Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ICMF

  1. 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!)
  2. 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
  3. 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.)
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. ¯\_(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.
  7. 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?
  8. https://www.airspacemag.com/panoramas/lockheed-sr-71a-1-180952064/
  9. Fair enough. Didn't realize they'd started shipping.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. Meh. Different strokes. IMO, giving it a good swish in a jar of IPA is more effective. Changing back to the topic of new printers, Elegoo has announced that they will be selling modification kits to increase the Z axis on their upcoming Jupiter. Replacement rails and a longer lead-screw so you can have upwards of 50cm in build height. Which takes away one of my big complaints about the printer. Though a 50cm print would take a heck of a long time...
  14. Something I've been meaning to knock together for a while. Here are a couple of visual comparisons of the various printer bed sizes. Should be useful for anyone looking at buying a machine, to get a feel for just what 'big' and 'small' actually means, and whether a size upgrade is worth the money. I haven't included every printer, but all the major players and main 'size classes' are in there (so, the L-002R is the same size as the Photon Mono, as are the equivalent Epax and Longer machines) They're sized to print on North American legal sized paper (that Mega 8K is BIG!), but should work on the equivalent European standard. Something got messed up in the upload, so they may need to be printed at 200% scale. Centered version: Corner adjust version, which really underscores the size differences:
  15. If you were planning on getting some sort of wash/cure machine, you could always forego that (they're a bit of a waste anyway, IMO) and add it to your budget. I don't know that a DLP's benefits will be as useful for a home tinkerer. You can design in looser tolerances and be fine with the level of detail on a typical mSLA print. Where the DLP will be a big benefit is people who need greater accuracy in their prints, since this could potentially replace a five-figure DLP printer (or more realistically, farming out to a bureau that has one...) (Just to muddy the waters further, I'd also suggest a Mars 3 over the Mars 2 Pro, for a modest increase in price. Better resolution and a bigger build volume for a small price increase seems like a bit of a no brainer to me)
  16. Some interesting new developments in the hardware side of things. First up, Anycubic have announced the first budget DLP printer. This uses a projector under the vat, rather than masking off an array of LEDs, so it should give a crisper, more defined, more accurate image, with correspondingly improved prints. It's "just" the size of the standard Photon or Mars and pixel size is 80 um, but the actual prints are on par with (or better than) 35 um printers. It will be launched as a Kickstarter soon, where you can expect a significant savings over retail prices (but you're also getting beta units that may have nits to iron out...) Review of a pre-release unit here: https://youtu.be/eAf0mpF9Nww This is a REALLY interesting development, as it opens up a bunch of cool possibilities - if they make the projector 'focusable', you could theoretically get down to, like, 10 um if you just printed a small ejection seat or wheel in the middle of the build plate. Definitely on my radar to replace my OG Photon. Next, Elegoo announced a new larget-format printer yesterday: the Elegoo Jupiter. It has a 12.8" 6K screen for a respectable 278 x 156 x 300 mm build volume (11 x 6 x 12") @ 51 um resolution. Again, they're launching on Kickstarter at a significant discount - MSRP is $1300 US, but the super early bird Kickstarter price will be $600. IMO, it's a bit of a 'mushy middle' printer; it's really compelling at the launch price, but at full MSRP, it kind of lags behind the competition. The Phrozen 8K is only $300 more, has a bigger, higher-res screen for better detailed prints, AND has an extra 10 cm on the Z axis. It's probably a bit of a moot point for most modellers, but one of the big uses for the large format printers is the cosplay community, and I suspect 300 mm will be too short to print helmets and such, so it kind of misses the mark. Anyway, full details here: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E86V1YCWEAIYoLJ?format=png&name=medium ...and lastly, speaking of the Phrozen 8K... it has started shipping to pre-order customers. Reviews here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HaSNoTEAg8 and here https://youtu.be/o4jlmFzb0-s Most of the criticisms I've seen either relate to the slicer (which, meh, I'm not that bothered by) or the fact that it's just so damned big (which is obviously unavoidable, really). The one legitimate complaint I've seen is that the print times are relatively long - a full Z axis print is about 70 hours, IIRC - which again goes back to the large build plate and commensurate suction forces, and the time needed for the resin to flow back across the plate. I guess that just leaves Creality and Epax to announce new stuff in the coming months.
  17. Your best bet would be to contact Elegoo for help.
  18. Shouldn't be the problem. Remove vat and build plate from the printer (so it's just the bare, exposed screen) and run the print again. Is anything showing up on the screen? If not, then can you see any light bleed from the LEDs? If the image displays fine, then I guess it's the resin - 'good' resin WILL cure on the FEP if its exposed to UV. If you can't see the image, try running the test screen, or a previously successful print. If the slices appear on your screen as per normal, then the problem is with your file; re-slice and try again (I'd check it with the vat and plate removed, just to make sure). If the slices DON'T appear on the screen, then you've either got a problem with your LCD or the LED array. If you can see light from the LEDs, then obviously they're fine and it's probably the LCD; if you can see a dim outline of the layer on the screen, but no light, then it's probably the LED, not the screen. Open the printer, re-seat the connectors to make sure they're properly connected, then try again. If it's still not working, you probably need to replace the parts diagnosed above.
  19. Again, converting your digital file into something that looks like a mould is easy. Doing it at "absolute top quality, with no necessity for manual interaction or mould cleaning" is very hard and doing it with the manufacturing requirements and at the budget a limited run manufacturer would have is borderline impossible. Yes, Cura lets you print moulds, but a.) FDM prints are terrible quality and not what the OP is looking for, b.) moulds would explode at the required pressure needed for moulding and c.) given the temperature needed to inject plastic, the moulds would melt before they even had a chance to explode.
  20. There's a big difference between being able to print something that looks like a mould, and printing an actual, usable production tooling. It's probably not feasible at any realistic pressure/temperature for injection moulding, but you would need to experiment with different resins and your own particular equipment. Generic, cheap resins almost certainly won't cut it, so you'd have to research engineering grade options. Also, it would depend on what you deem as 'acceptable' quality. For higher quality, you'll be extremely limited in terms of build size, or else looking at much higher end machinery. TL;DR: technically feasible, with a lot of caveats, but in reality probably more science fiction for modelling purposes.
  21. It's listed on the Pre-Order section of their website: https://www.elegoo.com/collections/pre-order And their social media activity for last week was all about how to pre-order the printer starting on the 10th. https://twitter.com/Elegoo_Official Plus, it's just the way Chinese tech companies do business: fund production via pre-orders, release beta units to influencers and early adopters, develop and iron out problems over time. I don't know when it will actually release, but based on experience, autumn seems a safe bet. Could be a little sooner, could be a little later, but I'd be shocked if it's in your hands within a matter of weeks. Just noticed, they're saying all the (early bird?) pre-orders will ship by August 30:
  22. It's not available. You pre-ordered for a delivery at some unknown time in the future (I don't think they've said when the pre-orders will start shipping). Again, it probably won't be released - shipped - until the autumn.
  23. It's not out yet, and probably won't be out until the autumn. So... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ If you want something sooner, either the Elegoo Mars 2 or Anycubic Photon Mono would be fine - they're functionally identical. You probably wouldn't want an Elegoo Saturn or Photon Mono X, as larger printers introduce other problems beyond the initial learning curve.
  24. Yes, this is higher resolution - 35um vs 50 um. Like the Phrozen Mini 4K
  • Create New...