Jump to content

Kittyhawk new tool Mirage 2000 Family


Recommended Posts

Mirage 2000 doesnt have any intake splitter, just a cone;

Mirage_2000_DSC04162.JPG

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 by Berkut
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please let it be in 1/32 w00t.gif

Same here...another favourite on the horizon.

Looks promising.

<cough>

wing root trailing edge/rear fuselage transition...

</cough>

Edited by Airfixer
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Marcel111
Link to post
Share on other sites
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).

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Marcel111
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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...