Jump to content

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Solo said:

Hey, when had we renderings of F-14D GWH 1:48? I believe at september of 2018, and still there is no sign of kit available.


August or September of last year..usually GWH follows about a year to 18 months later with the kit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Solo said:

Hey, when had we renderings of F-14D GWH 1:48? I believe at september of 2018, and still there is no sign of kit available.

 

It was announced together with 1/72 kit. 1/72 was just released so I suppose 48th is coming soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Solo said:

So AMK showed test shots on August, GWH on September, and for both we are awaiting for kit launch, but the problem is only with AMK.

 

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/amk-88007-f-14d-super-tomcat-preorder#/

Estimated shipping December 2017. Test sprues August 2018.

 

Where have you seen test sprues of GWH 1/48 F-14? I have seen 3D renders only. 

Would be funny if GWH release their F-14 soon and it take lesser time from early 3D render to ready kit than AMK from test mold to finished model.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2019 at 2:37 PM, Hubbie Marsten said:

Speaking of bite and the Jaws sign in the background of that McFly meme, I kind of could feel the sound cue of the big shark slowly marauding its victim in the film, but in the form of @terrysumner, very close round this thread. :rofl: 

Nahh...not yet...  I'll wait till it gets to page 199

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, terrysumner said:

Nahh...not yet...  I'll wait till it gets to page 199

 

You have to wait until after September 20th regardless of what page we're on.

narutorunning_zpswz5shafi.jpg

 

The future (and the past) depends on it! 👽

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jonathan_Lotton said:

In all seriousness...

Are there any legit AMK supporters/defenders anymore?


Like 100% true believers? 

 

I wouldn't call myself a defender, but neither am I going to bash them. If they release the Tomcat, I'll get it. It looks decent even with the problems. If it never gets released, then so be it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you define a good kit? What are acceptable mistakes? What is a brake point in getting or not getting a kit?

 

A quite note (and maybe a parallel): I have been doing for the past few weeks the brand new Eduard MiG-21 bis kit which everyone praised at the beginning of the decade as a perfect representation of the Fishbed. I am not speaking of the nose issue, back in 2011 Mr Sulc asked me to give him a list of problems which should be corrected for future releases. I did for him a several page list of things to do. In the past years put both the MF and bis kit aside (waiting for a good opportunity), but now with that Hungarian marking I have to do it (if for nothing else just to see what I have designed for them on that decal).

 

I can safely say now that about 40 % of the original kit remains untouched, (forget the nose) mostly wrong panels, wrong measurements, wrong shape items, lack of detail, wrong details . . .    In many cases they simply assumed that everything is symmetrical on left and right while on the real aircraft they are not. And made the design as simple as possible with too many compromises (be it technological or financial). This is not solely about the 21 bis version but about MF, SMT and all the others too. Now the sad thing is that the same silly mistakes were repeated 2 years ago on the 72nd scale version even that they were told of the problems and had plenty of time (how many years it is since 2011 to 2018??) to correct the design on the 72nd. In the end it is a straight downscale of the 48th kit. :((

 

 

SO how do you define a good kit? How responsible are manufacturers in listening to opinions, what do they do and what not even if told? Will we buy the kit? and make do with problems be they minor or bigger?

 

Best regards

Gabor  

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ya-gabor said:

How do you define a good kit? What are acceptable mistakes? What is a brake point in getting or not getting a kit?

 

A quite note (and maybe a parallel): I have been doing for the past few weeks the brand new Eduard MiG-21 bis kit which everyone praised at the beginning of the decade as a perfect representation of the Fishbed. I am not speaking of the nose issue, back in 2011 Mr Sulc asked me to give him a list of problems which should be corrected for future releases. I did for him a several page list of things to do. In the past years put both the MF and bis kit aside (waiting for a good opportunity), but now with that Hungarian marking I have to do it (if for nothing else just to see what I have designed for them on that decal).

 

I can safely say now that about 40 % of the original kit remains untouched, (forget the nose) mostly wrong panels, wrong measurements, wrong shape items, lack of detail, wrong details . . .    In many cases they simply assumed that everything is symmetrical on left and right while on the real aircraft they are not. And made the design as simple as possible with too many compromises (be it technological or financial). This is not solely about the 21 bis version but about MF, SMT and all the others too. Now the sad thing is that the same silly mistakes were repeated 2 years ago on the 72nd scale version even that they were told of the problems and had plenty of time (how many years it is since 2011 to 2018??) to correct the design on the 72nd. In the end it is a straight downscale of the 48th kit. :((

 

 

SO how do you define a good kit? How responsible are manufacturers in listening to opinions, what do they do and what not even if told? Will we buy the kit? and make do with problems be they minor or bigger?

