Jump to content

MENG Super Hornet kits question


Recommended Posts

For those of you that have the later boxing of their SH kits VFA-2. Did MENG fix the decal sheets when it comes to the stencils? I have a couple of the first run kits and the kit decal stencils are just gray boxes and squiggly lines. Such a nice kit to have a half *** decal sheet. I know there are aftermarket decals that can be used to correct this and I have a few of them. I am just curious if the fixed this issue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a copy of LS-012; sure enough, the small letters/numbers are rendered as gray areas. Not sure whether it'll be obvious to the naked eye (almost certainly not to my 75-year-old pair), but what would people recommend for an aftermarket sheet of stencils?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, tosouthern66 said:

For those of you that have the later boxing of their SH kits VFA-2. Did MENG fix the decal sheets when it comes to the stencils? I have a couple of the first run kits and the kit decal stencils are just gray boxes and squiggly lines. Such a nice kit to have a half *** decal sheet. I know there are aftermarket decals that can be used to correct this and I have a few of them. I am just curious if the fixed this issue. 

Not to mention spelling errors: "CAUTIOX AREAS HOT AFTER OPERATIOX", "CAUTIOX: DO NOT BEST FOD ON RADCHE",  "CAUTIOX : HEFORE HONOVNO RADOME PLAEC AXTENNA IN FOW E AFT  FOWITION" if that makes sense to you.

 

Yes, aftermarket stencils very much required for the earlier kits. I hope they fixed it but I am not holding my breath.

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

So are we going to see this kind of chicanery on the F-4G ?

 

Rick L.

I certainly hope not since I prefer the Meng F-4G due to the OOB retracted slats option.

 

All 3 Meng Super Hornets I own have this decal issue, the EA-18G having the spelling issues. Considering decals were printed by Cartograf it is either a cost saving issue or a lack of actual data for most of the stencils being non-readable. No excuses for the spelling errors. Cartograf is more than capable making stenciling readable in 1/48 scale, unfortunately not in these Meng releases.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Nebbor said:

I certainly hope not since I prefer the Meng F-4G due to the OOB retracted slats option.

 

All 3 Meng Super Hornets I own have this decal issue, the EA-18G having the spelling issues. Considering decals were printed by Cartograf it is either a cost saving issue or a lack of actual data for most of the stencils being non-readable. No excuses for the spelling errors. Cartograf is more than capable making stenciling readable in 1/48 scale, unfortunately not in these Meng releases.

 

It isn't a 'cost saving issue' as the decals being wrong has absolutely no bearing on the cost. Price of a decal sheet is based on its size, quantity of the run and number of colors. Accuracy of the artwork is completely irrelevant. Cartograf is simply the printer and only prints what is sent to them. All of the misspellings and small dots/blocks in place of actual text is 100% on Meng and whoever designed the decal art.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Nebbor said:

And printing resolution has nothing to do with cost of decals?

A squiggly line costs the same to print as actual text. 

 

Obviously Cartograf has no problem printing tiny letters and numbers for other sheets as we have all seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Solo said:

I have very first F/A-18E with excellent quality of decals:
90.jpg

84.jpg

86.jpg

 

So many spelling mistakes. Decal 59 is not even english! Its either lazy or just not enough research. 

 

I think AMK included a decal sheet from third party for its F-14. Meng could have gone the same path. Such an important product feature lacking this basic research reflects very badly on the company. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Spook498 said:

A squiggly line costs the same to print as actual text. 

 

Obviously Cartograf has no problem printing tiny letters and numbers for other sheets as we have all seen.

Correct but you are assuming it is the same cost silk screen printing 600 dpi or 1600 dpi. I assure you it is not. A squiggly line at 1600dpi cost more than at 600 DPI. And for certain text size 1600dpi is required. It is not a matter if they can print tiny letters, it is if the customer wants to print at that resolution considering cost involved. At least that was what I was told when I wanted to print decals @Cartograf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the VF-2 F-18F sheet I have to say it’s dpi print quality is high.  So the question isn’t why didn’t Meng pony up for the top end print quality, but rather why didn’t they maximize the content with real stencils. Corners were cut. All on Meng’s part. 
 

Rick L. 

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

 

So many spelling mistakes. Decal 59 is not even english! Its either lazy or just not enough research. 

 

I think AMK included a decal sheet from third party for its F-14. Meng could have gone the same path. Such an important product feature lacking this basic research reflects very badly on the company. 

