Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

Jennings

AMK 1/48 F-14!!!

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Whiskey said:

Well this turned into a real "manure" show. Imma go drink a beer and leave it alone for a while. Somebody call me when there is something worthwhile to discuss again.

 

I'm with you, though I don't drink anymore, so I think I'll have a Snickers bar. :cheers: (just imagine one of those little smileys toasting with a candy bar instead of a mug of frosty cold goodness. I do miss my beer, sigh).

Share this post


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

Just in order to return to examining the kit and poitning out things one could address rather than picking on each other .... the panel lines around the position lights on the LEX zone on the wing glove should be rescribed. This should be a rather easy fix for any builder and no reason to hit on the kit and AMK for that. Just stating my observation. The pos. light openings do have another form. Later on, many birds received a partial cover resulting in the shape AMK tried to depict but the actual opening remained the same. Sometimes the cover would be painted, sometimes not. GW8345 among others could certainly further elaborate on this, I suppose.

The shape of these pos. lights is not quite right in general. I would suggest that serious modellers fill in the openings and panel lines and rescribe / correct the openings. That is what I at least would do, if I had the kit.

 

My opinion is that the wing glove lights do look a little "off" but I don't think it's a big deal, just fill them in and re-scribe them since there were variations due to who the lens was masked when the aircraft was painted.

 

I will say that there are some panel lines that are off but I don't think it's an issue I need to point out because 99.999% of people will never see them so why "dog pile" on the kit when there are other issues that just jump out at anyone familiar with the F-14.

11 hours ago, andrew.deboer said:

And here’s my nose section with a shot of Tamiya primer straight from the can (not my preferred method); radome seam looks OK. For those of you wondering about the rivet pattern on the panel above the gun, that’s what the real thing looks like. Also, I know the three vents need to be removed from the top of the nose - not found on the D.

Q7aRxli.jpg

Just a technical correction.

The three rain removal nozzles are accurate for a F-14D(R). A F-14D(R) is a F-14A re-manufactured to F-14D standards. You can identify a F-14D(R) if the BUNO starts with 159xxx (originally Block 85) or 161xxx (originally Block 110).

 

If you are doing a F-14D with a BUNO that starts with 163xxx or 164xxx, then it would have the "straight bar" rain removal nozzle. If you are going an F-14D with a BUNO that starts with 159xxx or 161xxx, then you are fine with the three nozzles.

Edited by GW8345

Share this post


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

 

I'm with you, though I don't drink anymore, so I think I'll have a Snickers bar. :cheers: (just imagine one of those little smileys toasting with a candy bar instead of a mug of frosty cold goodness. I do miss my beer, sigh).

 

Craft Root Beer my friend, craft root beer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sio said:

... and he is the one stole our Tomcat design, and sold it to another manufacturer. I don't need to name it, as most of the modelers may see, how come the design is so similar.

A way to determine if a kit/design is based on a copy of another kit/design is to look for errors that would have been replicated. If the original has an error that the so-called copy doesn't, the claim of copy is shoddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another observation and that again is by no means intented as bashing, merely as a notification for any modellers:

The AMK F-14D features the bracing around the step for the RIO. That is absolutely o.k. and no flaw! Just for those who want to build the Vandy-1 iteration. That particular serial did not have that brace! Some Deltas had it, some didn't. I know to many this is not new information. I just thought it might be noteworthy for some modellers nonetheless, since other manufacturers went the other way around, i.e. no bracing on the kit and the modeller would have to see to it to add the bracing via aftermarket or scratch approach depending on the envisioned serial.

 

I want to emphasize, this is no bashing on the kit and it is nothing wrong!!! Regarding those bracings and other details regarding later blocks and versions, there's just no way to do it right. Do you leave them off, the inclined modeller will have to look, whether to add them. Are they featured on the kit, the modeller has to do the research whether to delete them.

 

Just trying to make modellers aware regarding this particular provided decal option, is all.

 

There seems to be a general understanding that all newly built Deltas had that bracing around the step. This is obviously a misconception.

Share this post


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

A way to determine if a kit/design is based on a copy of another kit/design is to look for errors that would have been replicated. If the original has an error that the so-called copy doesn't, the claim of copy is shoddy.

