1/48 - Grumman HU-16A Albatros by Trumpeter - released - new Alley Cat nose correction set

[jenshb]

I agree that the box art can suck people in to buy the kit if it is well done, but if the subject is interesting and the contents accurate and well executed, they can pack it in a brown paper bas as far as I'm concerned:) The only thing I expect is that the box art portrays the right version. What I find really hilarious though is that one BM reviewer so keenly critisises this least important aspect of a kit, yet, is so completely uncritical of the box contents of a kit - http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234933424-f-16-ab-nsawc-adversary-kinetic-148/ - the conclusion is so non-descript, inoffensive and uninformative it is hard to believe it comes from the same person who claims a ship on the box art is not sinking the right way. If people on the internet - who have a fair knowledge of the subject has voiced concerns, then maybe they're on to something? Tell your audience what the issues are, or use the concerns to do your own research rather than offering an ill-informed opinion without even bothering to dryfit the kit together. To make things even more entertaining, said reviewer displays great indignation about these words

Of course , reviewer will write lines and lines about all what we don't
need ( the colour and quality of the plastic,the number of parts , the
scale, the raised or recessed panel lines and, more important , the
fact that we can look through the glazed parts or not , the shape of
the box, the quality of the plastic bag in which the canopy is wrapped,
the way the decals are printed and by who. One thing is sure , they
won't tell you whether the model is right or not . There are no
reviewers anymore , there is just a bunch of advertisers. It's high
time they stop taking us for fools .

by Madcop who hits the nail on the head even though they are not aimed at him, but reviewers in general. So...it's all right to savage a piece of box art - that for what we really want is insignificant, but not a kit? I can hardly wait for the Britmodeller review of the Trumpeter Vampire...

Jens

[Julien]

If you read my comments I never "savaged" the box art, I think the aircraft is actually well done and I said so, just the details with the ship are not right, as had already been pointed out.

As to my review of the Kinetic F-16 I stand by what I said from reviewing the parts in the box. Its an "in box" review. If we had to start dry fitting every kit we review we would never get anything done. That review is as honest as I could make it from looking at the parts. Its my view, and I deliberately don't take what others "say" about kits into a review. It is no way an "advertisement" as had been suggested.

You ask about a fair knowledge of something, well when it comes to ships I have a fair knowledge of them. I have worked in shipbuilding and shipping since 1986. I am a time served shipwright, and ships draughtsman. I have a first class honours degree in the subject, along with other professional qualifications, and membership of 2 professional bodies as well.

Julien

[jenshb]

Oh, I have no doubt that you are technically correct about the ship sinking in an unnatural manner, so that is not what I am commenting. I do not doubt that you have knowledge about ships - my own knowledge of that subject is not sufficient to question you on that. What I do find peculiar is that you are so critical about a minor detail on the least important aspect of a kit, yet you are glossing over potential problems in a "review" that could help readers buy or not buy the said kit when it is almost served to you on a platter. So you don't want to take other people's words for it - by all means show some professional scepticism and use that as checkpoints and do your own research. If you have done enough digging on the internet to find out that some people are unhappy with the Kinetic kit, then surely you will also find out *why* they are unhappy with the Kinetic kit? Alternatively check out finished Kinetic builds and compare them with photos of the real thing.* As a reader who would like to know more, that would be far more informative. The fact that you think it looks like an F-16 is a cliche (what *did* you expect it to look like?) that shows you don't understand the subject you are reviewing. I wouldn't expect such meaningless, empty words from someone with your degree and professional qualifications - since you wanted to bring that up to lend weight to your arguments...

Jens

*When making my comments on the KittyHawk Gripen intakes, it took me longer to type a reply than it did to find a couple of photos to illustrate my point on airliners.net. If I can do it, anyone can...

[planeart]

Hello there fellow modellers!!!!

Thanks Jenshb! You just copied what i had in mind to reply!! The main subject on the painting is the aircraft and not the bloody ship! I could take any harsh critic about my work!!! Not a bloody problem!! I just found that photo of the sinking ship in the web site dealling with ships going down to the bottom!!!! it seemed good to place it in my painting to add drama in it! If mister Julien is obsest with that the ship is going to the bottom of the sea in the wrong way, should try to find out which ship was that and sue the captain for not doing it in the right way!!!! HU-16A Albatros is a beautifull airplane and i feel honoured that Trumpeter Models trusted me to paint the boxart for their product!! If my clients are pleased, i am too!!!!

Dear HL-10, Heloman1, Albeback 52, Ray S and Jenshb, thank you very much for the kind words about my work! As i am a Modeller myself, i'll try to paint boxart in the best possible way, not because i want to avoid hard critisism, but because I LOVE IT TO DEATH!!!! Best wishes to all!! good modelling!!

