1/32 - Douglas A-26B & C Invader by HobbyBoss - released - Resin2Detail detailing sets

[delide]

1 hour ago, spruecutter96 said:

My point is that people have an alarming habit of making it seem like kit inaccuracies are almost a personal insult. I think that if these folks had a go at producing a conventional, injection-moulded kit from scratch, they might complain a lot less. The cost involved in making brand new, solid-metal moulds is massive (I'm told that a big mould can easily cost $100,000 to produce). If some manufacturers "cut some corners", then I can't blame them. 

 

In my (humble) opinion, rivet-counters are on a crusade to remove any aspect of fun or relaxation from our hobby. At the end of the day, we are sticking bits of plastic together and painting them. We are not curing cancer, folks...

 

I will continue to enjoy the hobby at my own level - and ignore the ego-based complaints of the so-called "purists".

 

Chris. 

Thanks for letting me know your opinion, though I'm no sure how you got those impressions, but I will just agree to disagree. Oh and I for one am no "purist" at all, I don't care much about details for example, only shape and dimensions.

[VMA131Marine]

3 hours ago, quangster said:

I’m not sure that becoming dependant on aftermarket like we do nowadays make us better modellers.

I look for aftermarket corrections and improvements when I have some sense that they have been better researched and mastered than i could hope to do myself. Take the cowl on the A-26 for example; it looks wrong to my eye, but I don't have access to primary source documentation confirming my observation nor how best to correct the problem. I'm happy to pay for someones time to do that and produce a corrected part by buying their product.

[VMA131Marine]

12 minutes ago, delide said:

GWH for example revised their molds for their F-15, MiG-29 kits, so in the end those kits are all updated and much improved, you sincerely think they'd revised it if everyone was happy?

Modelcollect produced a completely new forward fuselage for their 1/72 B-52G kit because the problems with the original were obvious.

[VMA131Marine]

1 hour ago, spruecutter96 said:

My point is that people have an alarming habit of making it seem like kit inaccuracies are almost a personal insult. I think that if these folks had a go at producing a conventional, injection-moulded kit from scratch, they might complain a lot less. The cost involved in making brand new, solid-metal moulds is massive (I'm told that a big mould can easily cost $100,000 to produce). If some manufacturers "cut some corners", then I can't blame them. 

It costs them just as much money to cut the molds wrong as it is to cut them right in the first place. Where TrumpyBoss are cutting corners is in the source material for their kit designs and in a lack of QC by subject matter experts before the final CAD goes to mold production. They could get a lot of help on this for free, and they have been offered lots of assistance.

[Thom216]

If it's early enough in development, such as these prototype examples, then now is the time to point out inaccuracies. The earlier in the process the better while any corrections are able to be made to the molds. And I'm not saying this as a 'riveter' or other. Having the final kit as close to actual dimensions is not a bad thing, it's just wanting an accurate model to start with.

 

Doing so suits the whole range of modellers, from those who find pleasure in just gluing what's in the kit, OOB, to those who want to super-detail it to the point it looks like its about to fly.

 

A wrong dimension or shape might be a simple mistake in the design process, but a good company that is concerned about their product will seek to correct it and put out as good a model as possible.

[tony.t]

Would buy this to build one of the fire eaters from the film Always. 

 

There might be a set of cowls with closed flaps and, wayhey, pigs might fly and there's an optional set of tinted canopy parts.

 

It looks pretty good overall. 

 

Tony 

[quangster]

1 hour ago, VMA131Marine said:

I look for aftermarket corrections and improvements when I have some sense that they have been better researched and mastered than i could hope to do myself. Take the cowl on the A-26 for example; it looks wrong to my eye, but I don't have access to primary source documentation confirming my observation nor how best to correct the problem. I'm happy to pay for someones time to do that and produce a corrected part by buying their product.

Next time I know, you’d hire someone to build a correct model for you. Where’s the modelling in it?

[VMA131Marine]

19 minutes ago, quangster said:

Next time I know, you’d hire someone to build a correct model for you. Where’s the modelling in it?

There are a lot of people on this board who use aftermarket parts, it's not just me. And I'm quite happy doing it; it's my way of modelling.

[SC2015]

Keep it what it is.....a hobby you should enjoy.

If you want to build with aftermarket parts....that`s fine.

If you want to build it without aftermarket parts....that`s fine.

Do what you want....it`s your hobby.

 

I myself recognized after spending several month to fix Su-27 & F-14 from Trumpeter that life is simply too short and there are too many models on the market to spend so much time on fixing shape issues. 

Took me while to get over it but meanwhile I`m really happy with what`s coming out and just enjoy building it.

Here and there is still stuff I really feel the need to fix but that is just minor issues.

 

 

[delide]

15 hours ago, SC2015 said:

Keep it what it is.....a hobby you should enjoy.

If you want to build with aftermarket parts....that`s fine.