 

Just like the ever beginning, you proposed to me to help for design of Mirage 2000, but the ONLY condition is to send you the 3D for checking. So that, you can send the 3D to another manufacturer?

 

Sorry for refused to accept your proposal!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bushande said:

Just another observation and that again is by no means intented as bashing, merely as a notification for any modellers:

The AMK F-14D features the bracing around the step for the RIO. That is absolutely o.k. and no flaw! Just for those who want to build the Vandy-1 iteration. That particular serial did not have that brace! Some Deltas had it, some didn't. I know to many this is not new information. I just thought it might be noteworthy for some modellers nonetheless, since other manufacturers went the other way around, i.e. no bracing on the kit and the modeller would have to see to it to add the bracing via aftermarket or scratch approach depending on the envisioned serial.

 

I want to emphasize, this is no bashing on the kit and it is nothing wrong!!! Regarding those bracings and other details regarding later blocks and versions, there's just no way to do it right. Do you leave them off, the inclined modeller will have to look, whether to add them. Are they featured on the kit, the modeller has to do the research whether to delete them.

 

Just trying to make modellers aware regarding this particular provided decal option, is all.

 

There seems to be a general understanding that all newly built Deltas had that bracing around the step. This is obviously a misconception.

 

No no. This is not bahing!

 

I would be appreciated with this kind of comments, as well as those by Darren Roberts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sio said:

 

 If I am happy too, I will send 3 Tomcats to the first one reach 400 pages. This is just want to have some funs with you guys.

 

Awww no, Sio. why did you do that?! This thread will never shut down now .... 🤣

 

Oh and thanks for a professional reply and your understanding.

Edited by bushande

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bushande said:

 

Awww no, Sio. why did you do that?! This thread will never shut down now .... 🤣

 

Haha. I want every body happy, and I want to be happy too.

 

If so, we do it, if no, forget about it. OK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...........As long as you were working with Terry (It is ok to mention the name here, as he is a Chinese and he can change his English all the time.), and he is the one stole our Tomcat design, and sold it to another manufacturer. I don't need to name it, as most of the modelers may see, how come the design is so similar."

 

Does anyone want to share whose design out there is similar to that of AMK's? Just out of curiosity.  I'm rally not aware of it. I'm not interested in the person/s, just want to know the brand of the kit.

Edited by flybywire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, flybywire said:

"...........As long as you were working with Terry (It is ok to mention the name here, as he is a Chinese and he can change his English all the time.), and he is the one stole our Tomcat design, and sold it to another manufacturer. I don't need to name it, as most of the modelers may see, how come the design is so similar."

 

Does anyone want to share whose design out there is similar to that of AMK's? Just out of curiosity.  I'm rally not aware of it. I'm not interested in the person/s, just want to know the brand of the kit.

 

The only 1/48 F-14 (known to be ) in preparation is the GWH's one.

The only F-14 made recently after or before the AMK, are the 1/72 GWH and Academy.

 

As stated above, a good way to see if a design is a copy of another is looking if the same errors are present.

GWH kit doesn't seem to have the numerous rendition problems of the AMK.

Academy kit either.

Share this post


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

 

Just like the ever beginning, you proposed to me to help for design of Mirage 2000, but the ONLY condition is to send you the 3D for checking. So that, you can send the 3D to another manufacturer?

 

Sorry for refused to accept your proposal!

Er I don't recall anything about a Mirage 2000. And I'm no Wesley or Terry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, shion said:

The only 1/48 F-14 (known to be ) in preparation is the GWH's one.

The only F-14 made recently after or before the AMK, are the 1/72 GWH and Academy.

 

Zactoman noticed in this post about the stabilizer that Tamiya == Grumman while AMK != Grumman (== stands for "matches", != stands for "doesn't match").

Last night I overlayed the 1/72 GWH F-14D stabilizer with the Tamiya leaflet.

 

QMvqiQJ.jpg

 

GWH == Tamiya (same angle between the stabilizer leading and trailing edges) so it implies that AMK !=GWH

 

I could eventually look at the new 1/72 Academy F-14A.

 

Edited by Laurent

Share this post


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

 

Craft Root Beer my friend, craft root beer!

