This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Giorgio N

Members
  • Content count

    9,956
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Giorgio N last won the day on November 13 2012

Giorgio N had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,533 Excellent

4 Followers

About Giorgio N

  • Rank
    Completely Obsessed Member
  • Birthday 22/07/69

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

7,101 profile views
  1. Martin, if it can be of help I'll have a look at the afterburner included in the Meng F-102 kit and let you know what it's like.
  2. Aircraft manufacturers also already have plenty of free publicity whenever there's a crisis somewhere in the world, with pictures of Eagles, Hornet and Typhoons appearing on every national newspaper and every TV channel. Again, not that this results in people knocking at Boeing doors to buy one of their fighters On the opposite side, when an aircraft suddenly becomes famous, model companies get extra revenues: when Top Gun hit the screens in the '80s there was a rush to buy anything depicting a Tomcat, the owner of the local model shop said that he'd never seen so many people as in those days, all asking a kit of whatever was the aircraft Maverick flew in the movie
  3. Agree with that, it may not be the preferred choice for lovers of the Phantom but at the right price would be a decent canvas onto which add some good colour scheme and some extra detail. It's on the Italeri website for €38, is this a good price ? Not sure, the way superior Academy kits (that however don't represent the E variant) can be found for €45-50... true that I'm comparing full RRP with a discounted price, so not a fair comparison, however I feel that this kit would make sense at €25-27, at full RRP it becomes less interesting
  4. Nothing wrong with being a collector of kits, it's in itself a hobby like many others. As a modeller though I have a small complaint against collectors: they have played a big part in the increase of prices on the second hand market. Not that high prices weren't seen before the appearance of kits collecting as a hobby, but when the notions of collectable value and rarity started being applied to plastic kits, their prices (or at least the prices of some kind of products) increased. This nothing serious of course, it's just that collectors are a different kind of competition when it's time to look for that old OOP kit that I may want because it's the only kit of the subject I like while for the collector it may be the piece he needs to complete his collection of kits from that particular brand. I have friends who are collectors and I can't believe that they have certain kits and will never build them while at the same time they can't believe how I could contemplate even just removing the parts from the runners of that particularly rare kit...
  5. From my very limited experience, it would really depend on the policy of each licensor. Generally a licensee would purchase a license covering all products within a certain cathegory so that for example if Corgi has a license to use the name Tornado from Panavia on die-cast models, they would be able to use this name whenever they want to make a new Tornado model. If however Corgi wanted to sell mouse-mats with the Tornado name and logo, they may require a new license as this product is likely outside the cathegory for which the license was initially purchased. Some licensors have separated die-casts from kits in their cathegory list, and have issued different licenses to separate companies. Some just include all of these into the "toys" cathegory, it would depend on how wide the cathegories are and where the licensors believe they can make money. I have gone through such a list from a European military force and they had only a few quite broad cathegories (like clothing items, toys, household items and so on), others have more and narrower cathegories. Clearly a larger number of cathegories allows more potential licensees, what's the point of issuing a license for toys to a single manufacturer that doesn't cover the whole market ? At the same time a single license can bring in more money that 10 smaller ones. Not knowing the terms of each contract it's of course impossible to tell what Airfix could or not have covered by pre-existing licenses held by Hornby. If I were the Hornby representative, I'd try to buy a license covering the whole range of models that my group could supply, so both die-casts and kits. There's also the matter of exclusive versus non exclusive licenses: if, again as a hypothetical example, the same Panavia had an agreement with say Revell for the exclusive use of the name Tornado on kits, then there's no way that Airfix could sell a model of this aircraft until the end of the license. Of course I've used imaginary examples.. we know that there's no exclusive license on the Tornado name as this is currently used by several manufacturers of kits and die-cast models. I know nothing of any license agreements between model companies and aircraft manufacturers so I'm simply applying my very small experience in what is a huge world. And I also know that I'd love a new Tornado F.3 made to the same quality of Airfix recent kits ! I know that with all the possible variations and the lot of "generally" I used, my post is of little use... wonder if there's any lawyer on the forum who has more experience of these issues and can tell us more, of course without divulging any confidential information
