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

What is wrong with AMT/Italeri's 1/72 B-52 G & H offerings?

Recommended Posts

On 3/8/2015 at 7:25 PM, Jennings said:

No, the AMT kit doesn't represent any configuration you would ever see a real B-52 in. It's just plain wrong. It was a very poorly researched, poorly designed, and poorly executed kit.

 

How is that possible? One of the finest researchers ever in the course of modeling helped AMT/Ertl in the development of that kit. That's just a ludicrous statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, steel_tiger1 said:

 

How is that possible? One of the finest researchers ever in the course of modeling helped AMT/Ertl in the development of that kit. That's just a ludicrous statement.

And who might that be? :hmmm: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well whatever he did they didnt listen.

Jennings got it in one.

The kit airframes have multiple errors with for instance reinforcement plates on aircraft whichbdidnt have them in that timeframe, numerous incorrect vents, incorrect nose profile, incorrect wing dihedral except for in flight, the H engines are woefully undersized as are everyones except Lone Stars.

i could go on for an A4 page with the errors. 

Some people would not care about but things like the wings and engines are basics that are pretty unforgivable.

oh the plastic they used sucks and the engineering is crappy as well.

I wouldnt want my name associated with this kit...

Edited by dehowie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I built one 'H' and one 'G' years ago for gifts around when they first came out (mid-90's IIRC). I still shudder when I think about it. I won't ever touch another of these AMT BUFFS or any of the reboxings. As others have posted the problems, inaccuracies, and flat out hassles with the kit are numerous. I attribute my hair loss to the two I built...LOL!

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is Big Al Griffith ???

 

or am I missing a joke....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why only the former proprietor of the company called Amtech models. Consulted for Ertl for years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2017 at 1:16 PM, steel_tiger1 said:

Well Big Al Griffith of course. Silly you would even have to ask.

KZYERVJ.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Methinks the new ModelCollect B-52G is also not terribly accurate as well!  So we must pick our poison wisely!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/25/2015 at 6:49 PM, MoFo said:

It's a bit of a nit, and I know the common wisdom is that the wing angle on the kit is wrong because it's "in flight" but... that's completely false. It's not in-flight, AMT just flat out blew the wing angle. The wing tips might be at the correct height for an in-flight aircraft, but AMT just pivoted the entire wing to get them there, which is absolutely, 100% wrong.

Wings don't pivot at the root. They flex along their lengths. Any modeller who's built a plane with long, floppy wings knows this; it's why you glue rods inside the length of a wing so it doesn't droop, rather than just bulking up the wing root seam.

THIS is how B-52wings flex in-flight:

061127-F-1234S-003.jpg

(sorry. it's been a pet peeve for a while)

 

I agree there. Thats why you have to follow the old FSM fix that drops the wings at the root thus changing the angle of the wing from there down...
There was a company (of dubious memory) that made a wing box fix for it that takes that problem away completely. I have several of them, in addition to a half dozen H engine sets etc etc...

Once you fix the engines and the wings the H model comes out ok. The G model has the wing problem too but the engines were ok from memory.

 

The kit is devoid of any real detail by todays CAD standards of course but with some modelling effort it makes a nice model, but without the engine fix the H model is a write off... Those kit engines and just to small, they change the look to the point it looks like it has different engines fitted.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know guys....I'm not sure why the manufacturers can't get the Buff right. But to be honest....I'm not really that unhappy with the AMT and Italeri offerings.  I've got 5 in the stash. lol....

ESPECIALLY after this disappointment with MC.
Yeah....I know there's serious fit issues and inaccuracies....but if you model it right it can build up to a really great looking model. And....most people don't even notice the inaccuracies that makes us bats--- crazy.
My thing is that at least the AMT offering has:

- Engraved panel lines

- Straklets on the G

- 'Decent' engines on the G. Love the bulge...

- Full load of ALCM's WITH decals....

- In all honesty....the wing problem is not that hard to fix. Yeah...it's not perfect even after the fix. But it looks mean and loaded for bear....especially if you drop the flaps.

 

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new H from Modelcollect fixes pretty much all the errors on the G and looks like its going to finally be a decent Buff out of box.

Check out the MC topic going...it has the corrections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...