If you want to build it without aftermarket parts....that`s fine.

Do what you want....it`s your hobby.

 

I myself recognized after spending several month to fix Su-27 & F-14 from Trumpeter that life is simply too short and there are too many models on the market to spend so much time on fixing shape issues. 

Took me while to get over it but meanwhile I`m really happy with what`s coming out and just enjoy building it.

Here and there is still stuff I really feel the need to fix but that is just minor issues.

 

 

Exactly! And limited time is a problem indeed. Personally I only try to make things look better if it can be done very easily/quickly, if it's more complicated then only with my favorite subjects, so most of the times I too actually just ignore the issues on the kits I have, but it doesn't hurt for me to read/know about it, at the least I know where to look away 🙂 in the end I enjoy looking at the models I built. I just hope people realize that when someone said "the cowlings are wrong" that doesn't mean "Look here, I'm an expert" or "The kit is bad, don't buy it" And in fact if the subject is popular and error is obvious, more people would be talking about/bothered by it, then the manufacturer themselves may revise their tooling, like MC's B-52, and others. If some think this is a bad thing then I have to agree to disagree.

 

And time does change, nowadays hundreds of new tooled kits are released every year, many multiple options for the same subjects, quality is also improving, so it's only normal that people are getting more critical? Imagine that one day all new kits would truly be at Tamiya's level or better, I guess choices would still need to be made, because not every one has the time to build them all, or is willing to spend the money to buy them all, it would be based on even smaller things then... Anyway, I find such discussions helpful and welcome them, it saves time too when others have already discovered issues for me. Everyone can make his own judgement and decide for himself what to do, I see no harm at all. Try not to let it bother you, if you find it extreme. Yes, depending on modeler's decision, it might hurt the sale of a kit a little, but we can't expect people to buy every new kit anyway? Popular subjects will sell well regardless, others will have to be marvelous indeed to attract more buyers, IMO it's normal. 

 

Sorry about the OT again, this will be the last one from me

Edited October 2, 2019 by delide

[mattcour]

B-26K would be great in that scale.

[colin ritchie]

Quote

B-26K would be great in that scale.

Yup , much as I'l love to do a korean war Night intruder, it's the thought of a 32nd K that really interests me , I've got a Bronco done, a T-28 Pending ,along with a couple of A-1's so a K would just slot into the COIN collection beautifully 

[spaddad]

I love it when the naysayers gang up on a new kit and slag it beyond next week. I pray that loads of people take heed of what they say and refuse, en mass, to buy it.  Then when all the shops are left with loads of kits they can't sell, hopefully price reductions follow and as I don't really care if the cowlings or whatever are innacurate, I can buy one at the reduced price. I have much lower requirements re accuracy, as long as I can look at it and think "yep, that's a such and such" that'll do me. I'm grateful to all the Chinese companies for their prolific output of all scales and genres, even if it's just from the point of view that their output probably helps to keep the price of other companies kits in check, except Hasegawa, obviously.

[RidgeRunner]

On 10/3/2019 at 9:59 AM, spaddad said:

I'm grateful to all the Chinese companies for their prolific output of all scales and genres, even if it's just from the point of view that their output probably helps to keep the price of other companies kits in check, except Hasegawa, obviously.

Agreed. Let's just be grateful!

[FCM]

This is what I feel...

 

I do not see criticism as harmful, but an opportunity to offer a point of view that the manufacturer often does not realize. I would very much like manufacturers to expose their designs for this purpose as sometimes the flaws are widely pointed out and the manufacturer completely ignores it. That's what happened with the kittyHawk's 1/32 T-6.
I will like very much I could buy two HobbyBoss A-26 instead having to spend almost the value of another kit buying a pair of resin nacelles to fix the kit ...

 

Edited October 10, 2019 by FCM

[Laurent]

1 hour ago, FCM said:

I do not see criticism as harmful, but an opportunity to offer a point of view that the manufacturer often does not realize. I would very much like manufacturers to expose their designs for this purpose as sometimes the flaws are widely pointed out and the manufacturer completely ignores it. That's what happened with the kittyHawk's 1/32 T-6.

If a producer wants to improve the accuracy of a CAD design, there's only one way to do it: peer review. It's even the case if the CAD is based on a 3D scan because the designer may miss some shape features of the subject. Some producers like Great Wall Hobby or Kinetic Model do it.

 

[Homebee]

1/32nd

- ref. 83213 - Douglas A-26C Invader

- ref. 83214 - Douglas A-26B Invader

In the new catalogue they have not only inverted the designations (the C model should be the glass nose and the B model should be the gun nose) but also wrongly quoted the ref.83213 as a 1/48th scale kit, sigh... Link

 

 

V.P.

