Petarvu Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Some more test shots, clear parts this time. https://www.facebook.com/avantgardemodelkits Meanwhile, at Trumpeters development offices... "Looks like MiG-31 to me." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
janman Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I just luuuv that pit! Wonderful details. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
erik_g Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 The cockpit canopy parts look great with those inside lining parts, but there will be a problem with their appearance as there will be an inside "glass" side part which will remain transparent, being also more noticeable as the transparencies are much thicker on the model than in real life. I wonder if for the MiG-31 it would have been better perhaps if these transparent parts were given as separate pieces which would then be glued to the regular plastic canopy frames. It would ease the painting and look more realistic; it would also be somewhat tricky to glue them, although painting the inside edges first and then using a bit of some CA glue on those painted edges might just work. Just a thought as IMHO it seems as a better option, especially now with the much more detailed cockpit canopies finally becoming available in kits. FWIW, I think the "inside glass part" won´t be noticeable, especially if you coat the non-transparent parts with black. I have no idea how thick the canopy of the Mig-31 is, but they are usually quite thick on high performance jets. The design of the canopy makes me believe that they are thicker than usual on the Mig-31, to cope with heating from air friction at high speeds. So the added thickness of the internal detail will only help to communicate this to the viewer. I think having the transparencies as separate parts is not such a good idea for a few reasons (some of them you already mentioned): 1. Fit issues, if the fit isn´t perfect it will not look as good. Difficult to putty and sand - doing so also negates the "easy to paint" argument for having separate transparancies in the first place. 2. Less easy to build. The risk of getting glue stains, ugly marks from sprue attachment points etc increases. 3. I don´t think masking the outside of the canopy is that hard. I usually add a piece of masking tape, burnish it down thoroughly, then cut along the frame using a sharp blade. Masking the inside is harder, since the canopy is often completely smooth inside. Having the inside separate makes things much easier. Anyway, I guess we´ll find out soon enough when the Mig-31 build threads swamp the forum :-) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I suppose the periscope on the rear canopy is for landing the aircraft from the rear seat. Are all Mig 31s equipped with flight controls in the rear seat or just a select few for conversion training, or is it perhaps a kit that can be moved from aircraft to aircraft? Nice work with the plastic, AMK. I am sure I will enjoy this kit immensely wen it arrives to my door sometime hopefully before Christmas. :-) They are all the same; all have basic controls for the rear seater to take control over the plane if needed. And i agree that separate clear windows would work poorly. AMK's solution is much better from the point of assembly and painting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MoFo Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 But IDENTICAL ???? Okay, sorry... for modelling purposes, 2/3 of the assembly is identical, one has brakes, the other doesn't. The tires *are* identical - they're interchangeable (also see: Tu-134, Su-15, Su-24 and the Fitter family). They also share the same "hub cap", though, as opposed to the Su-24 or Su-25 which use the same nose wheel tires and rim dimensions but a different "hub cap" pattern. So with a typical modern modelling breakdown where you've got different inserts to mix and match wheel details (think: Eduard MiG-21), if you added brakes to your MiG-31 nose wheels, and you've got Yak mains; if you added a simple axle to the Yak mains, and you've got Foxhound nose wheels. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChesshireCat Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Wow! Simply Wow again. I got to have this beast in my stash. AMK and Great Wall have flat moved to the very top of my list. If you put that kind of detail in the F14a; I'll be standing in line to get two of them! Seeing this (photos), I know now that you guys are the ones I want to do the F100 series. Somebody posted awhile ago that this kit should be nominated as kit of the year. Without a second thought; it is. Martin, be proud of your work as it shows. gary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Thanks for the kind comments everyone. We will keep going from strength to strength I believe. I am passionate about details and accuracy and so is the rest of the team. I know most of you are too and hence why we want to get the right name for accuracy and for looking after you guys as best as we can. Berkut's knowledge is incredible and invaluable. Thanks for posting Berkut - you are a gem! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Somebody posted awhile ago that this kit should be nominated as kit of the year. Without a second thought; it is. Martin, be proud of your work as it shows. gary Thanks Gary - I don't know whether there is such a thing as "kit of the year". Is there? You're most kind for mentioning it anyway. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
erik_g Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 (edited) Thanks Gary - I don't know whether there is such a thing as "kit of the year". Is there? The first thing that comes to mind is the Model Fan magazine "Modell des Jahres" award. It is handed out at the Nürnberger Spielwarenmesse I believe. I suppose there are other similar awards, if not we should create something like "the ARC award for best aircraft kit". Could be decided with a poll. Maybe it is something for the admins to look into. There have been a lot of nice kits released this year as well as previous year. But I´d vote for the Mig 31 because of its use of state of the art injection molding, innovative design, attention to detail and ease of build and last but not least the dedication and devotion to the customers by two way communication. Many model kits and firms do one or more of the above, few do them all. /E Edited November 5, 2015 by erik_g Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thegoodsgt Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Martin, This is slightly off topic but will mention it since we're talking about the cutting edge features of your MiG-31 kit. I’ve long believed that the next significant leap in scale model technology is the ability to produce thinner canopies that are more in scale than what we see in kits today. I can only begin to understand the challenges behind that, but the company that can do it will put themselves ahead off all the others. If AMK doesn't do it, Eduard will! Steven Brown Scale Model Soup Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Hi Steven, Thanks for the comment. Wait until you have the plastic in your hands :thumbs: I think you will approve. Hi Eric, Interesting post actually. I'm not sure whether something like a poll would work because it could be abused using different log on details etc. Just thinking ahead that this may cause issues. However, an independent adjudication might do it. I may speak with Mike Benolkin about this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Martin, do you guys use 3D laser scanning to capture the shape of the subject in question accurately? