AMK 1/48 F-14!!!

[GW8345]

 

26 minutes ago, Dave Roof said:

 

They included those so the modeler can do an in flight "diorama" with the bombs as they would appear shortly after release from the aircraft. AMK is well aware they weren't open in any other situation.

How many modelers are going to be doing a diorama with a GBU-12 dropping from an aircraft, let alone four of them at once. Almost no one does Q4M1 (Quantity 4, Multiple 1) releases of GBU-12's so to me, it's a waste and those GBU-12's could have been replaced with something more useful, something like a Mk 82/BLU-111 with a BSU-86 Snakeye fin (since no one makes those in 1/48 scale).

 

My mistake, there are two GBU-12's and two GBU-16's, not four GBU-12's.

Edited November 12, 2018 by GW8345

[Mstor]

deleted

Edited November 12, 2018 by Mstor

[GW8345]

6 minutes ago, Collin said:

Yeah, was wondering where you were, it caught both our eyes. Yours from loading/moving them and myself from dropping them. Funny. 

 

Collin

I've been stewing on it for a while, just could figure out why they would do that.

[Zactoman]

2 hours ago, Mstor said:

Personally, I am very confused by all this. I have no clue which photos are supposed to be which version of the kit. It pretty obvious to us now that the built up model that's been shown is some very early interation, probably a 3D print. Fine. But the pics of the parts - all the ones I've seen still have problems.

I know AMK owes me nothing. I didn't pre-order. I just find their whole behavior in this matter to be rather demeaning of their customers. They started this whole mess with the pre-order drive to "fund the project ". Then posted pics of parts to entice us. Sang the praises of their new kit and stirred up their fan boy following on Facebook. But as soon as we started to point out possible problems, they have hemmed and hawed and refused to address the questions directly. I think it speaks poorly of them.

They need to up their game and be forthright. If we are all barking mad, then please, help us out here. Show us some real production parts. Explain what you have or have not done to address the issues we perceive. If we have further questions, do your best to answer them.

Well, I doubt they will do any of that. It would take too much of their time to do so. So, we will go back to waiting for some scrap of intel from AMK in the form of a photo or pronouncement from Martin. It grows weary.

 

I'm a bit confused as well.

 

I'm confused about the terminology being used if they are on mold #4.
A "mold" is either a metal injection mold or a "rubber" RTV silicone mold. In this case I take it to mean metal, most likely steel (aluminum is possible but unlikely).
I'd be more inclined to think that meant that they did 4 CAD revisions and had SLA models made (3D printed parts). But they have shown steel tooling and parts (test shots) that are obviously injection molded.
If they have indeed cut 4 separate steel molds, each being very expensive and time consuming, then somebody very seriously screwed up.

 

I'm also confused with their goal in showing CADs (and later SLAs and plastic) through development.
I gather it was just to hype the product, which is fine, but of course they risk getting critiques and having to make revisions. They seemed to welcome and thank the viewers for pointing out problems so that they could fix them. They didn't however give the audience enough info to fully analyze their work. They posted close-ups and cropped pics at odd angles, good for hype but not good for analysis. They haven't posted any full top/side/front CAD views so it's impossible to judge the whole package.
I think they were relying on good job from an internal R&D department that overlooked issues and they weren't expecting problems to be spotted.

 

At this point, if they are indeed still making revisions, I'd think it would be in their best interest to fully embrace crowd-sourced development and share everything they've got, else risk molds 5, 6, 7? and more delays.

Or just release what they've got now and hope it isn't shredded by the consumers.

 

[GW8345]

On 11/10/2018 at 11:56 PM, dylan said:

 

Now that I'm taking a good look at the weapons, the nose devices on the GBU-32's (1,000 lb JDAM's) looks weird. They stick out too much to be nose plugs (MXU-735 Steel Nose Plugs (SNP)) and too small to be a DSU-33 Proximity Sensor. If they are SNP's they should like the GBU-38's nose.

[Dave Roof]

14 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

 

How many modelers are going to be doing a diorama with a GBU-12 dropping from an aircraft, let alone four of them at once. Almost no one does Q4M1 (Quantity 4, Multiple 1) releases of GBU-12's so to me, it's a waste and those GBU-12's could have been replaced with something more useful, something like a Mk 82/BLU-111 with a BSU-86 Snakeye fin (since no one makes those in 1/48 scale).

 

No one knows how many modelers will choose to do that, but AMK thought it would be a cool idea to provide that option for them. 

 

Nothing says they have to be used on the same model, or even the kit they're included in. I'd be willing to bet though, now that the option is available, there will be modelers that will use them for that purpose. 

[GW8345]

5 minutes ago, Dave Roof said:

 

No one knows how many modelers will choose to do that, but AMK thought it would be a cool idea to provide that option for them. 