Edited December 30, 2019 by Homebee

[Wuger91]

The A-26b Picture is the cover of the Osprey book on A-26

[ejboyd5]

As much as I dislike one-sided criticism of a new release before it is viewed "in the flesh," I must agree that the cowling shape is unlike any I have ever seen on a 1:1 aircraft.  For what this kit will undoubtedly cost it should be correct without the need for aftermarket parts.  Perhaps it is not too late for the manufacturer to make amends.

[Kushan_Farsight]

My 2 cents to this conversation is that looking at the guys who are all working on the cad models, they all look like relatively young chaps.

A lot of modelers come from a massive wealth of experience either flying craft firsthand, or having worked on them or have long stories from family-members etc. I highly doubt that is the case for these guys, so a lot of 'obvious' errors can be accidentally missed or introduced.  I appreciate they could do a lot of research on the topic but again i have no idea how easy it is to get hold of texts and documentation based in china for a half century old american aircraft. 

 

We also don't have any idea on the divide of customers that buy their kits. perhaps 70% build OOB and dont worry about such issues. if so, is it worth laborious and expensive retooling to appeal to 30% of your market? For example, if this is being bought as a gift for anyone under 12, firstly, they are a lucky sausage, and secondly, probably not too fussed on the details. 

I am sure if people summarized their comments in a "Pros/Cons" column, along with some supporting images (such as FCMs diagram) it would appear less critical of the work, or at least much more constructive.

Having just picked this up in 1/48 i have no interest in an even bigger version, but you could get some real electrification going on at that scale (flight surfaces, props, interior lighting etc)

[GRIM REAPER]

So, is this 1/48 or 1/32? Or are we getting both from Hobbyboss? 

[Homebee]

7 hours ago, GRIM REAPER said:

So, is this 1/48 or 1/32? Or are we getting both from Hobbyboss? 

 

Did you read this thread title? Did you have had a look at the test build pictures? Did you read these future kits reference numbers in accordance with the HB coding system? Did you have had a close look at the online images from new HobbyBoss catalog 2020-2021? 

Then you've your answers:

- 1/32nd

- Nothing announced for the moment in 1/48th scale

 

V.P.

Edited December 18, 2019 by Homebee

[Caerbannog]

On 01/10/2019 at 17:05, quangster said:

 

Do you sincerely think that modellers cannot trust their own eyes and therefore need ’experts’ to show them the issue?

There  was a time when modellers would marvel at a new kit, buy it, go home and build it. Whatever the errors, we tried to correct them with the best of our abilities.

I’m not sure that becoming dependant on aftermarket like we do nowadays make us better modellers.

 

Correct - I remember these times! You only learned about new kits from one of two monthly magazines (here) and hardly ever got bad comments on any kit - no matter how off it might have been. All the "slight" shape issues did not interest me because I was usually not aware of them. Bad decals and horrible fit was much more of a concern. I remember an old 1:72 Me 163 kit from Revell which had part of the cockpit windows molded with the fuselage. The instruction asked you to paint these areas silver. I found this odd but followed (maybe I am more "German" than I like... 😜). That was the time when airbrushes were some strange tools for graphic departments, filler was only known from the automobile industry and washes had several meanings - none related to our hobby directly... Weathering? WTF?

 

Nowadays I put a lot more efford in my builds. And I have less time to build than I used to have back in school. So my expectations for a new kit has risen a lot the past 30 something years and so has the over all quality of the plastic kit tooling (and kits costs). Some companies are very good at meeting my personal requirements and others are not.

 

Yes - sometimes people seem a bit over enthusiatically with spotting errors first. Some kind of sport it seems. Still I am very gratefull to these comments as they are usually profound and turn out correct in the end. Kit producers should be thankful as well IF they care: In case of CAD drawing comments they can still correct the errors before cutting metal (like Dora Wings for example). Even if the kit is already produced they can still correct issues on later releases - especially with variations of the type where new parts are needed anyway (GWH P-61 family is one, Eduard Me 109 became a completely new tooling after scale issues with the first release).

 

If companies like Hobby Boss do less good jobs on some of their kits they will get comments as above. If they care they can check if the work involved makes sense for them or not. Or simply do not care at all, which is also possible.

Those of us modellers who care (like me) can decide if they want to spend the money on the kit and what to do (or not to do) about the issues (besides - not every issue for one person must be a real issue for the next...) - or simply spend the money elsewhere.

 

Back to topic...

 

Rene

 

 

 

[GRIM REAPER]

6 hours ago, Homebee said:

 

Did you read this thread title? Did you have had a look at the test build pictures? Did you read these future kits reference numbers in accordance with the HB coding system? Did you have had a close look at the online images from new HobbyBoss catalog 2020-2021? 

Then you've your answers:

- 1/32nd

- Nothing announced for the moment in 1/48th scale

 

V.P.

Well, yeah I read it. If you look at the scale in the catalog,  it says 1/48. That's  why I was asking. Nothing more. Just asking for clarification. Over and out.

[Wuger91]

The reference number begin with 8 32 xxx so it's a 1/32 scale not 1/48 just a print error