lithography; SLA; rapid prototype) from a CAD model or a hand made model?

Solid?

Hollow?

Vacuumformed?

Hand-carved from a block of wood?

CNC?

Carved from a block of soap?

paper-mâché?

Toothpicks and wood glue?

I'm just curious about the process of how a big company like Trumpeter creates their kits.

[song]

Carved from a block of soap?

paper-mâché?

Toothpicks and wood glue?

I'm just curious about the process of how a big company like Trumpeter creates their kits.

A special wood and resin.

[GEH737]

As the owner of multiple Trumpeter kits in 1/32, I'd like to make the following request.

Make shape accuracy the number one priority. Nose profile, intakes, canopy, wing and tail profile / outline.

Extras - like separate engines, flaps are nice - but, if the shape is off or wrong, the rest really doesn't matter.

It is easy to add detail, but very hard to fix profile or shape issues.

Thank you for posting the Jaguar photos - I'd like to get a RAF "Desert Storm" version if it was released.

Regards,

Hitch

[dylan]

As the owner of multiple Trumpeter kits in 1/32, I'd like to make the following request.

Make shape accuracy the number one priority. Nose profile, intakes, canopy, wing and tail profile / outline.

Extras - like separate engines, flaps are nice - but, if the shape is off or wrong, the rest really doesn't matter.

It is easy to add detail, but very hard to fix profile or shape issues.

Thank you for posting the Jaguar photos - I'd like to get a RAF "Desert Storm" version if it was released.

Regards,

Hitch

well said Hitch, i couldnt agree more

[Laurent]

As the owner of multiple Trumpeter kits in 1/32, I'd like to make the following request.

Make shape accuracy the number one priority. Nose profile, intakes, canopy, wing and tail profile / outline.

Extras - like separate engines, flaps are nice - but, if the shape is off or wrong, the rest really doesn't matter.

It is easy to add detail, but very hard to fix profile or shape issues.

Thank you for posting the Jaguar photos - I'd like to get a RAF "Desert Storm" version if it was released.

Amen ! It seems like Trumpeter considers (or considered ?) that their kits are bought by kids that don't really care about shape accuracy. But kids cannot afford Trumpeter kits now, only adult modellers . Shape accuracy is often important to them so yes I'd say focus on accuracy first then on details. Perhaps Song could say this the Marketing Department ?

Edited November 23, 2009 by Laurent

[song]

Marketing Department can`t adjudge AMX go to dead. :

[Andre]

Marketing Department can`t adjudge AMX go to dead. : :lol:

Pity, I'd personally would like an injected styrene AMX/AMX-T in 1/72nd. But I do agree it is a rather obscure subject.

Come on Italeri, you know you want to do one. ;-)

Cheers,

Andre

[cag_200]

FAF Jaguar E do also have the franch style gunport, diffrent from the RAF versions.

Looking at these great samples, I noticed that the Ecole Jaguar with the airrefeulling probe (which is typ. french) but with incorrect style gunports, this one carries an english gunport(s)/vent(s).

French jaguars A/E both carry 2 aden 30 mm guns.

Both have typical French gunports, diffrent from the UK ones.

Gosh what a model....a French Jaguar E 1/32...

Edited January 15, 2010 by cag_200