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 (edited) Thank you Martin for the kind words. It was great working with Sio and his team because they were so receptive of constructive critique. That helped a lot to iron out the bugs in the CAD's. I think all in all there were ~100 bugs ironed out... AKU-170's... ;)/> Edited November 5, 2015 by Berkut Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 (edited) I have no idea how thick the canopy of the Mig-31 is, but they are usually quite thick on high performance jets. The design of the canopy makes me believe that they are thicker than usual on the Mig-31, to cope with heating from air friction at high speeds. So the added thickness of the internal detail will only help to communicate this to the viewer.I think having the transparencies as separate parts is not such a good idea for a few reasons (some of them you already mentioned): 1. Fit issues, if the fit isn´t perfect it will not look as good. Difficult to putty and sand - doing so also negates the "easy to paint" argument for having separate transparancies in the first place. I've looked at some photos and it didn't seem rather thick hence why I posted (of course, having not sat in the real thing and being limited to small images on the Internet, it's only an impression). Regarding the fit, it would seem that AMK kits are rather precise so I thought with all the CAD and stuff, perhaps it's time to try something new with the canopies, rather than following the same (obsolete) approach as since always. If they fit well, perhaps they could be also made self-adhesive and pre-cut which would remove these other potential issues you mentioned in your post. I specifically mentioned the MiG-31 for this since it's canopy is not a one piece glass, but consists of several panels so it would be a good test example for separate glass panels. I'm not sure if the new molding technologies could also allow them to be made thinner or some other production method should be found (e.g. like vacform, 3D printing, etc.). I apologize for going OT, but seeing those lovely canopy frame parts (approaching best resin level detail and without their imperfections), I couldn't help feeling the standard injection made canopies are dragging them down. Edited November 5, 2015 by ijozic Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Martin, do you guys use 3D laser scanning to capture the shape of the subject in question accurately? Not yet it is extremely expensive. If the company does well who knows? Thank you Martin for the kind words. It was great working with Sio and his team because they were so receptive of constructive critique. That helped a lot to iron out the bugs in the CAD's. I think all in all there were ~100 bugs ironed out... I've looked at some photos and it didn't seem rather thick hence why I posted (of course, having not sat in the real thing and being limited to small images on the Internet, it's only an impression). Regarding the fit, it would seem that AMK kits are rather precise so I thought with all the CAD and stuff, perhaps it's time to try something new with the canopies, rather than following the same (obsolete) approach as since always. If they fit well, perhaps they could be also made self-adhesive and pre-cut which would remove these other potential issues you mentioned in your post. I specifically mentioned the MiG-31 for this since it's canopy is not a one piece glass, but consists of several panels so it would be a good test example for separate glass panels. I'm not sure if the new molding technologies could also allow them to be made thinner or some other production method should be found (e.g. like vacform, 3D printing, etc.). I apologize for going OT, but seeing those lovely canopy frame parts (approaching best resin level detail and without their imperfections), I couldn't help feeling the standard injection made canopies are dragging them down. Hopefully you will like what we have done when you see it in the flesh. To be honest, I always fix my canopies with white glue which is cleaned up very easily and dries glossy and transparent. If you prefer to use something else then you have plenty of under surface area to make a good bond without the need to go close to the clear section. It should be easy without too much care to be honest. Don't forget this is a BIG aircraft. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flankerman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Don't forget this is a BIG aircraft. No..... it's a MiG aircraft ....or do you have a cold ??? Sorry.... I'll get my coat. Ken Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 LOL. I have been dying to use that one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madcow Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 I usually only build Cold War stuff (and, don't ask me why, I prefer the mid 80s), but I might break that rule with this kit.. Or wait for an early MiG-31... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Janissary Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Do all operational MiG-31s wear all-grey camouflage colors? Looks to be the case with Russion as well Kazakh air forces. Are there variants to the colors and camo schemes beyond the one blue/grey scheme I have seen? MiG-25 has the green/brown scheme that I really like, wondering if the 31 has something similar. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 ^No. Just grey and 903's blue/grey scheme. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Not to hijack the thread, but... were there any camo MiG-25P/PD/PDS fighters? I've only seen camo on the recon versions and the BM. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
galfa Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Just tell me where can I order your Mig-31? I want it beneath my Christmas tree... In addition, how long we have to wait for your Mig-25 ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Petarvu Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Thank you Martin for the kind words. It was great working with Sio and his team because they were so receptive of constructive critique. That helped a lot to iron out the bugs in the CAD's. I think all in all there were ~100 bugs ironed out... AKU-170's... ;)/>/> Interesting stressed skin,probably lighting was appropriate and brought it out... P Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mingwin Posted November 6, 2015 Author Share Posted November 6, 2015 Not to hijack the thread, but... were there any camo MiG-25P/PD/PDS fighters? I've only seen camo on the recon versions and the BM. no, for the same reason you won't find any camouflaged MiG-31... it's been a long time since i've seen an interceptor with something else than a grey schemes... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Martin @ AMK Models Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 (edited) Just tell me where can I order your Mig-31? I want it beneath my Christmas tree... In addition, how long we have to wait for your Mig-25 ? Hey galfa, I don't know where you are. If you are in the US then a few places. I'm not sure if it the right or sporting thing to do, but since you asked so nicely; http://www.megahobby.com/mig31bmbsm148amkmodelkits.aspx is holding a preorder reduction in price. Caveat: There may be cheaper places to buy and other shops will be carrying our models. I am not affiliated to the shop at all. If this offends anyone then I will remove the link. If you own a shop or distributor and think my post is unfair, I will remove the link or add yours for fairness. Thats how we roll. Edited November 6, 2015 by Martin @ AMK Models Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.