 

Actually, here in beautiful (ack!) Milwaukee, we have a local brewery that makes a dynamite root beer, Sprecher Root Beer Thanks for reminding me. I should get some to have on hand for these rare, but oh so important moments. :doh:

Edited by Mstor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Sio said:

... and he is the one stole our Tomcat design, and sold it to another manufacturer. I don't need to name it, as most of the modelers may see, how come the design is so similar....

 

7 hours ago, Laurent said:

A way to determine if a kit/design is based on a copy of another kit/design is to look for errors that would have been replicated. If the original has an error that the so-called copy doesn't, the claim of copy is shoddy.

Wait.... What?? The design was stolen?

 

 

 

 

Tu4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Laurent said:

I could eventually look at the new 1/72 Academy F-14A.

 

9135cu4.jpg

 

Academy == Tamiya (same angle between the stabilizer leading and trailing edges) so it implies that AMK !=Academy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mstor said:

 

Actually, here in beautiful (ack!) Milwaukee, we have a local brewery that makes a dynamite root beer, Sprecher Root Beer Thanks for reminding me. I should get some to have on hand for these rare, but oh so important moments. :doh:

 

Send me one hahaha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2020 at 3:36 PM, Sio said:

 

If you want to know, I can tell!

Sio, respectfully it is not my place to tell you how to run your business. You seem to be capable enough at it.

 

However, speaking only for myself, these vague "I know, but won't tell" posts don't sit well with me. I do not believe this to be the appropriate forum for the airing of those types of grievances. Surely none of us here are qualified to adjudicate your claims, nor do we have the authority. I also do not believe it is an appropriate forum for the company bashing that has gone on here, tbh. Discussing the minutiae of the kit and potential fixes and workarounds on the other hand ARE what this forum should be for in my opinion. However, not my forum, not my rules, just expressing my opinion is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, madmanrick said:

Sio, respectfully it is not my place to tell you how to run your business. You seem to be capable enough at it.

 

However, speaking only for myself, these vague "I know, but won't tell" posts don't sit well with me. I do not believe this to be the appropriate forum for the airing of those types of grievances. Surely none of us here are qualified to adjudicate your claims, nor do we have the authority. I also do not believe it is an appropriate forum for the company bashing that has gone on here, tbh. Discussing the minutiae of the kit and potential fixes and workarounds on the other hand ARE what this forum should be for in my opinion. However, not my forum, not my rules, just expressing my opinion is all.

+1

Share this post


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

+1

 

Dude, you copied his post....  :cop:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, habu2 said:

 

Dude, you copied his post....  :cop:

.... as I guess I just did yours. What's so weird about Mstor or anybody else quoting a post and agreeing with it? Okay, his post was just underneath the one he quoted, but that doesn't always happen, and a random "+1" post referring to --what? doesn't seem so desirable. Just sayin'.

Edited by seawinder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, seawinder said:

 What's so weird about Mstor or anybody else quoting a post and agreeing with it?

 

Weird?  No, nefarious.  Obviously we are into throwing around accusations of copying things - kits, posts, cats...    :OMG-OMG:

 

Just callin' them like I see'um. 

 

:sarcasm_on:

 

OK, sarcasm off now.  I totally agree with madmanrick's post which Mstor +1'd.  People need to lighten up here and stop with the personal attacks and insinuations of industrial espionage.  If they don't stop, this carnival of a thread won't see 312 pages much less 400.

 

.

 

Edited by habu2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, habu2 said:

OK, sarcasm off now.  I totally agree with madmanrick's post which Mstor +1'd.  People need to lighten up here and stop with the personal attacks and insinuations of industrial espionage.  If they don't stop, this carnival of a thread won't see 312 pages much less 400.

 

Is OK, I knew you were pulling our leg as soon as I read it. Well done habu2. :clap2:

 

P.S. I use  "+1" as I find the ubiquitous "Word" to look like one is trying to be too cool. Just saying. :whistle:

Edited by Mstor

Share this post


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

 

Is OK, I knew you were pulling our leg as soon as I read it. Well done habu2. :clap2:

 

P.S. I use  "+1" as I find the ubiquitous "Word" to look like one is trying to be too cool. Just saying. :whistle:

Word!

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...