Jump to content

JeffreyK

Members
  • Posts

    1,377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JeffreyK

  1. The more I see the less I actually like about it I must say. I pre-ordered the G model as soon as it was available, based on the early CAD images shown. The kit is currently winging its way to me from Hong Kong. I'll give it a proper hands-on investigation of course. But so far, with more info trickeling in, the only plus points I see are the one-piece upper fuselage, (potentially!) a better shaped cockpit/canopy area than ZM, inner canopy insert pieces and retracted slats. Everything else is looks rather meh, and that lower tail piece is a real shocker. We shall see... J
  2. ...or wait for what GWH will put out. GWH kits are generally on a higher price level and I don't think they will be had for 40Quid but corrected engines may put you in the GWH price range already...
  3. DBMK are actually a UK company and Armory/Dora have a UK representative so no travel invoved. As for overseas attanance: You have to account not only for governmental travel restrictions. You need to see that flight connections are not what they used to be and things are still often quite inconvenient and also unreliable. Flight times are also extended as you can't fly over Russia. The other big issue is cost. Travel cost has exploded and when I looked at tocket prices, I would have had to pay about 2.5 times the price in Yen for a return ticket to Telford from Japan, and that doesn't include likely increased cost for local transport like airport taxis. I just can't afford it. For those reasons I decided not to attend and cancel my booked table. I hope things wll look better next year... J
  4. so has anyone seen the Meng plastic yet?? Yes, so far only Tamiya has got the forward fuselage width more or less correct (and it is the fuselage width around the cockpit centre that’s the main issue - the canopy is just a follow-on symptom). But how accurate is Meng ? The CAD looked quite good but I wouldn’t draw final conclusions before investigating the plastic (or examine lots more CAD renders). so has anyone seen the Meng plastic yet?? Yes, so far only Tamiya has got the forward fuselage width more or less correct (and it is the fuselage width around the cockpit centre that’s the main issue - the canopy is just a follow-on symptom). But how accurate is Meng ? The CAD looked quite good but I wouldn’t draw final conclusions before investigating the plastic (or examine lots more CAD renders).
  5. Good job, that looks very nice indeed! I have recently received the same kit, how are the decals? They look a bit, hmmm, so-so on the sheet… My resin seats also have air bubbles, a bit unusual to see these days. Any need to reinforce the mounts for the skids? That crossed my mind as well when looking at the parts. Itching to start mine… Cheers, J
  6. While I can see your point it's not currently on the agenda as I hardly do anything else than 1:48. Besides, I don't have the kit and it's hugely expensive here in Japan. The master pattern was hand-made so it's not a matter of up-(or down-) scaling a CAD file... J
  7. ...and the wrongly-shaped fin cap. Again. That's in all three scales then.
  8. I'm no expert on the Tomcat by a long way but when is aw the nozzle parts I also thought, hmmm? Didn't the B have the F110 engine? Anyway, when GWH first announced their F-14 (before AMK even released theirs), they announced it as an F-14A. I guess for marketing purposes, with no B model neither from Tamiya nor AMK , they changed it to releasing an F-14B first and maybe the originally planned A later.... J
  9. The engine housings and fuselage are totally asymmetric on my kit, not sure if that’s the master/mould or just a bad casting…it gets continuously worse from front to back. Maybe check your parts first and devise a plan Mine has been on the shelf of doom for over 10 years now… J
  10. Temma-san from Japan has written volumes about Phantom shapes and in this article you can see a diredt comparison between Tamiya and ZM, as he converts the Tamiya F-4B into an F-4C, using components from the ZM kit. http://soyuyo.main.jp/f4c/f4c-1.html Just from the width of the side console instrument panels you can see the difference in fiselage shape. There are many comparison studies across his website, a bit difficult to navigate and find, but there's a ton there and I do think it's valid as it's backed up by both photos and McD drawings. I do agree that the issue becomes a lot less apparent with the canopies open. With the canopies shut the sills form a very peculiar S-shape, in both horizontal and lateral orientation. The lateral S is missing from the ZM kit. A couple of pics fur firther illustration (many thanks to Andreas Beck for the first pic): J