 

Best regards

Gabor  

 

It is really personal. Isn't it?

 

For me Hobbyboss F-14 is a good kit. Yes! I said it! 😄

 

If I have the choice between GWH Su-35 and Kittyhawk Su-35, I would pick GWH but I still think Kittyhawk is a good kit too. 😜

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, foxmulder_ms said:

 

It is really personal. Isn't it?

 

It was a fun week to be and to see Tomcats in operation (real war operation) out in the Indian ocean on board JFK. But from this I am not an expert on the F-14 even though I like it very much.

 

But with the Fishbed I think I know most if not all inches of it and can show with hard photo evidence what I have corrected and why on those 60% of the kit. Sure it is a personal thing just as for similar Tomcat experts who knows well what they are talking about.

 

But the point was not about this. Where do you draw the line in accepting mistakes of a kit?

 

Best regards

Gabor  

P.s. Glad you like the GWH Su-35 kit. It was just as much fun researching and desinging it as experiencing a take off from JFK! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I define what is acceptable as far as accuracy by what else is available and how accurate any other kits are in comparison. If I have the choice of the Tamiya, soon the GWH (which is an unknown at this time) and the AMK kit, it will come down to which is the more accurate representation. After that I look at what features the kit offers. The AMK (and I would hope the GWH) offer dirty wings, something I like. I have a Tamiya F-14A which I bought the KASL wing set for. Certainly, AMK's wings would probably be much easier to deal with than the resin KASL ones. Same for the GWH I would think.

So, when it comes down to it, when the GWH D kit is released I will compare it to the AMK (if it is ever released) and Tamiya kits and decide which gives me the most accuracy with the features I want (even if they need to be available aftermarket) and make a decision. Needless to say, I will wait until the GWH kit is released. If it is near, as, or more accurate than the Tamiya kit, I will probably get it, even if the AMK kit hasn't been released yet. Based on AMK's history, I have little confidence at this point that their product will live up to their hype.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

How do you define a good kit? What are acceptable mistakes? What is a brake point in getting or not getting a kit?

 

I'll wait until you guys buy it, assess it and then make my decision to spend my money on it. 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thanks to HobbyEasy team for arranging a shop credit. With good people like them I will pre order kits in future. Will be using the shop credit towards a Kittyhawk UH-1N  which has its own problems, and most likely will cause some more along the build by myself. Why buy it and give up on the AMK Tomcat, because it’s available, appears to be the best version out at this stage, and it has some cool looking paint jobs over service life. Above all I am a plasticholic with too many unmade/part finished kits. 

 

Modelling has come along way since the late 70s, only wish I could complete them as quick and be as happy with the result now of those less than accurate kits like the Matchbox Tomcat.

 

Have a great day cheers Steve from NZ

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

I'll wait until you guys buy it, assess it and then make my decision to spend my money on it. 😉

 

Personally experts are the last people i listen to now..i still listen but with three grains of salt and a dose of reality.

Why?

Well take a look at whats already happening with the Eduard P-51 and this is nothing to do with what was a botched kit the first release of the 109G.

Its over reaction caused by being to close to a subject.

 Example.

So a panel of experts self appointed who love the Fairy Dingbat Mk7 to bits, have spent there lives collecting information etc, know every block and factory variance take a look at the kit.

So when the ultimate or maybe even the first Hasetamiduard version is released they buy it with glee!

There joy immediately turns to horror when they find the rpm indicator and manifold pressure gauges are reversed, the pilots joystick has the pickle misplaced and the main wheels have Michelin badges instead of goodyear.

To add insult to injury the guncamera port is misplaced by 3 inches on the wing leading edge and is square instead of round. 

Oh the horror!

To many these would be insignificant errors meaning nothing to 98.9% of the community.

However the Dingbats take it upon themselves to launch a campaign across forums to highlight the stupidly poor research and glaring mistakes by Hasetamiduard.

These errors are amplified page after page with vitriol by the Dingbat experts driven by disappointment  to bring a campaign of hate because there most famous beautiful aircraft, the love of their lives has been slighted by an incompetent bunch of amatuers parading as a model company.

Now this has happened here and elsewhere that insignificant errors which have no visual impact on the “look” of a kit compared to the prototype have been shredded.

So to me I temper what experts say, I use your own eyes to asses exactly how you think the kit looks and decide from there. Use the experts opinions to educate yourself from their wonderful knowledge on the finer points or like those experts you will never finish a kit. 

Gross errors are one thing which the Mk1 eyeball can spot at 20 paces ie Eduard 109G, AMK F-14 aft fuselage etc but listening to experts is rife with issues as you may find there hyper realistic goals will kill much of your enjoyment of the hobby.

 

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...