Jump to content

ICMF

Members
  • Posts

    550
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ICMF

  1. From the sprue shot, the spinner is split. Bottom left corner on the accessories sprue.
  2. Yes, it's still available via Shapeways.
  3. You're confusing pixel size - X/Y resolution - with layer height - Z resolution. The two variables are entirely divorced from each other. Higher X/Y resolution doesn't need any more or less time, it just prints bigger pixels. Thinner layer heights (higher Z resolution) DOES effectively take longer, because you need to print more layers*. X/Y resolution is fixed on a printer - whatever screen you have, that's your resolution, and you can not change it. Layer height IS user configurable depending on the print, but this is the same on every mSLA printer - they'll all print pretty much the same range of usable layer heights no matter what the X/Y resolution is. There's a small caveat that a smaller pixel size might have a thinner ideal theoretical layer height, but in practice, it's not going to make much difference to the way users actually print with them. FWIW, actual exposure times will be lower, because you're not exposing as much resin at a time, but it'll be net slower because you've got to raise/lower the print bed more times, which takes most of the actual print time anyway.
  4. Apropos of nothing, it's a pity that's just a black and white rendering of the SEA camo, as I really like it as a 4-tone grey camo.
  5. I use an artist's palette knife. Razor thin and highly flexible, so you can get under the part with zero deformation or damage (unlike most putty knife style scrapers) and no chance of damaging the build plate, either.
  6. A few suggestions: Use an ultra-fine saw, rather than sprue cutters (something like a Tiger saw) Cut away from the part, then file off the excess. Remove supports before curing the part. Soak in hot water before removing supports, to soften the resin. Use finer support settings.
  7. Most likely it was confusion between mm/cm, as slicers use millimetres by default.
  8. It's a prop in a commercial for the manufacturer; it's almost certainly going to be from their own fabrication shop.
  9. You'll have more chances - Elegoo are working on a Mars 3 DLP (with larger build area and resolution), as are Phrozen.
  10. No. Just that they've pre-sold their allotment of kits, so they're not taking more pre-orders. I had it happen to the bombs set and F-4C while they were sitting in my cart (curse you again, procrastination!)
  11. It seems to have the extension. There is a panel line that runs around the fuselage, between the aft end of the canards and the front tip of the wings. On the AJ, both surfaces 'touch' this panel line - the canards stop at the line, and the wing root starts at it. https://plasticfantastique.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Saab-AJS-37-Viggen-header-001-768x402.jpg On the JA, the extension was added directly aft of this line, so the canards stop at the panel line, but the wings start (slightly) aft of it: https://www.armedconflicts.com/attachments/4461/IMG_20190405_140344.jpg Or another way to think of it: in plan view, on the AJ, the wings and canards look like they *just* touch; on the JA, there's a gap between them. This gap is particularly noticeable by the APU door, which also abuts the fuselage break line. On the AJ, the wing starts immediately aft of the panel line: https://plasticfantastique.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/SAAB-JA37-Viggen-Fuselage-007.jpg whereas on the JA, there's a space: https://www.armedconflicts.com/attachments/4461/IMG_7982.JPG Which shows us what to look for. The instructions seem to indicate there's a gap between the wing root and the fuselage break: https://scontent.fyyc2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/236183119_877916949797258_4378205192386689638_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=klam4FikwBQAX_1RuEc&_nc_ht=scontent.fyyc2-1.fna&oh=fa762ebb955b4c2d2f6af1fa259c9500&oe=615EDFBE (FB link, so, ugh...) Similarly, the gap seems to be present on the resin aft fuselage: https://i.ibb.co/5vqKcCr/23.jpg So... probably. Though without a test fit and measuring the actual parts, it's impossible to say for sure. Also worth noting, this picture https://i.ibb.co/hYzrZf5/Viggen-Large-Parts-Production-Status.png shows a couple of pieces that fit between the fore and aft fuselage halves, which some people have assumed was an insert for the fuselage stretch. I'm pretty sure they're not - they look to me like a couple of parts to help join the fuselage halves more securely - since they're too long, and don't actually form a complete circle (there's a cutout for the APU). That said, it's 'supposed' to be a normal Jaktviggen, but has the D cockpit; the decal options are a mix of original and upgraded airframes, so it's not 100%. ...and a couple of good walkaround pages here: https://plasticfantastique.com/walk_arounds/walkaround-the-saab-37-viggen/ and here: https://www.armedconflicts.com/SAAB-JA-37-Viggen-t3752
  12. Short answer: no. Not for the home user or to the quality you're looking for, and not without a CAD model to print. Long answer yes, but with a bunch of caveats. (specific professional machines/materials, you'd be better off printing a vac-form buck, the frames would be thick and clunky, you'd be farther ahead just paying someone to mask and paint your frames for you, etc. etc.)
  13. It'd be cheaper to buy a conversion set. Or a Growler kit with the various pods and sensors. My CAD work starts at $60/hr.
