song Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Hi all: we have a new Mirage 2000 3D finish. Single seat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
song Posted January 15, 2016 Author Share Posted January 15, 2016 Engine Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Manuel J. Armas S. Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Peruvian decals please... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcatfreak Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Please let it be in 1/32 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ijozic Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 A relatively high-tech 1/48 kit would be pretty welcome, too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) Mirage 2000 doesnt have any intake splitter, just a cone; EDIT; I see this was pointed out in the other thread too. Also the top of the tail is rounded, not chopped off with an axe. Edited January 15, 2016 by Berkut Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Airfixer Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) Please let it be in 1/32 Same here...another favourite on the horizon. Looks promising. <cough> wing root trailing edge/rear fuselage transition... </cough> Edited January 15, 2016 by Airfixer Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JeffreyK Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Interesting stuff, I do wonder why though the CAD seemingly hasn't been designed for injection moulding...? I see lots of undercuts, tapers and "floating" components that would be perfect for 3D printing/resin moulding but impossible to produce with injection moulding. Isn't it twice the amount of work to then start and re-design everything for injection moulding? Just thinking out loud... Jeffrey Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mizar Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 This has no chances to happening in 1/72 right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
31Tiger Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 This has no chances to happening in 1/72 right? just about every aircraft has been done in this tiny scale...you guys are covered me thinks In 1:32 scale there is still a lot off aircraft that are not done in injected plastic.... so please make it in 1:32! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Inquisitor Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Interesting stuff, I do wonder why though the CAD seemingly hasn't been designed for injection moulding...? I see lots of undercuts, tapers and "floating" components that would be perfect for 3D printing/resin moulding but impossible to produce with injection moulding. Isn't it twice the amount of work to then start and re-design everything for injection moulding? Just thinking out loud... Jeffrey From the previous thread it seems Kitty Hawk 3D scanned or got 3D scans of the airplane. And as seen from the pics of the cockpit and turbine there;s all the 'garbage' from the rough files. From there I could make an assumption they cleaned or designed the 3d models and after that comes the modifications and cuts to make the kit parts for molding. But, as it's been discussed or rather argued about in many threads, people think 3D scan is the 'foolproof' way to make a model, well here's your answer. As pointed out by Berkut, it doesn't have a splitter and the vertical tail tip is curved, but somehow from 3D scans, which look correct and complete as seen in the other thread to 3D models they managed to goof those two details. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mizar Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 just about every aircraft has been done in this tiny scale...you guys are covered me thinks :taunt:/> In 1:32 scale there is still a lot off aircraft that are not done in injected plastic.... so please make it in 1:32! Italeri is out of scale Heller is old,needs rescribing,canopy shape is off,some bits need replacements or new shapes So nope we are not covered,same thing applies with the Rafale we are not covered with accurate models Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 3D scanning does not automatically mean a 100% accurate model kit at the press of a button. There's a LOT more to it than that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 3D scanning does not automatically mean a 100% accurate model kit at the press of a button. There's a LOT more to it than that. I'm sure that's true, but isn't that the best approach to an accurate model? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
song Posted January 16, 2016 Author Share Posted January 16, 2016 I'm sure that's true, but isn't that the best approach to an accurate model? i think that is the best way to do a accurate model. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 I'm sure that's true, but isn't that the best approach to an accurate model? Not enough. People who "understand" the subject are also required in the design team. So that things like a snapshot of Mirage 2000 model with boundary layer splitter and chopped fin aren't posted on forums. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 i think that is the best way to do a accurate model. :rolleyes:/> Mr. Song, are you going to tell us what scale is in? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 People who understand how real aircraft are designed, built, and operated. Otherwise you end up with things like curved piano hinges (KH OV-10 anyone?). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Marcel111 Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 (edited) Song, it is really great to see that you are working on what I presume to be a 1/32 project that will hopefully result in a 1/32 jet that has not been produced in that scale before! I am truly excited and hope you are not discouraged by some of the feedback (including mine) that you see over here. It looks like there is no discouraging you from designing the engine (does doing the engine really impact unit sales or get you more price?), but as has been pointed out in the parallel thread on this subject, please do focus on accuracy and make the build as easy and quick to assemble as possible. Apart from that being general voice of customer, it should increase the market potential of the project since individuals will build and hence purchase more of the kit (increase unit sales/customer)... so the return on the project will be greater. :cheers:/> Marcel Edited January 16, 2016 by Marcel111 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 I like having the option of an engine. Just my humble opinion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 and hence purchase more of the kit (increase unit sales/customer)... so the return on the project will be greater. This doesn't apply to 1/32 jets IMHO. Even if the Mirage 2000 isn't too big a plane, I doubt that the majority of potential customers would buy several of the same boxing because of storage problem (unbuilt or built kit). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aigore Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 Engine-no engine not important, make it right -that's important! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dryguy Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 All of the previous criticisms are spot on. In addition, the nose cone seems too upturned to me, almost like an su24 or Tu22 backfire type of look about the nose. I hope kittyhawk do pay attention to the suggested accuracy improvements now before any tooling is cut. The suggestions I have seen so far have been posted ina neutral, helpful manner. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Marcel111 Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 (edited) This doesn't apply to 1/32 jets IMHO. Even if the Mirage 2000 isn't too big a plane, I doubt that the majority of potential customers would buy several of the same boxing because of storage problem (unbuilt or built kit). I am certain that it applies to a % of the market but of course it's not an absolute. Look at a guy like Chuck, he's built two Tamiya Phantoms and is about to start I believe his 2nd Tamiya F-15E. I doubt he'll be doing another A-10. I will be starting my 2nd Tamiya Phantom as my next build, and will probably do another Tamiya F-16 after that, I wouldn't do that that if those kits were as big of a challenge as some others are. So even if it only applies to a minority of the market, which I doubt, it would still increase the market potential of the product. :cheers:/> Marcel Edited January 17, 2016 by Marcel111 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
falcon91352 Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 I am hoping, that the Kitty Hawk Mirage 2000 will be released in 1:32, because in this scale exists a big gap eith French jets. We already have a bunch of M2000 kits in 1:48, which are not perfect, but orkable and therefore better than nothing. In 1:32 there actually is nothing with this type of aircraft. 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.