  6. I'm not a collector of kits, even if my stash is now over 200 (small by someone's standard but large by other's) I'm a modeler and not a collector. I'm not a collector because I intend to build all these kits. I know, I'll never be able to build them all, but the plan is to at least try. I'm not a collector because even if I do have rare kits, I bought these to build them. Or maybe resell them if I realise that I'm not going to build them, following the principle that the rare stuff would get me more money than the rest. I may become a "trader" the day this happen, but I'd still not be a collector. I'm not a collector because although I do buy older OOP kits, I select them for their buildability value and not for their collectable value. I don't care if the 1977 issue is rarer, if the 1982 issue has nicer decals this is the one I buy... and if the 1987 issue is the cheapest then this is most likely the one I'll buy. I don't care if the kit comes in a rare red box, I'd rather buy a cheaper one with no box. I'm not a collector because I almost invariably open the box and open the bags to check the plastic. This action alone is something that no serious collector would do as would reduce the value of the kit. I know, the boxes watching me from the top of the cupboard may seem to show the opposite, but I can guarantee you that I'm not a collector...
  7. Impressive work on the cockpit, the seat belt assembly alone is a small masterpiece ! Love the overall finish, the resin parts may be very good from the factory, but your painting skills made them become real
  8. The traditional pavement of Roman street is made from the so-called "Sampietrino", a block of mid-grey stone with an approximate size of 120X120 mm. The stone used is very common in most of Central Italy and this material was first used in Rome in the XVI Century. It's still used today in central areas of the city and to get an idea of the colour variations you can google the word, will return many images. There's even a wikipedia page in English language on this pavement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampietrini Of course in the 1940's asphalt had already been introduced and some of the main roads in the larger cities started to be covered in this material in the late '20s. There sure were asphalt paved roads in 1940's Rome, however the pavement in the central areas would have remained in stone
  9. Eve with all the tribulations it looks good ! Well done, it's great to see the first of the Starfighter family in model form.
  10. Martin, when you say that the kit F-102 style afterburner is inaccurate, what kit are you building ?
  11. The problem with what hasn't been done to death is the size of the potential market. Airfix know just by looking at their past sales that for example a Spitfire Mk.I has a certain potential of X kits each year. What is the potential of the P-8 ? If this potential is below the numbers needed to recover the investment and make a profit there's no way that Airfix or any other company will make a kit. And even if the potential market allows a profit to be made, why choose to be the only ones to cover a 5,000 pieces market when they can take 10% of a 100,000 pieces market ? As licensing has been mentioned, Airfix would have no problem with licenses for aircrafts like the Typhoon or the Tornado as Hornby already produces models of these types under the Corgi brand (and the Typhoon is also in Airfix easy build line). If a license is needed for these types, then it's very likely that Hornby already has such license
  12. Thanks to all, don't know how much detail I'll be able to add but for sure all these modifications will make the build more difficult... While my latest update was a while ago, I've actually worked constantly on this kit. Ok, maybe not much per day, but I tried to do something almost every day. Both flaps have now been cut from the wings, a job of which I hated every second. Both wings have now received two plasticard strips, one to close the rear of the wheel well (and representing the rear spar) and one to cover part of the flap recess (slotted flaps have different chord on upper and lower surfaces, so needing a cover on the wing uppersurface to maintain the profile when the flaps are closed). The plasticard strips have been sanded flush and filler has been applied on the top. The wings will need some more work, but it was time to work on the cockpit. My original plan was to use the Pavla set but no matter what I tried, I couldn't find a way to make this fit in the Meng fuselage. So in the end yesterday I reverted to using the original kit cockpit. This required some added detail, in particular the bulkhead behind the seat that was added from thin plasticard. A plasticard rectangle was also glued on the bottom of the cockpit part to represent the top of the intake trunk. This