1/48 - Grumman F-14A/B & D Tomcat by AvantGarde Model Kits (AMK) - F-14D released

[F4u]

Looking good Martin this is going to be so good

Guy

[solowing666]

On 9/14/2016 at 5:04 PM, Parabat said:

Looking good, but please check that the bottom intake lip is parallel to the top lip, currently on that front view the bottom lip is parallel to the floor, same mistake Hobby Boss made.

 

Wow, I didn't know this. I knew the Trumpy's 1/32 tomcats had this mistake but I didn't know about HB's 1/48 cats. Definitely watching with interest...

[Robert]

I see that AMK (Martin) will be at Telford this year 🙌 as announced on their Facebook page.

 

Martin, will you have your own stand or be part of someone else ? It will be good to see you and AMK represented at the premium model event of the year.

 

 

[Martin @ AMK Hobby]

I’ll be milling about with Uschi Van Der Rosten and friends.

I will be wearing a grey AMK T-Shirt so pop over and say hello.

[DIO]

On 28/9/2016 at 3:50 PM, solowing666 said:

 

Wow, I didn't know this. I knew the Trumpy's 1/32 tomcats had this mistake but I didn't know about HB's 1/48 cats. Definitely watching with interest...

 

 

If this is true, then above needs refinement!

[Christer A]

This has been covered. The Picture above is not parallell to the ground but at an angel. Notice the main landing Gear leg to the left, that should be close to vertical, so you need to rotate the Picture clockwise in your head to get  the horisontal view.

[ICMF]

Problem is, even if the render is at an angle, the intake is *still* wrong.

 

The top edge of the F-14's intake is parallel to the bottom edge:

 

 

The opening is rectangular.  AMK's isn't.  The top and bottom edges aren't parallel.  They have made a trapezium, not a rectangle.

[Ka-Efka]

Your photo is directly from the front, the rendering at an angle from below. Could be misleading. I hope it is...

 

Great photo btw.

[Tbolt]

3 hours ago, ICMF said:

Problem is, even if the render is at an angle, the intake is *still* wrong.

 

The top edge of the F-14's intake is parallel to the bottom edge:

 

 

The opening is rectangular.  AMK's isn't.  The top and bottom edges aren't parallel.  They have made a trapezium, not a rectangle.

 

They look pretty close to parallel to me - if measured it's a small bit off which is probably just due to the CAD perspective, note how the parts further in the intake are at a slightly different angle as well.

Edited October 4, 2016 by Tbolt

[ICMF]

1 hour ago, Tbolt said:

probably just due to the CAD perspective

 

No.  It's wrong.

 

First and foremost, while the intakes on the actual aircraft aren't perpendicular to the ground, everything within the actual intake assemblies themselves is square.  The sides are square to the top and bottom, the ramps are square to the walls:

 

 

 

The AMK intakes aren't.  They look to be about 10` out of whack.  The upper lip, ramps and interior details are all pretty much parallel to each other, but they're not parallel to the lower lip - they're rotated about 10` - nor are they perpendicular to the sides.  You don't even need a much-derided red-line drawing to see it.  Just scroll up and down the page.

 

As for perspective...  that doesn't explain the discrepancy.  It's just not the way the 'perspective' function works in any CAD software that I've ever heard of.  And I suspect that the render was captured without perspective anyway - if they had perspective switched on (it's a user-selectable option in most CAD software), the compressor fan would be smaller than the intake opening.  You also wouldn't be able to see both sides of the *outer* intake skin (you can on the render) but you *would* see both of the intake's *inner* vertical walls (you can't on the render). 

[DIO]

Martin, I believe ICMF's comments should be taken very seriously.

He is right .

Edited October 4, 2016 by DIO

[Ka-Efka]

Thing still is, It's just impossible to draw those definitive conclusion from these CAD screenshots. So I'd recommend to get the emotions down a little and see what the response from AMK / Martin is.

[Tbolt]

19 hours ago, ICMF said:

 

No.  It's wrong.

 

First and foremost, while the intakes on the actual aircraft aren't perpendicular to the ground, everything within the actual intake assemblies themselves is square.  The sides are square to the top and bottom, the ramps are square to the walls:

 

 

 

The AMK intakes aren't.  They look to be about 10` out of whack.  The upper lip, ramps and interior details are all pretty much parallel to each other, but they're not parallel to the lower lip - they're rotated about 10` - nor are they perpendicular to the sides.  You don't even need a much-derided red-line drawing to see it.  Just scroll up and down the page.

