Jump to content

1/72 - Miles M.2 Hawk Major by Kovozávody Prostějov (KP) - released


Homebee
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guy's what a lot of noise. Are you kit collector's or modellers?

You don't have to buy it if you don't want to.

I had already noticed some problems but the base is more than OK.

So keep modelling.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spitfire65 said:

Guy's what a lot of noise. Are you kit collector's or modellers?

You don't have to buy it if you don't want to.

I had already noticed some problems but the base is more than OK.

So keep modelling.

 

 

I happily build bad models if there is no alternative or if it is what I already have. However, having only a finite lifespan, I really appreciate it if someone's considered opinion can save me from making a fresh purchase that I would regret, and when the correction time exceeds what I'd spend on what I already have, or how long I think a scratch build or conversion would take, then doubly so. Criticism of minor issues may get irritating if they don't bother you personally, or if they're being used to bash a manufacturer unreasonably, but what is wrong with calling out major problems? You can choose to ignore them if the errors don't bother you or you disagree about the severity, and no harm done.  Meanwhile, the rest of us may be saved a little pocket money we can spend on something else.

 

You don't have to read a negative review if you don't want to. You certainly don't have to ask or tell people to stop discussing it just because you don't want them to. Maybe if puppies were being harmed, but we haven't got to that stage yet.

 

Paul.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Carlos and Paul. Kits are expensive now and you expect manufacturer's to get the reference's right , there is enough out there. Yes as modeler's  we can modify and use other kit's to build an accurate aircraft ,but really i'm grateful that these error's are pointed out as some of us like accuracy in our model's.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Spitfire65 said:

Guy's what a lot of noise.

 

Noise? I don't understand why you are trying to belittle a perfectly valid and substantive criticism of the kit.

  

10 hours ago, Spitfire65 said:

You don't have to buy it if you don't want to.

 

I thought it was made clear enough that The Critic (@CarLos) had bought the model and was warning others, because if he himself had received such a warning he would not have bought the kit.

  

10 hours ago, Spitfire65 said:

I had already noticed some problems but the base is more than OK.

 

No, it is not. And it is high time to stop making excuses for manufacturers who make mistakes of this magnitude. We're not talking about the "problem" that a designer shortened a panel line by half a millimetre, which can be fixed in less time than it takes to log on to BM. We are talking about mistakes that require making the fuselage and wings virtually from scratch.

 

The manufacturer of the model did not sell us plans according to which we should make the model ourselves, but took money for a product that we should not improve to the extent of what is called "building from scratch".

 

10 hours ago, Spitfire65 said:

So keep modelling.

 

Sorry, but to me such a statement is very arrogant.

 

It sounds like an announcement that criticism of a poor model is not allowed, because everyone should improve it themselves.

 

This is 2022, not 1972, when a model roughly resembling the original was enough for everyone. Developments in technology today make it possible to turn good factory plans into a great 3D design that a short run company can print and make moulds based on. AZ Model are keen to claim to design their models in 3D, so perhaps it's time to start expecting 3D and CAD quality?

 

If you like building models from something that only broadly resembles the original - fantastic, this is the kit for you. But most people in 2022 expect contemporary quality from the brand new kits, not a semi-finished product that is hard to achieve a satisfactory result from. And even a "short run" tag doesn't mean a "do all the details yourself, because we didn't give a poo-poo" set these days.

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/05/2022 at 10:15, Roger Holden said:

And the decals for the vintage civil subjects they provided are just as inaccurate as the parts. Nothing usable there ! 

Any pointers on what you feel is wrong with the scheme for G-ADCF please Roger? I've not managed to locate any images of this aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Dave Swindell said:

Any pointers on what you feel is wrong with the scheme for G-ADCF please Roger? I've not managed to locate any images of this aircraft.

The registration letters are definitely not white, but some intermediate shade, possibly with a white outline. There's a small photo in the Air-Britain Miles Aircraft book. It's very difficult to be sure which parts are green and red, but probably not AZ's choice....

Edited by Roger Holden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Roger Holden said:

The registration letters are definitely not white, but some intermediate shade, possibly with a white outline. There's a small photo in the Air-Britain Miles Aircraft book. It's very difficult to be sure which parts are green and red, but probably not AZ's choice....

Ah yes, found it, p332. I was forgetting the appendix section at the back and just looking in the main section at the front.

Yes the reg letters are definitely outline, both on the fuselage and upper wing (and therefore presumably the same below the wing) They're much squarer/angled than the decals show as well.

The caption says green and silver for the colours, but the history entry says red/green.

The reg outline could be white or possibly silver or yellow?

The inside of the letters looks the same as the surround on the wings, but lighter than the surround on the fuselage, though this might be down to the angle of the lighting giving less contrast on the wings.

Wheel fairings very light, so silver/natural metal?

The rest of the aircraft looks too dark to be silver, and whilst the outer wings do appear to be a fraction lighter than the inner wing/fuselage this again might be lighting. The caption would suggest overall green with silver wheel fairings. The outer wings could possibly be red, but the tailplane looks the same as the fin/rudder/fuselage colour.

BP colours are green and yellow, if the reg letters were yellow I wouldn't have thought they would have needed an outline, however if they were red then the outline could definitely improve contrast, could the outline be yellow?

Shell colours are yellow and red, so there is some logic in the possible use of these colours.

If the fuselage is green with red outlined letters, the outer wings could be the same or possibly reversed, red with green outlined letters. 

The Hawk emblem forward of the cockpit is light, not black as per decals, and there is a rear cockpit headrest & fairing that's not shown on the kit drawing.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, CarLos said:

Roger, Dave, may be this helps... Or creates more confusion!

 

Winged Shell


 

G-ADCF

 

I'll try to find more references in the text.

 

Carlos

Ooh that's interesting Carlos. The front instrument panel especially. What's the rest of the book like? recommended?

From the photo, wheel fairings natural metal (as are the wing join cover strips) light hawk motif both sides, outlined reg letters with different inner colour to surrounds. Outer wings do look slightly lighter than the inner wing/fuselage.

The fuselage appears to be one single colour, not the red upper/green lower/gold cheatline shown in the book cover, however gold inner colour for the reg letters could account for them appearing light in one location and dark in another.

The painting does lend support for green fuselage and red outer wings, possibly red tailplane as well (but allover red painted as a sub assembly rather than KP's green upper red lower?), does rather depend on the artist's research, I suspect it isn't a contemporary painting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...