Jump to content
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. :)

Thomas V.

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

126 Excellent

About Thomas V.

  • Rank
    Established Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

770 profile views
  1. Hi all, I still did not make new Eduard's Mustang, but have few in the stash, and plan on adding more. There is one thing that to me seems odd, on all models that can be found on internet tailwheel position is far too back and far too low, question for those who tackled the model, is it an inherent flaw or can be rectified? Big thank you. Tom
  2. Comparing Airfix to Revell, you have at least accurate outline in the former, unlike Revell kit that has more than serious shape issues, both are old and it shows, but Airfix Harrier (details aside) is again more or less accurate representation of the real plane, Revell is not. Many people dont know what is hiding in the box, and may think that its a good kit-its not, and there should be no reason not to state it.
  3. Run away, kit has more than serious shape issues, if one wants big early Harrier 1/24 Airfix is the way to go, far less hassle...
  4. Have no doubt that its going to be huge seller, my only wish is that like Victor is labelled made in Britain, thus far better injection process and higher quality plastic.
  5. Please....not a single F-35 has RAM panels the way Hobbymaster portrayed them,and there is no difference between real early and late 35's. In reality they are milimetres thick, and any scale representation should be scribed panel and paint only. As a diecast enthousiast as well, this is plastic model forum, and in my view as well you're are pitching...
  6. Beyond belief that after Hasegawa and Academy and years of accessibility to the real plane they still decided to portray RAM panels as protrusions instead of them being totally flat in the scale, or any other scale.
  7. I wish-1/24 Spitfire Mk.I, announced at Telford, hitting shelves by June
  8. Find it s bit underwhelming, only 6 marking options, all subtypes already issued as stand alone kits, could and should have included AZ/CZ, or at least few other options not seen.
  9. I hope, but since they have both their own and ESCI toolings-very much doubt it. Cutlasses would be nice.
  10. Sorry Luigi for the late answer, yes that is the part.
  11. Clearprop kits aside from Gloster E28 are state if the art full mainstream kits made from high quality steel molds. There are plenty of kits today that have same quality of injection molding+there is nothing inherently revolutionary in their current quality of toolings to warrant such prices. Market will decide, but from my perspective 25€ for 1/72 Claude, 50€+ for Seasprite or Su-25 is beyond reason.
  12. Most likely, aside that they made big changes in cockpit from initial release, having both Airfix and Fujimi in my hands few minutes ago, still gobsmacked to see devolution of tooling benchmark Airfix decided to go for.
  13. Lower part of the fuselage just before the burner cans should be flat, Fujimi molded it with slight curve towards the exhaust, cannot be fully remedied but with few swipes of sand paper it won't be noticable, other than that Fujimi ( in its last incarnation from 1991 ) is far superior to Airfix.
  14. Comparing Airfix to Fujimi pretty much sums what is wrong with Airfix today, to have 30 year old kit better new tooled one ( except one innacuracy) is astounding, as much as i love Airfix in my opion just shows how relatively low tooling standards can be easily surpassed. Same goes for Buccaneer, best yet but will be easily surpassed by anyone deciding to tackle the subject properly.
  • Create New...