 

As for perspective...  that doesn't explain the discrepancy.  It's just not the way the 'perspective' function works in any CAD software that I've ever heard of.  And I suspect that the render was captured without perspective anyway - if they had perspective switched on (it's a user-selectable option in most CAD software), the compressor fan would be smaller than the intake opening.  You also wouldn't be able to see both sides of the *outer* intake skin (you can on the render) but you *would* see both of the intake's *inner* vertical walls (you can't on the render). 

 

I understand everything in the intake should be square/parallel (as viewed directly from the front)  that's why I pointed it out because it's not parallel in the render and assumed it must be the image otherwise they've managed to get everything a little off which seems strange.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Tbolt

[Martin @ AMK Hobby]

The CAD you see is tilted so the intakes look parallel. They are not on the CAD drawing.

If you tilt the CAD drawing to the right so the bottom of the fuselage is on the horizontal then the intakes kick out off horizontal.

 

The intakes are also rectangular. Everything was checked again today.

 

[DIO]

 

Top lines should be parallel to the lower one.

Cannot be certain though, also depending on the angle the image is taken...

[Navy Bird]

Interesting conversation about the CAD rendering of the intakes. Because the top edge is considerably farther forward than the bottom, you have to know what kind of projection is being used. Projection is the method of representing a 3-D object on a 2-D surface (in this case the monitor). The projection used (orthographic, isometric, parallel, axonometric, oblique, etc.) will affect how objects in the distance appear smaller and can also change the geometric appearance of the object, especially angles.

 

Additionally, the type of perspective (1-point, 2-point, 3-point, etc.) is also a factor. All of these factors, when combined, can alter the appearance of a CAD rendering and make it appear different than what the 3-D model actually represents.

 

If Martin says that they checked the intakes (I assume he's referring to the 3-D objects that make up the intakes) and that they are correct, I'm ready to believe him.

 

Cheers,

Bill

[Pfeil]

+1

 

[Robotics]

And slowly this forum changes to a backseat driving technical drawing agency...

 

**************RUMOURMONGER******************

 

Joe

[DIO]

As I said already, might just be the angle the screenshot was taken.

If though this comment could make AMK team to recheck, and if wrong, the end result would be something to make us all happy.

The irony on the other hand, never helped anyone for sure.

 

 

[71chally]

AMK have already said they are working closely with Tomcat people and are using a real Tomcat for the basis for the design of this kit.

I don't believe that they would mess this obvious feature up.

 

I'm willing to trust them, especially over a photograph where getting a true perspective is incredibly difficult.

 

You can see why some kit companies may not want to be as open about their future products as AMK have been here.

[ICMF]

It'd be pretty easy to settle the debate by posting a head-on, perspectiveless render of the intakes.

[salomon]

In the end I don't think the model I build should be a "REAL" but that looks real with some awesome detail, so please leave AMK working on that Tomcat and I'm sure that could be the best 1/48's F-14. I'll buy some for sure.

[Ka-Efka]

4 hours ago, Navy Bird said:

Interesting conversation about the CAD rendering of the intakes. Because the top edge is considerably farther forward than the bottom, you have to know what kind of projection is being used. Projection is the method of representing a 3-D object on a 2-D surface (in this case the monitor). The projection used (orthographic, isometric, parallel, axonometric, oblique, etc.) will affect how objects in the distance appear smaller and can also change the geometric appearance of the object, especially angles.

 

Additionally, the type of perspective (1-point, 2-point, 3-point, etc.) is also a factor. All of these factors, when combined, can alter the appearance of a CAD rendering and make it appear different than what the 3-D model actually represents.

 

If Martin says that they checked the intakes (I assume he's referring to the 3-D objects that make up the intakes) and that they are correct, I'm ready to believe him.

 

Cheers,

Bill

I am very sure there is no projection used. This seems direct from the construction. You usually don't use projection there. Slows down the workstation...

[Tomcat4Life]

4 hours ago, 71chally said:

AMK have already said they are working closely with Tomcat people and are using a real Tomcat for the basis for the design of this kit.

I don't believe that they would mess this obvious feature up.

 

I'm willing to trust them, especially over a photograph where getting a true perspective is incredibly difficult.

 

You can see why some kit companies may not want to be as open about their future products as AMK have been here.

I just wonder if AMK is working with Northrup-Grumman on this project.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Tomcat4Life
Grammer

[Martin @ AMK Hobby]

It'd be pretty easy to settle the debate by posting a head-on, perspectiveless render of the intakes.

Perhaps when Sio has time from actually making the kit - anything that distracts him from doing that only prolongs the release date. Not something I want him to do really.
I prefer that we just take your notes, look carefully at what you tell us, act on it and go forward. I think it is probably enough to say that we have done it and to thank you for bringing it to our attention.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Martin @ AMK Hobby