Paul J Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 7 hours ago, Gene K said: Well, I don't find your arrogance (to be kind) amusing. On second thought, it is amusing that you, as a "modeller", don't know the correct number of "holes" you were struggling to describe. Gene K I think Rad was humorously exaggerating millions of holes I feel a lot of pedantic comments coming... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfordhibby Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 9 hours ago, Dave Fleming said: All three as far as I'm aware - it would be good to get ssomething to represent the bleed air holes, even a decal or a bit of rough texture The rough texture idea for the intake ramp is worth thinking about. Much preferable to a decal, in my eyes. The absence of the grills/vents is more of a surprise to me. As others have pointed out "Fujimi" managed it 30 years ago. It is for reasons like this that I haven't pre-ordered and will wait until the kit has appeared. I don't have a problem with the Fujimi offering at the moment and will continue to assemble/model them. Peter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 7 hours ago, ICMF said: Same deal with all three areas though - they're all fine recessed details that Airfix may be simply incapable of reproducing. As I said, they're not major details, but they are quite visible, so I'd be shocked if they somehow overlooked the various vents, rather than making a conscious design decision. The boundary layer outlet vents are quite pronounced, and the rear vents are pretty well defined as well. There are clearly quite nice little moldings in the kit so I would be surprised if they couldn't represent these. The splitter plate holes are interesting in that sometimes they are noticeable and other times not so, but I agree with Dave, some sort of texture in the plastic would help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 I know it is unlikely, but it would be good customer relationship if a rep from Airfix was to inform us if they have decided to leave the kit as the review in Airfix Magazine and from what we have seen at Telford. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hook Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 6 hours ago, 71chally said: The boundary layer outlet vents are quite pronounced, and the rear vents are pretty well defined as well. There are clearly quite nice little moldings in the kit so I would be surprised if they couldn't represent these. The splitter plate holes are interesting in that sometimes they are noticeable and other times not so, but I agree with Dave, some sort of texture in the plastic would help. Perhaps they'd be better served with photoetch. Cheers, Andre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tomohawk Kid Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 7 hours ago, Robert said: I know it is unlikely, but it would be good customer relationship if a rep from Airfix was to inform us if they have decided to leave the kit as the review in Airfix Magazine and from what we have seen at Telford. Robert My understanding is test shots are to test the moulds, styrene flow and how the gates work in the IM machine. If the kits are being shot overseas I imagine the boxes are now snugly packed in shipping containers. Thomo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radleigh Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) On 22/11/2017 at 12:38 AM, Gene K said: Well, I don't find your arrogance (to be kind) amusing. On second thought, it is amusing that you, as a "modeller", don't know the correct number of "holes" you were struggling to describe. Gene K Gene, I'm not arrogant (please tell me how I am, when you meet me like many others have on BM will tell you I'm the least arrogant guy about) and the 1,000,000 holes was sarcasm... and I said 50-100 as I would have no idea on how Airfix could address this effectively to satisfy peoples needs. Edited November 23, 2017 by Radleigh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 In 1/72nd those millions of holes on the splitter plates would be practically invisible. I for one couldn't care less if they are not there. Then again, any very subtle representation would be better than none. I'd be more than happy if they were depicted as a decal only!!!! For crying out loud ... its only a model!!! 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caerbannog Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 Hmm - is it me or would it help to actually post some pictures of the details in question before the discussion continues? :-) My understanding was not the zillions () of holes on the splitter plate is the omitted detail. You can hardly see them on a much larger picture - to effectively represent them in styrene in 1:72 is in my eyes next to impossible. Even in PE it will be quite difficult I think. The first layer of paint will surely fill them anyway (at least when I paint it...). If I would try to show these holes on my build kit I would just paint these areas in a slightly darker shade of the remaining slitter plate and call it a day (not that I have ever finished a build lately...). Besides I also doubt a decal could represent the holes in scale. René 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfordhibby Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, Radleigh said: Gene, I'm not arrogant (please tell me how I am, when you meet me like many others have on BM will tell you I'm the least arrogant guy about) and the 1,000,000 holes was sarcasm... and I said 50-100 as I would have no idea on how Airfix could address this effectively to satisfy peoples needs. Radleigh, don't quote me on this but it may have been the "Modellers/Assemblers" that grated with Gene. Though I cannot speak for him, I certainly took it as a wee bit off. It gave the impression of....some are modellers, but others are mere assemblers. Modellers will sort it out whereas assemblers will expect someone else to come up with the solution. This can be a problem with written word, sarcasm can be mistaken for arrogance. If you're speaking face to face you can normally pick up the facial expression and the inflections contained in the conversation. There again, maybe this will be taken by some as arrogant or off or even pompous. Such is life, and