rectangle was then sanded to give a slight curvature. The instrument panel was another problem... the kit panel is inaccurate and too small. I checked the Eduard PE part meant for the Revell kit and this was better but not completely accurate either. In the end I decided to make a resin clone of the Pavla part. I did not use the Pavla panel as this needed work to be made to fit and I preferred to work on the softer resin I use to cast my own part. Cutting the Pavla resin would have likely resulted in breaking the part. So here are the cockpit and the panel after some medium blue-grey paint was sprayed on (darker on the panel) The paint I used was mixed from a couple of Vallejo bottles to represent the colour used on Ginas and other Italian built aircrafts. The Pavla set is now back in its box, unfortunately it's been chopped in parts to attempt fitting this in the Meng kit. Hopefully I'll be able to reuse it for my planned Matchbox G.91Y. Another area that required a lot of experimentation is the air intake. I tried using filler and plasticard but none of these gave me good results. In the end I found that using simple paper allowed me to make a part that I could fold as I needed. To make the paper more robuts, I applied on one side a layer of aluminum self adhesive tape, courtesy of the local DIY shop. This is a great product for modelers and can find many uses in our hobby. But more on this in the next post...
  13. And that thread was right: none of those who were "mainstream" manufacturer made an AMX. Italeri in particular never touched the AMX even if this topped every Italian wish list for the last 15 years. The first AMX came from Kinetic, one of the new wave of Chinese companies. These companies for a number or reasons can get the investment on a new mould back with smaller numbers compared to the likes of Italeri and it's this business model that allows them to issue kits of types that are not particularly popular. The same applies to other Chinese companies and we have recently seen a good number of new kits of subjects that no traditional mainstream company would have touched. In a sense they have filled the gap existing between "short run" companies and the traditional mainstream manufacturers. That's why in my earlier post I mentioned Chinese companies like Kitty Hawk, if they can sell a Starfire in the numbers required to make a profit, then they may also think of a Scimitar. Trumpeter then issued their AMX. Don't know if this was a reaction to the Kinetic one (something along the lines of "ehi, they're making an AMX, let's make one ourselves"). Their catalogue shows a mix of common and unusual, they too may think of a Scimitar and Denford above mentioned Trumpeter for this same reason. As for the Italeri AMX, we're still waiting... they tried to get an agreement with Kinetic to rebox their kit but this failed, guess that now they'll just live happily without an AMX in their catalogue, as they did for the last 15 years...
  14. Ah the Scimitar... the last aircraft to carry the glorious Supermarine name! The FAA first swept wing type. Entered service in 1958, a good 6 years after the entry into squadron service of the USN Cougar and 5 after the Fury The first FAA aircraft to be able to carry a nuclear weapon, only a couple years after the Skyhawk (a type that had quite a different career). A type that, as often happened in those years, enjoyed a very brief career as the replacement was already flying as a prototype when the type entered service. That in that same fateful 1958 another carrierborne type later known as the Phantom II made its maiden flight is an indication of how fast aircraft design was developing in those years. In 1936 Supermarine showed the world the Spitfire, one of the best if not the best fighter of its era, one of the true icons of aviation history 20 years later Supermarine gave us the Scimitar, an unspectatular aircraft that is now almost forgotten. A type that sure marked a few firsts for the FAA but all of these just remarked how this service had changed in 10 years from being one of the most advanced carrier force in the world to being a force constantly lagging behind the others in terms of aircrafts technology. So yes, in a sense the Scimitar was historically important as it was a milestone in the decline of both Supermarine and the FAA... Even so, I'd happily build a model of the Scimitar ! 1/48 isn't my scale of choice but who knows, maybe a Scimitar in this scale will appear. I wouldn't ask the larger manufacturers though, this kind of subject is probably more in line with the catalogues of smaller short-run manufacturers. Chinese manufacturers may also be the ones to issue a 1/48 Scimitar, afterall some of them are producing similarly lesser popular types (like the KH Starfire)
  15. As Jure said, this has been discussed often, a search for Tomcat in the Cold War section will give you all the info you need. In any case, my personal view is that Hasegawa is still the best, with the Fine Molds D very close and even superior in some areas. The latter is however not the easiest to find. Fujimi is a good third but is only accurate for an A, their B and D have some inaccuracies