  14. It's a question of priorities. Some people stress the 'model' aspect of model kits, while others stress the 'kit' aspect. The Revell Phantom is a really nice kit - nice details, builds well - it's just not a very good model (poor accuracy, fidelity). Hasegawa is a pretty decent model, but at this point, it's not a great kit. While Fine Molds is a very nice model AND a great kit. Just depends on where your priorities lie. And there's no point getting sidetracked with an argument as to which is 'better', or insulting people that lean one way or the other.
  15. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Yes, and that's what bugs me. It's a kit made out of aftermarket-quality materials. It has the capacity of rendering fine details. You shouldn't HAVE to replace anything, and the fact that the fix is quick, simple and cheap makes it even more galling, IMO, that it's not included in the box. As I said, the subjects are cool and the kits are generally okay, they just make a bunch of baffling and infuriating decisions that tend to dull the lustre for me.
  16. Wild and probably pointless speculation at this point, but... is it just me, or does that top outline on the pic look an awful lot like a slatted wing?
  17. Fair enough. Didn't realize they'd started shipping.
  18. How many rounds of orders have they done now, for a kit that's never been seen, let alone released? Hope it's not vapourware.
  19. I somewhat disagree. I've got a bit of a love/hate relationship with MFH - the subjects are cool and I think the kits are generally okay, but I'm always a little let down by the choices they make, and don't feel they're quite worth all the praise that some modellers heap on them. IMO. The resin is nice, though my MP4/4 has noticeably discoloured over time, so you'll want a solid primer coat. Coming from the aircraft modelling world, it's not top-tier detail like, say, AiRes (things are a bit soft), but the body castings are clean and impressive. The white metal is nice as far as white metal goes, but is a significant step down in quality from the resin. Less crisp, less sharp. Cleaning them up by hand will be tedious; using a magnetic tumbler makes life much easier. Some people love the amount of metal (nothings looks more like metal...) but IMO most of it is wasted since it either has to be painted (like the black engine block) or else it's a different type of metal so... has to be painted (aluminium doesn't look like lead). They also don't always clean up their masters, so you'll find build lines and voxels from their 3D printed parts. I'd be a lot happier with the kits if they included more resin and less metal, but white metal is cheap, so it helps their bottom line. All in all, it's kind of mediocre, and less well rendered than an equivalent Tamiya kit. I also think they should include more PE and machined parts. Particularly in the newer releases, all details are cast integrally in the metal, when many things would be better represented with etch. I think they've even tried doing cast metal intake trumpets on a few kits, which is just awful. They've also dabbled in cast metal hosing, which is dumb. Their cast fasteners, when they include separate ones, are kind of shocking; you'd be better served buying some cast resin replacements. Moulded-in fasteners aren't much better, and you'd often be better served lopping them off and replacing. They often include gimmicky but useless details. The working engine in the MP4/4, for instance, with absolutely no way to show it off (and pistons that are way too small for the cylinders). It kind of infuriates me that they waste time on silly junk rather than improving their core product. And as excited as I get for each new release, it annoys me that they crank out a new kit every month, when they'd be better served spending more time improving each kit. And fixing what seem like frequent accuracy issues (they often have problems with wheels, even when they're based on a set spec). Basically, I bought a bunch of WCT Tameo kits before I ever heard of MFH, and honestly, I'm far(!) more impressed by the average 1/43 Tameo release than by any 1/12 release by Hiro. I think my 1/20 Tamiya MP4/4 with Top Studio's set will be a far more detailed build than the 1/12 kit, as will your Williams + details. I think they get cut an enormous amount of slack because they're the only ones doing kits of these subjects, but in a hypothetical head-to-head, there's no way you'd buy an MFH kit if a mainstream release was available. And I think that's the thing that really bugs me; I look at resin, PE, turned and cast metal as ways to achieve supreme detail, and something really special. The Top Studio sets REALLY add to the Tamiya Williams. But beyond all the hype and exotic materials, I just don't think the average MFH kit is actually any better than you'd get in a 30 year old Tamiya kit, let alone what Tamiya/Fujimi/Aoshima COULD do today.
  20. No. A similar thread on the WWI Modelling board was locked down, because there's no indication as to WHAT they'll be doing, hence no indication it would have anything at all to do with WWI. And since they have absolutely nothing to do with WNW, other than the fact that they used to work there, it's an entirely blank slate. Heck, they could do a series of classic sailing ship kits, or fantasy robots. After all, one ex-WNWer is doing a 1/144 civil plane. Any predictions, guessing or wishlisting is entirely pointless at this time. They're going to do whatever it is they're going to do, in whatever scale they choose to do it; we just have to wait and see.
×
×
  • Create New...