[thx6667]

Kostas, that's a nice box art - coming from a navy family I've heard plenty of tales of ships inking in calm waters, usually as a result of engine room fires or striking reefs, so your artwork is entirely plausible.

I'm sure if we were to go back through the back catalogue of the greats likes Roy Cross, Brian Knight or Roy Huxley, there's be plenty of things that are actually not right, but an expedient to the needs of packaging - and that's what this is folks, its packaging first and foremost.

Oh and the plastic looks interesting - 1/48 HU-16, who'd have thunk that!

[Julien]

Mr Plane art, I am not obsessed by the ship, in fact it was not even pointed out initially by myself, and if you read the post I actually commended the drawing of the aircraft. As English is not your first language I will also forgive the swearing, also is there a reason you type everything in bold?

Hey if your client is happy to pay you to do the work, why even worry? everyone would like to be paid for something they actually enjoy doing.

As for Jens I really cant see why you keep dragging my review of the F-16 into this, I don't understand your comment about it being served up on a plate? do you mean I get it for free? well its not quite as easy as that. A lot of time and effort goes into these reviews, writing up, taking pictures and even god forbid doing some research, so its not exactly a free ride. You say I should bring up the "bad points" of the kit, well I read about bad points and good points? should I bring all these in? If the kinetic kit is really all that bad how comes its been re-boxed by Eduard? I really cant see them buying rubbish and using it to tool up some really good looking boxings.

Its ok to look at photos and another thing to actually be knowledgeable on the real article.

Julien

[venomvixen]

Hmmm

Just for the record I wasn't slagging the box art, my comment was the type of usual gobby remark that I thought was an endearing feature of the site.

P'raps I was mistaken.

So for future reference I shall keep them to myself.

I shall also be keeping to myself the running out to climb over aeroplanes to help out members, climbing on folded Gannet wings, digging through manuals

for that one elusive diagram for some one and dumping the next 4 walkrounds photo's I've been working on for the last 6 months, pity that, the Sea Fury one is a work of art.

Over reacting? Most probably, but thats what I do being so pathetic and desperatly unfullfilled.

[D1fuN0]

Im afraid i shall be standing right behind Venom Vixen on this one.

I dont even like planes, but the pics of the Albatross might change that and then I read the mails that followed in disbelief.

I believe it was unwarranted critisism of a brand new member, (what if he tells all his mates to steer clear of BM?), and unwarranted critisism of Mr Kostas use of the english language and the typeface that he uses to post.

So...

Put your bloody nit picking goggles away, ignore the big square thing the plastic comes in, and rather, like we all do, concentrate on the love of building models, like we all do...

Me, gobby?... Yes!

(Go on Vixen, admit it, you like being gobby)

Steve

[Christopher]

Julien

I rather think you are being very disingenuous here - I reprint the entirity of your comments on the ship on the boxart. Most definitely savaging and despite your background you do not seem to have much knowledge about which you speak. It was very unwise to comment in such detail as sinkings occur in many different ways.

(((Yes, nice art on the aircraft, not good on the ship.

Sinking in far to straight a fashion and from the stern? very strange indeed. Also still smoke from the stack when engine room should be flooded by now?

Also for you info Mr Planeart I may not know art too much but I know ships and how they behave with qualifications in Shipbuilding, engineering and naval architecture. So while I am not being cynical or having a go, I very much doubt a ship would sink like that in such a calm sea unless by design.

I also notice the lifeboats are still on their davits, not launched. You would not believe how quickly a trained crew can get these away, especially with the added impetus of your ship sinking. Would have looked better with the boats in the water pulling away from the ship.)))

Generally, the standard of reviews on this website is rather poor and the standard of research for such lamentable. Cut your introduction down and focus on the actual contents and the accuracy or lack thereof. Verbiage is all very well but frequently disguises lack of knowledge about the points which concern the reader (see above about accuracy). One looks at the recent failure on the KittyHawk Jaguar review where there were comments on the accuracy available on Britmodeller itself. If one can write a long introduction then one can check threads on Britmodeller for comments or even on other internet websites. Reboxing of poor kits is also not an unknown practice among model firms; the 'there's one born every minute' principle.

Christopher

Edited February 6, 2013 by Christopher

[D1fuN0]

Pictures of a test shot at the All Japan Model & Hobby Show 2012 (11-14/10/2012).

Source: http://happy.ap.teac...gcate18/archive

Source: http://www.1999.co.jp/blog/1210123

Source: http://www.hlj.com/s...12overseas.html

V.P.

Ok, forgetting all the other thats been dished out on this thread, Homebee, that looks like it could make up into a lovely kit and i dont even like wingy things, even wingyfloaty things.

Just a weeeeee question, cast your eyes to the right, is that an Intruder/Prowler tail?