 

Nothing says they have to be used on the same model, or even the kit they're included in. I'd be willing to bet though, now that the option is available, there will be modelers that will use them for that purpose. 

Yea, let's take fishing line and hang LGB's off our models, just like we did when we were 13.

 

I'll be surprised if more than 10 diorama's are built using those bombs and if modelers really wanted to do that, all they'd have to do is use scrap plastic to make the wings.

[niart17]

28 minutes ago, Zactoman said:

 

I'm a bit confused as well.

 

I'm confused about the terminology being used if they are on mold #4.
A "mold" is either a metal injection mold or a "rubber" RTV silicone mold. In this case I take it to mean metal, most likely steel (aluminum is possible but unlikely).
I'd be more inclined to think that meant that they did 4 CAD revisions and had SLA models made (3D printed parts). But they have shown steel tooling and parts (test shots) that are obviously injection molded.
If they have indeed cut 4 separate steel molds, each being very expensive and time consuming, then somebody very seriously screwed up.

 

I'm also confused with their goal in showing CADs (and later SLAs and plastic) through development.
I gather it was just to hype the product, which is fine, but of course they risk getting critiques and having to make revisions. They seemed to welcome and thank the viewers for pointing out problems so that they could fix them. They didn't however give the audience enough info to fully analyze their work. They posted close-ups and cropped pics at odd angles, good for hype but not good for analysis. They haven't posted any full top/side/front CAD views so it's impossible to judge the whole package.
I think they were relying on good job from an internal R&D department that overlooked issues and they weren't expecting problems to be spotted.

 

At this point, if they are indeed still making revisions, I'd think it would be in their best interest to fully embrace crowd-sourced development and share everything they've got, else risk molds 5, 6, 7? and more delays.

Or just release what they've got now and hope it isn't shredded by the consumers.

 

This man is wise beyond his years...ok, I don't actually know his years...but yeah, what he said. I think there is "wrong" happening on most all sides of this discussion. BUT it does appear they (AMK) wants to truly get the kit right. I think I even read some chapters back in this book, that they were possibly thinking the end all be all Tomcat model. Lofty goal to be sure. It SOUNDS like errors were pointed out and it sounds like at first the errors where not admitted to and called angle illusions. And then they were agreed to be errors (either by giving in to truth or re-evaluation, whatever.) and were claimed to be fixed. It's a pretty risky thing to say "it's fixed, trust us" and keep that up for a long time knowing the issue is festering. If its fixed that's great. If it's not and it's beyond the scope of what they feel they can accomplish...maybe it's best to just own up to it and say "yeah, we missed the mark a bit on that, but we sincerely hope you'll like it regardless". Otherwise, it's bad to just tell people it's fixed trust us, and not show any evidence at all that it's fixed or at least in the process of getting fixed. True, they don't owe that, but it's risky. I feel for them, I think they are in a pickle. But it's kind of self-inflicted with a lot of people who are eager, willing or at least unintentionally helping push the knife in the wound further. Best case is it's a perfect model released and everyone will laugh about this super long novel of a thread in the future and say, "good job everyone, we have a wonderful F-14 to be prized" Worst case...there are a lot of options for that. I'm hoping for a good middle ground.

 

It's just a good thing F-14's never had false canopies painted on the bottom....

Edited November 12, 2018 by niart17

[Space Tiger Hobbes]

20 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

Yea, let's take fishing line and hang LGB's off our models, just like we did when we were 13.

 

I'll be surprised if more than 10 diorama's are built using those bombs and if modelers really wanted to do that, all they'd have to do is use scrap plastic to make the wings.

True. And how many modelers would want to open up maintenance panels, drop flaps and slats, kneel their nose gear, super detail the pits? I'd be surprised if more than 10 dioramas are built using those features. That's why people love their Tamiya Tomcats. None of that kiddie stuff. That's a real man's toy airplane.

[B.Sin]

I've heard Sio is a perfectionist.

 I'm sure all the issues will be ironed out.

[GW8345]

4 minutes ago, Space Tiger Hobbes said:

True. And how many modelers would want to open up maintenance panels, drop flaps and slats, kneel their nose gear, super detail the pits? I'd be surprised if more than 10 dioramas are built using those features. That's why people love their Tamiya Tomcats. None of that kiddie stuff. That's a real man's toy airplane.

All those things are different from inflight dioramas, how many inflight dioramas do you see compared to aircraft on deck dioramas?

 

You are comparing apples to oranges.

[Space Tiger Hobbes]

13 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

All those things are different from inflight dioramas, how many inflight dioramas do you see compared to aircraft on deck dioramas?

 

You are comparing apples to oranges.

Point taken. Versus how many built out of the box? My point is it's a fruit salad world. Different strokes. Each to his own. Who cares if the LGB fins are deployed? Cut'em off. 

[Dave Roof]

46 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

Yea, let's take fishing line and hang LGB's off our models, just like we did when we were 13.

