Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Jennings

AMK 1/48 F-14!!!

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, gb_madcat_sl said:

First completed build is out. 

 

48702263713_f4ace8ede9_b.jpg

 

 

48702263738_dfd3759f7e_b.jpg

Mark

 

LOOKS GREAT!!!

Share this post


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

So if i am understanding correctly, the problem starts with the wing bladder bulging up too high just behind the wing, and then sloping too low after the wing bladder?

I wonder how much of the exaggerated slope is caused by the overly bulging wing bladder? The reason why I say this is because removing material from the wing bladder via sanding will be a lot easier than adding material to the rear engine fairing.

 

Can we start another thread analyzing Academy's F14 shape errors? That would be quite fun.

 

No, it's not a matter of removing material from the bladder, the entire outer ledge on the rear flanks is too low: you'd have to actually add material (polyester putty, modeling board, etc.) and gradually re-sculpt the surface from the vertical tail outward. The bladder "floor" would also have to be raised to correspond with the higher  outer ledge, and the bladder itself scratchbuilt... And that's a best-case scenario, because we don't know what else may be off and how that will affect the fitment of the kit wings. Gotta remember than an aircraft is a complex puzzle of interacting shapes: you can't just change one element without corresponsing elements being affected.

 

As a professional model maker with decades of experience, that's a sh*t job, to say nothing of how much of a handful it would be for your average hobbyist. Better just to build the kit as-is, no one would fault you for that. I happen to think that gb_madcat_sl's build is very nice indeed. If anything, I'm curious to hear about this new separate frame canopy and how it looks on the kit.

 

And for what it's worth, those of us that rivet-count do so with the hope that a given company will, eventually, make even better models based on our findings. In my case at least it's not about bashing AMK or anyone else. It's quite the contrary in fact: I criticize because I believe in them and their potential to do even better. The Academys and the Italeris I don't bother with because I don't think anything useful will come of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like whole central section at the wing root and wing pivot area is way too thick comparing to original.

Edited by Alex Matvey

Share this post


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

First completed build is out. 

 

48702263713_f4ace8ede9_b.jpg

 

 

48702263738_dfd3759f7e_b.jpg

Mark

 

 

Disclaimer: this isn’t my build. I lifted off the AMK Facebook Fan page. It was built by Taiwanese modeller 樊成彬 (Fan Cheng Pin). 

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GunsightOne said:

No, it's not a matter of removing material from the bladder, the entire outer ledge on the rear flanks is too low: you'd have to actually add material (polyester putty, modeling board, etc.) and gradually re-sculpt the surface from the vertical tail outward. The bladder "floor" would also have to be raised to correspond with the higher  outer ledge, and the bladder itself scratchbuilt... And that's a best-case scenario, because we don't know what else may be off and how that will affect the fitment of the kit wings. Gotta remember than an aircraft is a complex puzzle of interacting shapes: you can't just change one element without corresponsing elements being affected.

 

As a professional model maker with decades of experience, that's a sh*t job, to say nothing of how much of a handful it would be for your average hobbyist. Better just to build the kit as-is, no one would fault you for that. I happen to think that gb_madcat_sl's build is very nice indeed. If anything, I'm curious to hear about this new separate frame canopy and how it looks on the kit.

 

And for what it's worth, those of us that rivet-count do so with the hope that a given company will, eventually, make even better models based on our findings. In my case at least it's not about bashing AMK or anyone else. It's quite the contrary in fact: I criticize because I believe in them and their potential to do even better. The Academys and the Italeris I don't bother with because I don't think anything useful will come of it.

I hear you and totally understand-however I am one of the insane people that likes to try my hand at sculpting etc, I guess I aspire to one day have Zactoman-like skills. I guess we all have different goals and strangely I get some enjoyment out of fixing these sorts of things. I tried to fix the nose of the academy kit, but gave up because the windshield was so badly misshaped and I wasn't up to the task of vacuum forming a new one. However I can only fix an error when I fully understand what the problem is. I guess I am one of those people that is really looking forward to getting the kit, and is also very appreciative of the analysis of this particular shape error.

Edited by dryguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DIO said:

 

 

Shion, your passion against AMK, getting into trouble to search in past 2-3 years of posts, says a lot to me...

 

stop projecting.

 

It's the one and only result you can found when you google "most accurate F-14D Tomcat ever produced", a really troublesome research.

 

I remember perfectly this quite bold  claim, first because how bold it was in itself, and second because it  absolutely doesn't fit in the context.

You may have forget but it was just after the Telford episode (debacle?) when everybody thought AMK would have calm down/amend their communication and focus on their work.

What a mistake we made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the preorders been sent out yet, or have they only sent out promo kits at this time?
In other words, have any of you guys who pre-ordered got your kits yet? Just want to know when I should start keeping an eye out for a box in the mail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have even not received shipping fee request from hobby Easy, so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I guess we who have waited for two years can wait a bit longer. Those social media influencers must have their kit first. Marketing is very important.
But I am 235% sure that if they later manage to send an actual kit to my actual address, the Swedish postal service will manage to lose it somewhere. 😕

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DIO said:

 

Wow! And this is where you are being rude, not really sarcastic.