one of the main reasons that I tend not to do a lot of posting. At the end of the day it is an expensive 1/72 kit and we all have different expectations we'd like to be met for the said price. Regards, Peter Edited November 23, 2017 by Blackfordhibby 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobsyouruncle Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) Yes on this scale the holes on the splitter plates are practicallly invisible on an individual basis, but collectively might look like a slighter darker shade patch (IMHO). I thought people were slightly more concerned about these features (seen here on FGR2 XV424 at Hendon)?:- Just added bottom one after mentioned by 71Chally Edited November 23, 2017 by bobsyouruncle To insert extra image 7 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) I will be honest, I'm an assembler. Time and money dictate so, I will improve the kit plastic as much as I can with the skills that I have (or haven't!). I do expect a £30 2017 kit to have levels of surface detail that a 30 year old kit managed. I can reach for my Fujimi Phantoms and build them out of the box without resorting to spending and fiddling with PE or resin aftermarket. They managed these subtle details (even the millions of holes area) in their kits, I would be amazed if a modern manufacturer couldn't. That said, this is all based on an assumption that the actual kit plastic is the same as the test build. Edit, cracking shots above, those boundary layer outlet vents are also repeated on the undersides, completely agree about the holes area showing up as a different shade. Edited November 23, 2017 by 71chally 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbolt Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Paul J said: In 1/72nd those millions of holes on the splitter plates would be practically invisible. I for one couldn't care less if they are not there. Then again, any very subtle representation would be better than none. I'd be more than happy if they were depicted as a decal only!!!! For crying out loud ... its only a model!!! If that's how you feel you might as well stick with the old Matchbox Phantom We all build different models to different standards - no need to get upset if someone's standards are different to yours. Edited November 23, 2017 by Tbolt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbolt Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) All this can be easily fix with some resin which I'm sure will appear for those who want it - new splitter plates with surface holes and the vents in the top and bottom can be one piece and the part above the exhaust is a separate piece so another resin bit for these vents. I do find it strange that they are adding details like the radar and missing obvious surface details, but I guess they are going for the wow factor to get sales. Edited November 23, 2017 by Tbolt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albeback52 Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Blackfordhibby said: Radleigh, don't quote me on this but it may have been the "Modellers/Assemblers" that grated with Gene. Though I cannot speak for him, I certainly took it as a wee bit off. It gave the impression of....some are modellers, but others are mere assemblers. Modellers will sort it out whereas assemblers will expect someone else to come up with the solution. This can be a problem with written word, sarcasm can be mistaken for arrogance. If you're speaking face to face you can normally pick up the facial expression and the inflections contained in the conversation. There again, maybe this will be taken by some as arrogant or off or even pompous. Such is life, and one of the main reasons that I tend not to do a lot of posting. At the end of the day it is an expensive 1/72 kit and we all have different expectations we'd like to be met for the said price. Regards, Peter In all honesty Peter, I find drawing a distinction between modellers and assemblers is, by itself a form of arrogance if not actual snobbery. There is, in my view NO distinction between the two. We are all here because we all enjoy the same hobby. Ergo, we are all modellers are we not? It's just a question of degree and how we apply ourselves to the hobby. There is no place for a "them and us" here. Most of my builds are out of box but, I do like to try and fix problems and/or improve basic kits myself.. Wonder what that makes me??. I certainly don't bother about accuracy or otherwise!! Getting back to the subject on hand, I agree that modellers SHOULDN'T have to pay extra for add on bits but, the choice is down to them. They can accept the model as is (imperfections and all) or, go ahead and fork out the hypothetical tenner for the hypothetical add ons. Their choice and, I respect that. As for me, I will happily accept the model as it is and, I rather suspect that for many customers, a series of issues which other posters here have already agreed are minor will matter not a jot. The kit looks like to meet any expectations I have and, that is really all that matters to me. As to why these issues arose? Who knows. I guess Airfix had their reasons but, they are certainly not enough to persuade me that the kit is unbuyable and, unbuildable!. Would I eschew the Airfix kit in favour of an admittedly very nice but, now very old Fujimi kit? No way!. You know, I can almost see the Airfix guys sitting round a table, shaking their heads in despair and crying "Modellers!! For years they shout and scream about a UK Phantom and, now that they get one they still whine and whinge!" ps - I know that you personally did not draw the distinction between "assemblers" and "modellers" so, my apologies now if you felt I was implying same. Allan Edited November 23, 2017 by Albeback52 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 I do hope that all of this discussion doesn't across as whingeing. This is a modellers forum, we will discuss the the whys and wherefores of modelling and kits - it's what we do, it's why forums exist. To that extent we are only a small part of the real world and the mass toy and kit consumer at large. At best this discussion may lead to an incorporation of corrections in a kit before its release, if not it at least makes other people aware of details that they may have not known of, but