Some parts of decal 59 leaves me puzzled as well. Third party doesn't matter as they are most likely printed at the same facility. There aren't that many mainstream decal manufacturers in the world these days. It is what you supply the manufacturer and what you want to pay for extra resolution.

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

And printing resolution has nothing to do with cost of decals? That would be a first.

Regardless, as said it must be a lack of actual data. Or almighty Dave Roof knows all...

 

No, it doesn't and it wouldn't be a first. Both Cartograf and Microscale have minimum line weights they can print. Cartograf's is a much finer line weight, which is why some of the smallest text printed by them can still be read. Microscale can technically print the same small text, but it won't be as legible. It also isn't a matter of me "knowing all", it is simply from personal experience having had a couple dozen decal sheets printed by both over the course of the past 20 years.  

 

I've sent several files of decal art to Cartograf for quotes not only for my line, but for Kinetic and Zoukei-Mura as well, and not once was resolution ever a factor or even discussed. Again, the cost of a decal sheet is based on its size, the number of colors on the sheet and how many you get printed. The only other factor that would affect cost is if you have any art that is offset and of the two printers I mentioned, only Cartograf has that capability. 

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

 

No, it doesn't and it wouldn't be a first. Both Cartograf and Microscale have minimum line weights they can print. Cartograf's is a much finer line weight, which is why some of the smallest text printed by them can still be read. Microscale can technically print the same small text, but it won't be as legible. It also isn't a matter of me "knowing all", it is simply from personal experience having had a couple dozen decal sheets printed by both over the course of the past 20 years.  

 

I've sent several files of decal art to Cartograf for quotes not only for my line, but for Kinetic and Zoukei-Mura as well, and not once was resolution ever a factor or even discussed. Again, the cost of a decal sheet is based on its size, the number of colors on the sheet and how many you get printed. The only other factor that would affect cost is if you have any art that is offset and of the two printers I mentioned, only Cartograf has that capability. 

YMMV

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, when you say "how many (sheets) you get printed" is it a linear cost e.g. 200 sheets cost twice as much as 100 sheets? or is there a base setup cost plus the sheet count e.g. $100 setup + $1 per sheet?  Obviously I'm just making up $$s & ##s for an example...

 

(hope my wording makes sense)

 

.

 

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

Dave, when you say "how many (sheets) you get printed" is it a linear cost e.g. 200 sheets cost twice as much as 100 sheets? or is there a base setup cost plus the sheet count e.g. $100 setup + $1 per sheet?  Obviously I'm just making up $$s & ##s for an example...

 

(hope my wording makes sense)

 

.

 

 

The more sheets you have printed, the more your price per sheet goes down. As an example, one of the last sheets I sent to Microscale for a quote came back as follows :

 

250 sheets (Microscale's minimum) $421.50

500 sheets $542.00

 

While 500 sheets is more expensive, it is obviously more cost effective to have that many printed as the price per sheet is much less. This was for a 5.5 x 8.5 inch sheet with 9 colors. As an FYI, that exact same sheet (with literally nothing changed on the artwork) was quoted at $1100 by Cartograf for 500 sheets.

 

 

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

YMMV

 

Not necessarily. Below is an email I received directly from Davide at Cartograf this morning in response to my question about resolution sent last night. A phone call to Microscale yesterday afternoon got the same answer. Resolution does not come into play with regard to cost. 

 

For what it's worth, this isn't about me "being right". This is about providing correct and accurate information for anyone reading this that may be considering having decals printed. 

 

- What you write is correct , both us and Microscale use conventional printing technics where resolution is not considered as we mainly

Print vector graphic by screen printing . Resolution can be a factor in case of Offset printing but it is related to the artwork preparation and the size of the original image . In any case resolution is a not cost factor For the printing itself .

If we talk of digital printing also , resolution is only intended as pixel size and technical possibility of the printer . For example printers that can print 1200 x 1200 dpi have a lower Image quality respect printers that can print 1200 x 2400 dpi .

Even is such cases resolution cannot be a cost factor .

 

We use Offset printing because , at today , it give us the best print quality and smallest dot respect digital printers . The cost that we ask is not related to the resolution but only printing cost so machine cost , materials , and human labour cost .

I am not sure of Microscale use Offset printing , maybe they still use screen print CMYK . In such case this should be counted as 4 more colors respect spot colors .

We do not use this way because of lower quality results .

 

Have  a nice day and thanks

Davide

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input on the newer MENG boxing. I guess I will have to plan on getting additional stencil decal sheets from Furball. Dave I know what you are saying is factual due to having a conversation with someone who uses Microscale. I value your input on this! Thanks again guys!

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...