Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 5/23/2017 at 10:31 AM, VAL-4 Black Ponies said:

Yep, door hold open assembly. I've got the Air Force version of the "Illustrated Parts Breakdown" on the Black Pony webpage - http://www.blackpony.org/ipb.pdf

Thanks for answering and providing the link.

The part I'm not sure about is what the latch attaches to to hold the door open. Is it the ring in this pic?

Ring_zpskes86fdd.jpg

 

 

On 5/23/2017 at 10:52 AM, VAL-4 Black Ponies said:

No hills in the Mekong Delta. Nothing in the books about it - so the North American Tech Reps told us to throw a line over the booms, loop & tie it loosely and sit on the rope to pull the nose up. In actual practice - we walked up to the nose gear facing aft, placed a shoulder blade under the fuselage - and straightened up lifting the nose until the gear extends & locks, place chock behind wheel and it would stay that way until your done.

Fascinating stuff.

Might make for an interesting diorama!

How many men does it take to lift the nose? How many to sit on the rope if that method is used?

 

:cheers:

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

I wear that badge proudly!

You can but it's also a burden:

- if the "rivet counter" is only a forum dweller, "it looks like a X to me"s will bounce on him

- if the "rivet counter" helps internally a particular company, some of his findings may be ignored for cost and keeping-on-schedule reasons so there's may be some frustration

 

6 hours ago, Zactoman said:

Having said that and now being part of a development team, I dread the thought that somebody might find problems and point them out for the whole world to see (It's embarrassing, especially if it's a stupid mistake).

Some have suggested e-mailing the company about the flaws rather than making it public. I am mixed about this because somebody noticing a small flaw might lead somebody else to finding a related bigger/fatal flaw that might have otherwise been fixed.

That's why a company should use several contributors on a project, not only a single subject expert. The problem is that a subject expert may not be efficient at troubleshooting and explaining convincingly what's wrong.

 

6 hours ago, Zactoman said:

Generally, molds will not be changed (very expensive!) so test shots pretty much always represent the final product.

It's depends if the company owns the toolshop or not. Owning one has some pros (tight QC, reactivity) and cons (need to keep machines and employees working, idle ressources to be avoided)

 

Anyway. Sprues layout design and tooling phases soon !

 

Edited by Laurent
Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one think that posting CADs is a good idea if people can provide reasonable input. An example of this happened recently with Airfix in 1/72 with their Wildcat kit. Last year they released a 1/72 Wildcat kit in one of the most produced variants (two bank radial engine) then decided to work off the same mold but add a new sprue to make a Martlet IV British Wildcat that had a single cylinder bank radial engine. They tooled up a new cowling and prop and stuff on a new tree and posted CADs of the revised model. but it was pointed out on an English discussion board that when the conversion was done in real life the fuselage forward of the wing was extended too to keep length similar with a single bank of cylinders, not just a new cowling and engine. Their new sprue wouldn't work if they wanted to do a proper job. Airfix bit the bullet and then ran a further sprue with a two part fuselage extension and a new cowling to match to it but still using parts (engine, propeller etc.) from the first new sprue and effectively corrected their mistake. If other companies listened like Airfix did we would have less to complain about when kits are released but as the moulds had been made, it cost them to correct the matter and they are to be congratulated for doing so. Hopefully this is a new trend that continues...... Good luck on your future release as it is looking like a very nice kit even if not my particular scale...

Link to post
Share on other sites

On this Memorial Day,
Remember the Fallen,
Honor their Service and Sacrifice,
and Rejoice in your Freedom.

 

Final_zpsxm7getwo.jpg

 

LTJG Joel Alexis Sandberg, USN, and CAPT Carl Edwin Long, USMC lost on December 20, 1969...

 

:occasion2:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
24 minutes ago, f-16 said:

Seems to have gotten quiet since your last post...

 

Yeah... I guess nobody cared for the box art... :dontknow:

 

Waiting for the tooling and test shots. Still no news on price or estimated release date.

I'll post as soon as I get anything.

 

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 7:58 PM, Zactoman said:

 

Yeah... I guess nobody cared for the box art... :dontknow:

 

Waiting for the tooling and test shots. Still no news on price or estimated release date.

I'll post as soon as I get anything.

 

:cheers:

 

I found the painting sobering.

gary 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really looking forward to this kit and hopefully there's a OV-10D in the future as well!   It's a bit of a unlikely wish but a kit of the proposed Boeing OV-10X Super Bronco with the 5/6 blade props, LGB's, Hellfire missiles, etc. would be stupendous - if not in plastic, maybe a resin conversion.

 

After the OV-10X, I need to find a conversion for a 1/48 F/A-14 Super Tomcat 21.

 

They'd look great next to my 1/48 F-20 and 1/48 A-4 Super Skyhawk! 

 

:cheers: and happy modeling, Bryan 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...

Good to hear some positive feedback on the box art! I thought the artist did a great job. :thumbsup:

 

On 7/24/2017 at 8:51 AM, chukw said:

Missed that fabulous box art- saved! Who's the artist? Can't quite make out the sig. Thanks!

The artists name is Shu Ming.

 

On 7/26/2017 at 3:42 PM, IAGeezer said:

Any idea when the kit will be released?

Still no firm answers on release date or price.

Test shot parts pics should be coming soon though! :banana:

 

On 7/27/2017 at 2:37 PM, usmcski6502 said:

With all these ordnance options, what are the chances of seeing a GPU-2 20mm gun pod?  They were carried on both As and Ds for the Marine Corps:

Not in this boxing. We are only including ordinance appropriate for the schemes included and as far as we know these aircraft didn't carry the GPU-2. The GPU-2 didn't actually start production until 1972.

 

:cheers:

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

P2V Neptune!

Enough with the speculation please. :709-457:

Our next project will be announced soon enough. I can't say what it is yet, but I will say it's not a twin engine blue aircraft. :hmmm:

 

Focus and repeat after me: "Bronco, Bronco, Bronco"

 

:cheers:

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...