it certainly shouldn't persuade anyone to buy a kit or not - I think the manufacturers realise that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 2 hours ago, Tbolt said: If that's how you feel you might as well stick with the old Matchbox Phantom We all build different models to different standards - no need to get upset if someone's standards are different to yours. Not Bothered. By the way , will build a couple Airfix ones as it is a very welcome kit. And take them as they are. I'm pleased that Airfix have added bits to give optional build variations like the wing folds etc. Can't be bothered about the matchbox one either haven't got any and won't go looking for'em!!!!!!!!!! If one wants extra fine detail then go bigger to 1/48th or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Knight Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 I just noticed that the release month is now January 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfordhibby Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 44 minutes ago, Albeback52 said: In all honesty Peter, I find drawing a distinction between modellers and assemblers is, by itself a form of arrogance if not actual snobbery. There is, in my view NO distinction between the two. We are all here because we all enjoy the same hobby. Ergo, we are all modellers are we not? It's just a question of degree and how we apply ourselves to the hobby. There is no place for a "them and us" here. Most of my builds are out of box but, I do like to try and fix problems and/or improve basic kits myself.. Wonder what that makes me??. I certainly don't bother about accuracy or otherwise!! Getting back to the subject on hand, I agree that modellers SHOULDN'T have to pay extra for add on bits but, the choice is down to them. They can accept the model as is (imperfections and all) or, go ahead and fork out the hypothetical tenner for the hypothetical add ons. Their choice and, I respect that. As for me, I will happily accept the model as it is and, I rather suspect that for many customers, a series of issues which other posters here have already agreed are minor will matter not a jot. The kit looks like to meet any expectations I have and, that is really all that matters to me. As to why these issues arose? Who knows. I guess Airfix had their reasons but, they are certainly not enough to persuade me that the kit is unbuyable and, unbuildable!. Would I eschew the Airfix kit in favour of an admittedly very nice but, now very old Fujimi kit? No way!. You know, I can almost see the Airfix guys sitting round a table, shaking their heads in despair and crying "Modellers!! For years they shout and scream about a UK Phantom and, now that they get one they still whine and whinge!" ps - I know that you personally did not draw the distinction between "assemblers" and "modellers" so, my apologies now if you felt I was implying same. Allan Allan, couldn't agree more regarding the distinction, that is the way that I read it. That is why I felt it was a wee bit off. I have no idea if I will or will not purchase the Airfix one , I haven't seen it yet so cannot say one way or another. What I do know is that I have no problem with the Fujimi offering. If the Airfix number is going to cost me £30.00 plus a hypothetical £10.00 for PE/Resin bits, £25.00 for the Fujimi seems reasonable to me. This of course is for as long as the Fujimi kit is available at a sensible price. As I said we all like our expectations to be met. I realise that we all have differing expectations and none are right or wrong they're just expectations. It may well be that the Airfix one will come with the parts that are lending to these posts. If the Airfix version was the only game in town we wouldn't be venturing down this road, but it isn't and some of us like a wee nit-pick. Cheers, Peter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 Can I make a suggestion? Should we all take a rain check on the accuracy of this much anticipated kit until the plastic is released into the wild and definitive opinions given? Me? I’ll wait for the FGR.2 boxing in 2019 or so (thank you for asking) Trevor 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanC Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 On 23/11/2017 at 9:12 AM, Blackfordhibby said: "Modellers/Assemblers".... Agreed -no need for any distinctions. We're all sad hobbyists or 'shed men' at the end of the day. And I'd say it's not really possible to be an 'assembler' with much of Airfix's recent output anyway. Wonderful though their kits are, in my experience they don't exactly fall together. Thus, plenty of 'modelling' potential! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radleigh Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 If I was being serious, I'd have said just assemblers, not put a strike through modellers. That was the sarcasm, clearly lost... maybe next time I will add lots of funny faces. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 On 23/11/2017 at 18:48, Max Headroom said: Can I make a suggestion? Should we all take a rain check on the accuracy of this much anticipated kit until the plastic is released into the wild and definitive opinions given? Me? I’ll wait for the FGR.2 boxing in 2019 or so (thank you for asking) Trevor Wise words there on the percivied accuracy issues. Please can those on modellers/assemblers debate please leave this thread and take it back onto track of the Phantom. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayprit Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 Does appear to be a bit of thread drift filtering in, it sounds like a lot of modellers already have the kit and are showing you their improvements to said kit..............as has been mentioned a couple of times..........wait and see I am not an aircraft modeller, but have been watching this thread just to see where its going...............brings to mind "rivet counters" 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailspin Turtle Posted November 24, 2017 Share Posted November 24, 2017 9 minutes ago, rayprit said: I am not an aircraft modeller, but have been watching this thread just to see where its going...............brings to mind "rivet counters" You say that like it's a bad thing... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts