Mstor Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 And so, with further ado... These are the photos of the areas under the most discussion. There were others, mainly of the wings. Sio stated that fixing the IFR probe issue may be difficult to do, due to molding considerations. In other words, it doesn't sound like they have worked on that yet or if they even will make the attempt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
adamitri Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 (edited) Looks better... but those slime lights 🤮 Are there pics of where the exhausts connect ? Will it accept aries exhausts ? Edited March 9, 2019 by adamitri Add ons Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mstor Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 1 hour ago, adamitri said: Looks better... but those slime lights 🤮 Are there pics of where the exhausts connect ? Will it accept aries exhausts ? There weren't any pics of the rear end without the exhausts attached, so no. Once its released I sure someone will make exhausts and other parts for it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 F-14 ignoramus here... Could someone, uh, highlight the slime lights and explain what's wrong with them? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrea Bolla Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 2 minutes ago, punder said: F-14 ignoramus here... Could someone, uh, highlight the slime lights and explain what's wrong with them? Slime lights does not have raised detail: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jonathan_Lotton Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 I’m sorry but the attempt at censorship and ready agreement the ARC staff is pretty unappealing... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
punder Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 Thanks Andrea. And, looking at your avatar, I congratulate you on your excellent taste in rocket hardware. 😀 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
terrysumner Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 1 hour ago, Jonathan_Lotton said: I’m sorry but the attempt at censorship and ready agreement the ARC staff is pretty unappealing... Well Jonathan...too bad. It's not censorship...it's just trying to get along with the company and adhering to their wishes with regards to sharing their photographs. If you don't like it you can leave. This is not a Democracy. You play here you play by the rules set by the moderators. We are personally very tired of all the crap that has gone on in this thread. I closed it once and I reopened it because we were asked to by one of the good guys. But I will not hesitate to close it down again if this thread goes in the crapper again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dustiepal Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 Thanks for helping to get the pictures posted Terry. I saw them on Facebook this morning and I think there has been an improvement. Thanks; Dave Quote Link to post Share on other sites
seawinder Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 2 hours ago, Andrea Bolla said: Slime lights does not have raised detail: Well, in that photo I think I'm seeing that the aft S.L. is definitely proud of the fuselage surface. Granted, AMK has them quite a bit too raised, but shouldn't it be really trivial to sand/file them down? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
seawinder Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 This may have been covered earlier in the thread, but I'm too lazy to track through all 166 pages: Does the AMK kit have provision for wings in overswept position as well as full forward? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Skull Leader Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, terrysumner said: Well Jonathan...too bad. It's not censorship...it's just trying to get along with the company and adhering to their wishes with regards to sharing their photographs. If you don't like it you can leave. This is not a Democracy. You play here you play by the rules set by the moderators. We are personally very tired of all the crap that has gone on in this thread. I closed it once and I reopened it because we were asked to by one of the good guys. But I will not hesitate to close it down again if this thread goes in the crapper again. By definition, that IS sensorship. (I'm not tryin' to say... I'm just sayin'.) Sio's assertion that the only detractors are from his "competitors" is farcical at best. When you boast that your kit is going to be the best and most accurate iteration out there.... especially in a subject so saturated as the tomcat, you can be damn sure people are going to nitpick. We want the kit to be perfect... we would be beyond thrilled if it were. But dont put test shots out there and not expect them to get nitpicked. You wanna edit or shut down the thread, that's your bailiwick, but don't try to pass it off for something it isnt. Edited March 9, 2019 by Skull Leader Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madmanrick Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 SMH and THIS ☝️ is why we can't have nice things. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 9 hours ago, terrysumner said: Yes... correct. so... for those of us that do not work for any of the competition, are we free to critique ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 2 hours ago, Skull Leader said: Sio's assertion that the only detractors are from his "competitors" is farcical at best. When you boast that your kit is going to be the best and most accurate iteration out there.... especially in a subject so saturated as the tomcat, you can be damn sure people are going to nitpick. agreed Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mstor Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 5 hours ago, terrysumner said: Well Jonathan...too bad. It's not censorship...it's just trying to get along with the company and adhering to their wishes with regards to sharing their photographs. If you don't like it you can leave. This is not a Democracy. You play here you play by the rules set by the moderators. We are personally very tired of all the crap that has gone on in this thread. I closed it once and I reopened it because we were asked to by one of the good guys. But I will not hesitate to close it down again if this thread goes in the crapper again. Too many people don't understand this about forums like this. ARC and the moderators make the rules. If you don't like these rules then, as Terry says, you are free to leave. If this were a government run website then free speech laws would probably apply. But it ain't and they don't. Sio said we can post today's pics but if a "competitor" posts negative comments, then Terry has been asked to remove those comments. Now, I would agree with those that question the whole "competitors are posting many negative comments" thing. I haven't seen it on ARC. Perhaps it is a problem on other forums, I don't know, but as long as no competitors post negative comments here, then all is OK. Hopefully Sio will continue to "allow" pics to be posted. As an aside, I did ask Sio if there was a release date yet, but received no answer. Oh well... Now lets get back to some critical examination of the photos Sio posted. Too me, it looks like AMK have improved the shape of the rear end. It is to the point where any deviance from accurate shapes is beyond my ability to determine. So, I hope those with more knowledge will chime in at this point.; Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 (edited) well to my eyes, I don't think they have changed ANYTHING at all. I think it is the exact same build that we saw last year. look at the slats and how they stand proud of the wing instead of drooping below. this was the same way on a "pre production, 3D printed, low quality test shot" or whatever hogwash they were trying to get us to believe. AMK claimed that the test shot was built by a non modeler, that was unfamiliar with the aircraft. yet they still haven't gotten someone in the know to build one up. as previously posted I can see that the air bags are still too thick and swoop upwards to the front. the area just aft of the airbags is also suspect. I feel that the area is mis shaped in some way but it is hard to describe without being able to post pictures. but my previously posted shots show the same misshaped area. I never felt that the kit had wide hips, but the weird shape sure made it look like it did. needless to say I completely disagree with AMK trying to dictate how their kit is discussed. the thing I am trying to figure out is why not just release the kit? they obviously have no intention of actually changing anything to fix the shape issues. the pictures of the test shots were first posted to Facebook on August 19 2018. Edited March 10, 2019 by dylan speeling misatkes Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GW8345 Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 First, allow me to proclaim that I am not a competitor to AMK (or anyone else) in any shape or form. To me, that rear end looks all jacked up, it looks too flat and wide and the exhaust fairing on the outboard side of the exhaust shroud looks completely wrong. For those who have Danny Coreman's F-14 Book, compare the pics to those on page 34 and 35. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GW8345 Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 7 hours ago, seawinder said: Well, in that photo I think I'm seeing that the aft S.L. is definitely proud of the fuselage surface. Granted, AMK has them quite a bit too raised, but shouldn't it be really trivial to sand/file them down? On most aircraft the slime lights were flush with the skin, that one in the pic posted has some RTV (sealant) around the aft light but that is not the norm. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shion Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 Last time they provided photos (of the same build), I thought the editing/cropping was weird, why cut images like that? Photos I've talking about: And now: Real A/C: I'm concerned about at least 2 things here: - how can they represent the fuel damp like that? - gaps between the main fuselage, the engine bags and the beaver tail part are huge. In fact, gaps between parts are huge in the whole kit, yes I know "it's a prebuild, the builder is a nonmodeler, he's unfamiliar with the A/C", but glued or not, gaps aren't supposed to be this width. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
flybywire Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 (edited) I just would like to point out something. 1. When modelers/readers here raised a "negative comment", it's usually based on an observation on the kit which is different or have some kind of deviation from factual sources like modeling reference materials or actual pictures or persons who have worked on the plane one time or another or persons who are very knowledgeable about the entire fighter jet especially the shapes and sizes of the outer structures, I still don't understand why negative comments could be so wrong. 2. I think the problem with the rear end is still there and has not changed a bit. Edited March 10, 2019 by flybywire Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 I'm so confused!!!😟 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxmulder_ms Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 8 hours ago, shion said: Last time they provided photos (of the same build), I thought the editing/cropping was weird, why cut images like that? Photos I've talking about: And now: Real A/C: I'm concerned about at least 2 things here: - how can they represent the fuel damp like that? - gaps between the main fuselage, the engine bags and the beaver tail part are huge. In fact, gaps between parts are huge in the whole kit, yes I know "it's a prebuild, the builder is a nonmodeler, he's unfamiliar with the A/C", but glued or not, gaps aren't supposed to be this width. Your reference picture is not a great one due to lens distortion. Look how the circular exhaust look :) what is wrong with the fuel dump? missing a hole? This is an ok picture for rear shape. I think AMK attempt is alright. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shion Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 You don't have to care about the lens distorsion, this photo is here to show the fact that the fuel dump pipe is... a pipe and how the beaver tail is connected to the A/C body. It's the first time we see the rendition of the beaver tail by AMK, and it seems they believe the fuel dump pipe is an ECM pod or something else, not a pipe. We'll wait the next mold revision. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AndrewPerren Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 I don’t see any issues so far that would be deal breakers for me. When the time finally comes I’ll be keen to judge the kit on its “buildability” 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.