 

I'll be surprised if more than 10 diorama's are built using those bombs and if modelers really wanted to do that, all they'd have to do is use scrap plastic to make the wings.

 

The number of modelers that will take fishing line to hang both their models, and models of bombs being dropped from them far out outweigh those that believe only kids still do that. If you look at the literally thousands of modelers that frequent Facebook modeling groups and those that follow the hundreds of Youtube channels, you'll see that "for the fun of it" modelers outnumber "serious" modelers 100 to 1.  Believe it or not, we (serious modelers) are a very, very, very small minority in the modeling community.

 

Anyway, I think it's a pretty cool option they provided. 

[glorystomper]

1 hour ago, goondman said:

PayPal may still help you under the circumstances. Call them. Do not a file the dispute online

 

thanks goondman! will get to it this weekend.. haven't ever had to actually call up Paypal, but i guess it would make it easier to explain the dispute.

[goondman]

26 minutes ago, glorystomper said:

 

thanks goondman! will get to it this weekend.. haven't ever had to actually call up Paypal, but i guess it would make it easier to explain the dispute.

My pleasure. Let me know how it works out

[galfa]

2 hours ago, Dave Roof said:

 

They included those so the modeler can do an in flight "diorama" with the bombs as they would appear shortly after release from the aircraft. ...

 

Dear Dave,

 

That's very interesting, expecially given that pilots are not included...

[Mstor]

On 11/10/2018 at 10:56 PM, dylan said:

 

 

 

2 hours ago, GW8345 said:

Now that I'm taking a good look at the weapons, the nose devices on the GBU-32's (1,000 lb JDAM's) looks weird. They stick out too much to be nose plugs (MXU-735 Steel Nose Plugs (SNP)) and too small to be a DSU-33 Proximity Sensor. If they are SNP's they should like the GBU-38's nose.

 

Plus, if you look close, there is a hair sticking out of the nose cone of the third Phoenix missile. I thought they were all supposed to have the hair removed before being deployed.

Edited November 13, 2018 by Mstor

[GW8345]

1 hour ago, Dave Roof said:

 

The number of modelers that will take fishing line to hang both their models, and models of bombs being dropped from them far out outweigh those that believe only kids still do that. If you look at the literally thousands of modelers that frequent Facebook modeling groups and those that follow the hundreds of Youtube channels, you'll see that "for the fun of it" modelers outnumber "serious" modelers 100 to 1.  Believe it or not, we (serious modelers) are a very, very, very small minority in the modeling community.

 

Anyway, I think it's a pretty cool option they provided. 

Sorry, I'm one of those "for the fun of it" modelers, I don't get too wrapped up with details and I build for fun.

 

My opinion is (and we all know what opinions are like), they could have done something else, something no one has done and something the 1/48 scale world has been wanting. I don't know of any modelers who has wanted to do a diorama with a GBU-12/16 dropping from and aircraft, I've never seen one request for info ever being posted so this sounds like a "they will come if you build it" thing and we'll just have to wait to see how that turns our. Again, just my opinion.

[GW8345]

1 hour ago, Space Tiger Hobbes said:

Point taken. Versus how many built out of the box? My point is it's a fruit salad world. Different strokes. Each to his own. Who cares if the LGB fins are deployed? Cut'em off. 

Would you rather have four LGB's that can only be used for inflight weapon deployment dioramas or four Mk 82 with BSU-86 fins, four LGTR's, or six 25 lb practice bombs (Mk 76/BSU-33)?

[GW8345]

6 minutes ago, Mstor said:

 

 

Plus, if you look close, there is a hair sticking out of the nose cone of the third Phoenix missile. I thought they were all supposed to have the hair removed before being deployed.

That's a 1/48 scale arming wire for one of the bombs, dang Ordies leaving FOD laying around again!🤣

[305swag]

On November 11, 2018 at 5:46 PM, Ventris said:

Why wont you just post them? 

Because he wants you to get on your hands and knees and beg.

🙏🏿

Edited November 13, 2018 by 305swag

[Mstor]

1 hour ago, GW8345 said:

That's a 1/48 scale arming wire for one of the bombs, dang Ordies leaving FOD laying around again!🤣

 

OK, so do I build it with the arming wire hanging around like that? Ahhhh, I get it. It's another diorama scenario piece. We'll need new figures of an Ordie getting chewed out for leaving the FOD around. Maybe Reedoak?

[habu2]

I just did an internet search on the phrase "train wreck" - and it pointed me to this thread.....

[zerosystem]

2 minutes ago, habu2 said:

I just did an internet search on the phrase "train wreck" - and it pointed me to this thread.....

Understatement of the year...

 

[goondman]

On a lighter note, Wonderland models has the Revell Germany F/A-18E in stock. Not sure if has red lines of not