Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Doppelgänger said:

 

In all honesty, I think that would be such a waste of resources when actually IAGeezer can always come here and read it online the times he wishes to.

 

Whoosh.

 

3 hours ago, kaz said:

 

Uhh... from the pictures normal users and AMK reps have posted on this board? Yes.

 

And they show what, exactly?

 

1 hour ago, GunsightOne said:

I know little about AMK, but it's very possible that there was a mistake somewhere between the CAD files and the tooling of the dies.

 

This is fundamentally wrong. There is no "in between". CAD's is tooling, tooling is CAD's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Berkut is right,,,,,,to a degree.

 

We have seen CAD renders, and injected parts,,,,,but, if they differ in any area, that merely means that we have seen some CADs and some parts. Obviously,  we didn't see the final CAD used to make the mold that made those parts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Berkut said:

There is no "in between". CAD's is tooling, tooling is CAD's.

I'm no industrial engineer but I believe it's wrong. A CNC machine cannot work with a CAD object file. This file is fed to a CAM software that spurts out a file that describes the tools to be used, the paths and angles the tool is to follow, etc. This later file can be fed to the CNC machine to cut the EDM electrode. CAD model renders tell you about the accuracy and the amount of details of an future kit, not about the engineering quality (fit, surface details like panel lines).

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Laurent said:

I'm no industrial engineer but I believe it's wrong. A CNC machine cannot work with a CAD object file. This file is fed to a CAM software that spurts out a file that describes the tools to be used, the paths and angles the tool is to follow, etc. This later file can be fed to the CNC machine to cut the EDM electrode. CAD model renders tell you about the accuracy and the amount of details of an future kit, not about the engineering quality (fit, surface details like panel lines).

 

What you're talking about is called GCode. it is used to instruct a CNC machine how to cut the tooling. A GCode is created from a CAD file using a CAM software. Given AMK's CAD model and the plastic we saw, if there is really that much discrepancy between the two, it must be a major human intervention and mistake somewhere. I cannot begin to imagine a CAM software, even with all the manual tweaking that is necessary, will make that significant of a mistake. 

 

I am beginning to believe something is wrong in that region based on AMK's silence. If it was our misinterpretation, you'd think they would've cleared the air right away, given how engaged they want to be seen with the public.

 

That said, regardless of what is going on, if I were them, I'd:

(1) Halt all PR stuff,  

(2) Review what they have with a few Tomcat experts and make changes as necessary,

(3) Make the kit and get it ready for shipment,

(4) Come back to social media and announce the damn thing only after then.

 

Otherwise, this is turning into a case study of how not to manage an engineering project.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few more thoughts.  The pics are from Berkut's earlier post. One thing to keep in mind is that at least in the first two pics below, the renders seem to have been in "Orthographic" mode (I am unsure about the third pic). Orthographic projection is great for measuring distances but can be deceptive to the human eye (see the illustration at the bottom). In particular, it tends to indirectly attenuate information closer to the camera as it preserves (rather than diminishing) the true size of the data far from the camera.

 

All this is to say that I am now entertaining the possibility that the CAD and the plastic are in fact consistent and there is something wrong in that area (both CAD and plastic). If the first two pics were in perspective mode, the area of interest would be more pronounced, making it closer to what we see in the plastic pic, which does look odd.

 

Can't remember seeing other CAD renders or plastic shots, so I'm open to the possibility a previously posted pic will invalidate my reasoning.

 

I focus on this perspective vs ortho also because when they posted their box art, the ortho projection was what I caught immediately (IIRC) that gave it a very odd look. 

 

14500433_676630325835131_394264511267101

 

18209280_793667364131426_790520035829088

 

15110848_707029502795213_619388493591908

 

projectionsexample.png

Edited by Janissary
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wish someone...anyone...from AMK would chime in here either way and hopefully do some damage control as there has been a lot written here since we've last heard from them. They are the only ones who can truly answer the questions and address the concerns posted over the last many pages yet they've been completely  silent.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Don said:

I just wish someone...anyone...from AMK would chime in here either way and hopefully do some damage control as there has been a lot written here since we've last heard from them. They are the only ones who can truly answer the questions and address the concerns posted over the last many pages yet they've been completely  silent.

 

 

That AMK's representatives have remained silent gives me probable cause to think that I did, in fact, point-out a flaw. Had it been just a perspective thing, or old tooling, someone on their end would have corrected me. But you have to look at it realistically from their end, too: if there's clearly a shape error and you deny it, you piss-off the fans by blatantly denying what people can see with their own eyes. If you admit the fault, people lose interest in the kit. The best damage-control you can do in their position is remain silent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Janissary said:

In particular, it tends to indirectly attenuate information closer to the camera as it preserves (rather than diminishing) the true size of the data far from the camera.

 

I was wondering why the CAD pics looked so strange. I was beginning to question my eyes. The parts that are supposed to be in the distance seem to have no size difference than those close to the viewer. Thanks Janissary!

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mstor said:

 

I was wondering why the CAD pics looked so strange. I was beginning to question my eyes. The parts that are supposed to be in the distance seem to have no size difference than those close to the viewer. Thanks Janissary!

 

Yes, that's what I think is going on. In the CAD renders, you can actually see how the front of the Tomcat remains large, while the engines look weirdly small. If it was perspective projection (more natural to the eyes), the rear of the airplane would look bigger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Sabre Freak said:

So when is the last time they posted?

 

Last post on FB was 9/11

 

Actually, they also posted the pic of all the sprues on 9/24. Not that it makes much difference. Silence since. Don't know whether that's good or bad.

Edited by Mstor
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IAGeezer said:

For what it's worth, Solo had some photos posted back on page 112 that may  or may not help regards the bump/hump/wart/thing....

 

 

 

Yes, I've seen those pics. If you are talking about the bump that is supposed to be above the stabilizer pivot point, then those pics just go to show that the AMK kit is missing said bump.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 1:43 PM, Berkut said:

Whoosh.

 

ZING! :tease:

 

Oh, well; my only hope is that, if it's not done on their D version... uh... oh... do you think AMK will retool the whole kit rear fuselage molds prior to releasing their A version? 

I really don't care for their D version, but could not do without their A version.

Cheers,

 

Onigiri

 

Ever gotten an alien with an AIM-54 fired into outerspace? :woot.gif:

Edited by Doppelgänger
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...