  11. I noticed the lack of belly strap as well. We will see what the kit brings. Note that Luckymodel's prices are based on USD and the currenty converter on the website is totally out of date. With shipping, it's actually GBP 69.70 , not 59,34. To Japan it's JPY 8984 and with that a little more than the ZM retail price (incl tax). In the shops, Meng kits are very expensive here (~13,000 for a Super Hornet) and probably no competition to ZM. J
  12. We live in an economic downturn, i.e. a buyer's market unfortunately though. You get little for second hand items these days. Very different to two years ago when people hand both money and time on their hands.... That's extremely furstrating, most for Annetra. I hope not too much money had changed hads already...
  13. The main thing is not so much the canopy, it's the fuselage. It bulges out slightly, roughly in between the two cockpits. Therefore Tamiya's cockpit tub, the instrument consoles in particular, are noticeably wider than other kits. The canopy simply follows the width. If displayed open, the shape is disrupted enough that you don't really notice the problem. It's more apparent with the canopies closed. The angles of these renders aren't really conclusive whether or not Meng have got it right. We will see... J
  14. The frustrating thing is, they already hand made tooling for the Annetra kit - test shots exist already. What went wrong then? J
  15. What I like about the MD turbo/exhaust set is that they took note of the exhausts being a different shape across the four nacelles and lh/rh sides. I don't have the set, as I bought a set from another manufacturer, which is beautifully designed and produced but unfortunately on that set, the exhausts are all just mirror images and the same for all four nacelles...A bit disappointing. Lookig forward to seeing your progress Cheers, J
  16. Taking notes as at one point I'll do the same, B-29 in stash, several X-1 kits as well... And then there is my "ultimate lifetime project" of NB-52B with X-15-3 under the wing. I have both the Sanger and HPH kits and plan to use Sanger parts to back date the HPH to the early configuration. However, I may end up drawing lots of parts in CAD instread as I'm not too confident about the Sanger shapes and details... But first the X-15 Jeffrey
  17. Why is this the same thread? The F-16C is a different kit from the F-16A.... Personally, I'm only interested in the F-16A, I already have a Tamiya C kit. J
  18. Looking very good!! Please don't do a flat coat, that would be the opposite of what's needed. As Alan said, it's largely a natural metal finish, just more like gunmetal. If anything, the finish could be even a bit glossier than it is now. Cheers, J
  19. Fantastic work! That's Revell aqua colour?? Wow, that's not half bad, is it? This plane (chase 1) is definitely high on my own to-build list, as most things associated with the X-15 program are. We just need a decent F-100 kit... Cheers, J
  20. ...or you could buy my wheels, readily available and with good and accurate inner detail as well I had to re-size the tyres a bit from accurate scale dimensions to make them fit the Revell main struts. A little thinner (i.e. less over all width), and slightly less tread diameter. An accurate (but again adapted for the inaccurate Revell kit) brake chute bay is available as well Jeffrey
  21. Thanks Duncan, the thing is, I've been finling my VAT return through HMRC's Gateway the whole time, I've never sent any paperwork or the like. Everything was online already and as such digital. This MTD I can no longer do that. Instead I have to use an Excel spreadsheat consisting of the exact same boxes as on the HMRC gateway and then upload it to one of several HMRC approved tax services. Their website "translates" it into a web form and then you enter your HMRC account and log-in details there. The form gets loaded into the HMRC system and as far as I understood, that's it. I have no idea why they had to add this additional step...? If you just use this upload service and no "real" accounting, as far as I understood, the service providers don't charge anything for this. If that's not correct and I have to pay something then I will have to think very hard and may have to make a painful decision. I already have all that extra hassle with separate filing and doing this VAT return quarterly, just for the UK and the few orders I get from there. If it will cost me extra on top it rapidly becomes unviable. Jeffrey
×
×
  • Create New...