Steve

Edited February 6, 2013 by Greg B
Duplicated pictures and swearing removed

[Homebee]

Just a weeeeee question, cast your eyes to the right, is that an Intruder/Prowler tail?

Steve

You're right Steve this is the future 1/32nd A-6A Intruder ref.02249

There's a dedicated thread:

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234919225-132nd-grumman-a-6a-intruder-by-trumpeter-test-shot-and-sprue-pictures/?hl=intruder

V.P.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Homebee

[D1fuN0]

You're right Steve this is the future 1/32nd A-6A Intruder ref.02249

There's a dedicated thread http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234919225-132nd-grumman-a-6a-intruder-by-trumpeter-test-shot-and-sprue-pictures/?hl=intruder

V.P.

....There is a god!

Thanks Homebee, you have just made my day.

Steve

[thx6667]

Will someone please stop posting pictures of plastic, its getting in the way of the real discussion here.

[Julien]

Generally, the standard of reviews on this website is rather poor and the standard of research for such lamentable. Cut your introduction down and focus on the actual contents and the accuracy or lack thereof. Verbiage is all very well but frequently disguises lack of knowledge about the points which concern the reader (see above about accuracy). One looks at the recent failure on the KittyHawk Jaguar review where there were comments on the accuracy available on Britmodeller itself. If one can write a long introduction then one can check threads on Britmodeller for comments or even on other internet websites. Reboxing of poor kits is also not an unknown practice among model firms; the 'there's one born every minute' principle.

Christopher

I think you do all reviewers on this site a disservice by saying this. As planeart says his client is happy, so must be the companies who supply review products here. It is said that reviewers will not say bad things about kits but if you read some reviews this is not plainly true.

It is also necessary in a review to give a decent introduction. This is not "Verbiage" as you say but information about the subject being reproduced in plastic form. Despite being an aircraft buff for years and a modeller for the same time I have read information in these introductions I did not know, and I am sure others have as well.

Julien

[Mike]

Well Christopher, you've shown yourself to be quite the nasty piece of work, haven't you? One question - if the reviews, and all that are so appallingly awful, why don't you sling your hook to a site that would suit you better? I can think of a couple of them right off the top of my head.

I'm sorry that our verbiage causes you consternation... I really am. I'm also sorry that we're not as expert as you in everything. What do you say reviewers? Shall we give up? Nope... we'll just ignore you thanks Christopher - you're really not worth listening to Oh, and if you're thinking that this kind of rudeness will be tolerated anywhere on this site, you're really rather wrong.

Re-reading that, I think we'll lump Jenshb in there too. One point for you for a personal attack on Julien and his review, methinks. You two really need to work on your interpersonal skills.

Topic closed.

[Mike]

I'm opening this one back up for additional information at VP's request, and as the main protagonists in the bunfight have gone for a lie-down to reconsider their personality "difficulties", we should be ok to continue without their childish interjections.

Over to you Homebee

[Homebee]

Thanks boss.

Now on pre-order at 1999.co.jp for delivery in mid-April

Price: +/- GBP 82.00 + P&P

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10215810

And even the colors of the box art in the 1999.co proposed pics look better... Ooops

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10215810b/30/1

Also on preorder at HLJ

http://www.hlj.com/product/trp02821

Watch for the LM offer. Should appear here and will be for sure better:

http://www.luckymodel.com/scale.aspx?item_no=TP02821

V.P.

Edited February 15, 2013 by Homebee

[Mozzy19]

Didn't think it would be that expensive, but then again it's big and probably well detailed.

[Norman]

Cant wait for this model to be available one of my all time favourites

Kostas i reckon the box art is great ! keep up the good work

Cheers

[Julien]

Will have to see what the luckymodel price on this one is, I really want one, price is about what I thought it would be.

Julien

[planeart]

Dear Norman, thank you very much for the encouragement! Yes, i always give my best effort cos i really have a massive passion about Aviation/boxart! I think a good boxart image is the gate to a model kit!

Keep up Modelling and...whatever else makes you happy!!

[pacificmustang]

Keep up Modelling and...whatever else makes you happy!!

That would be drinking red wine Kostas, having shared the odd bottle with Norm

[Norman]

The odd case you mean Bruce !!

[planeart]

I Hope this model to please many modellers! There were times that releases like this seemed a pisset man's dream or illussion!! So' let us be pleased about it and see mostly the possitive side even if some issues would occur to the model's designing! There were never perfect models, by no model company! Always was something left for the modeller!!

Edited February 15, 2013 by planeart

[Homebee]

Now in the Trumpeter homepage: http://www.trumpeter-china.com/a/en/product/fly/1_48_Series/2013/0405/2365.html

V.P.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Homebee