Reading comprehension, dude! I know that you Aussies can read English, even if you can't speak it.

 

My comment was in NO way directed at the model or modeler. But, explaining it isn't worth the effort, so take a chill pill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story so far....

 

 10 each kits have been sent out to Asian and US builders, as demo kits, and are being built Beautifully as I type this.

 

 If the problem with the rear fuselage is indeed as bad being said on ARC (And oozing onto other forums from here), then maybe Jeff at Hypersonic needs to be called, so he can do a correction set as he has done on the Z-M F-4 series.

 

 That is all...

 

 - IAGeezer, patiently waiting for the phone call from Bob at Victory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good deal Terry, thanks for posting those comparison photos! But I THINK (someone correct me if I'm wrong) but the shape behind the bladders is also what's being discussed. It appears that the structure immediately above the tail plain pivot point is too thick, or at least has too much of an angle in it's transition to the side. So it may not be too "wide of a hip" but rather too thick. I will say though with the flatter bladder part, that does help make it look a little more correct to my eyes. 

 

I just wish that people could understand that this is simply an academic conversation about shapes. It's not a slam against a company or any of the builders that are working on the models. And as many have said, there are no perfect models. If things such as exact shapes and/or details don't concern someone, they don't have to use ANY of the information in the thread about shapes and simply enjoy their build when they get the model. I think some of the work being done by the guys that have it already is REALLY REALLY good. I think it's a beautiful model. And to slightly misquote the movie Amadeus "it's a beautiful model, a first rate effort. And there is simply too much tail. Just remove a bit and it will be perfect"😀

But I find these conversations about really really detailed shape analysis etc...extremely interesting and helpful. And it's also encouraging that people like Zactoman are taking notes. That may mean that there could correction kits on the horizon that would please the "rivet counters" and possibly help AMK sell even MORE kits that might not have been sold before. So maybe think about that when commenting everyone.

 

Bill

Edited by niart17

Share this post


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

Just to get you guys more info...you know there are TWO bladders right?

 

2v2Eds5CMx9trR.jpg

Of course. I mentioned "inflated" bladders above. They also have shape issue comparing to real thing.

48705781793_9028bde45c_b.jpg

48705772128_bf0c2f60ff_b.jpg

48705771293_fa2a051635_b.jpg

Share this post


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

The story so far....

 

 10 each kits have been sent out to Asian and US builders, as demo kits, and are being built Beautifully as I type this.

 

 If the problem with the rear fuselage is indeed as bad being said on ARC (And oozing onto other forums from here), then maybe Jeff at Hypersonic needs to be called, so he can do a correction set as he has done on the Z-M F-4 series.

 

 That is all...

 

 - IAGeezer, patiently waiting for the phone call from Bob at Victory.

And everyone should remember...AMK didn't just send us those kits out of the blue.  That only came after quite a few messages back and forth between Sio and I where I was asking HIM to send us those 10 kits to build....so we could do this test build here in the USA alongside the talented Malaysian builders! Many thanks to Sio for granting this request!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Alex Matvey said:

Of course. I mentioned "inflated" bladders above. They also have shape issue comparing to real thing.

48705781793_9028bde45c_b.jpg

48705772128_bf0c2f60ff_b.jpg

48705771293_fa2a051635_b.jpg

 

Seeing these photos, I think there's a good question to ask to GW8345 and others guys who worked on this a/c.

 

In which material are these bladders made of and how do they work?

Did they just inflate and deflate according to the wing sweep?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, in summary

There are shape issues. It may be major to some, inconsequential to others, however the issue is there. 

In a shocking turn of events, it's not a perfect kit, as no kit is. 

However it's not the new-standard for F-14 kits either. 

FWIW it should also be about $25-30 on average cheaper than the Tamiya kit, much like how the Academy F-15 was cheaper than the Hasegawa F-15

If "close enough" is worth the $20-$30 to you then it's close enough

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are thinking about doing it in starting position then you should add some $$ for pilots which Tamiya includes.

Share this post


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

 

Seeing these photos, I think there's a good question to ask to GW8345 and others guys who worked on this a/c.

 

In which material are these bladders made of and how do they work?

Did they just inflate and deflate according to the wing sweep?

Refer to the posts by Reddog in the links AV O posted, Reddog is my old handle.

 

The airbags were vinyl/canvas covered rubber bladders and were constantly inflated when the engines were running, no matter wing position. The airbags got their air from engine bleed air system (can't remember what stage, think it was 13th stage but don't hold me to it) so anytime the engines were running, the airbags were inflated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tapchan said:

If you are thinking about doing it in starting position then you should add some $$ for pilots which Tamiya includes.


and add to tamiya 50 eur for kasl wings ... also for the very same starting position

Edited by skuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Alex Matvey said:

There is some difference I see))

48703226127_737dbab6f8_b.jpg

 

 

This is *great* comparison. Only one I find here close to "apples vs apples". 

 

If you don't mind could you start both red and blue line at the same height then it will become apparent the "difference" is maybe only 1mm. 

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...