1:48 Fairchild Republic Thunderbolt II - Warthog by GWH

[DaveJL]

9 minutes ago, Zacharias said:

" ...do you get two times as much plastic for it?"

It's like comparing books by size, weight or number of pages. 

The real, screaming breaking point of Academy A-10C kit is not possible to correct by any "correction" set on the market, and will never be, or it would cost twice as much as the kit itself. 

And btw. correcting engine intakes is a child's play compared to correction of the real breaking point of that kit.

Breaking point is very pronounced, but nobody has mentioned it here so far, or anywhere else.

That is very strange because it is staring you in the face if you pay a bit of attention. 

Member dragonlanceHR knows what I am talking about, as we discussed it already.

Anybody else has an idea what I am talking about?

Could you not just tell fellow modellers what this issue is instead of being cryptic in both of your posts?

[Zacharias]

Just now, DaveJL said:

Could you not just tell fellow modellers what this issue is instead of being cryptic in both of your posts?

No, sorry, it would be too easy, I just want to see how much fellow modelers are paying attention to a certain aspects of this beautiful hobby.

Like basic proportions, basic dimensions and basic angles of air-frame construction.

I am not a rivet counter so don't look for minute errors, look for huge shape and position error that is close to impossible to correct on otherwise marvellously engineered Academy A-10C kit.

1st Prize will be a joy to spend Ł100 on GWH kit with no buyers remorse knowing that Ł100 + would not be enough to purchase and build correct A-10C kit from any other manufacturer.

[DaveJL]

44 minutes ago, Zacharias said:

No, sorry, it would be too easy, I just want to see how much fellow modelers are paying attention to a certain aspects of this beautiful hobby.

Like basic proportions, basic dimensions and basic angles of air-frame construction.

I am not a rivet counter so don't look for minute errors, look for huge shape and position error that is close to impossible to correct on otherwise marvellously engineered Academy A-10C kit.

1st Prize will be a joy to spend Ł100 on GWH kit with no buyers remorse knowing that Ł100 + would not be enough to purchase and build correct A-10C kit from any other manufacturer.

The hobby is also about helping other modellers out, giving advice and assisting with queries. That’s what this forum is all about.

 

Some modellers don’t have access or knowledge to measure, assess and determine all these basic measures you mention and just like to know if kits have any issues so they can make an informed decision based on their personal circumstances be it cost, options in the kit, decals, ease of build, number of parts or indeed a combination of these.

 

You say the GWH kit will be a joy, yet you criticised it early in this thread.

 

Again as modellers we should be able to make informed decisions based on other modellers’ input from seeing plastic in the flesh or their build experience.

[hopkp]

If the Academy kit has a 'very pronounced' shortcoming that's also a 'huge shape and position error', I find it odd - to say the least - that no-one at all has either noticed it or mentioned it thus far!

[Zacharias]

12 minutes ago, DaveJL said:

The hobby is also about helping other modellers out, giving advice and assisting with queries. That’s what this forum is all about.

 

Some modellers don’t have access or knowledge to measure, assess and determine all these basic measures you mention and just like to know if kits have any issues so they can make an informed decision based on their personal circumstances be it cost, options in the kit, decals, ease of build, number of parts or indeed a combination of these.

 

You say the GWH kit will be a joy, yet you criticised it early in this thread.

 

Again as modellers we should be able to make informed decisions based on other modellers’ input from seeing plastic in the flesh or their build experience.

Yes, early in this thread I was indeed criticizing GWH because of numerous errors I have noticed on their test shots and CAD pictures.

I am glad to see on final product that those issues are properly addressed, and it is a great news to me and other members of our community.

Maybe, just maybe, such pointing out at those errors in the early stage of new product developing helped GWH and other manufacturers to offer much better, more accurate  product  with no glaring errors.

One way or another, it is good to see that GWH listens, learns and cares, at least in this case.

[DaveJL]

1 minute ago, Zacharias said:

Yes, early in this thread I was indeed criticizing GWH because of numerous errors I have noticed on their test shots and CAD pictures.

I am glad to see on final product that those issues are properly addressed, and it is a great news to me and other members of our community.

Maybe, just maybe, such pointing out at those errors in the early stage of new product developing helped GWH and other manufacturers to offer much better, more accurate  product  with no glaring errors.

One way or another, it is good to see that GWH listens, learns and cares, at least in this case.

That’s good to know, the GWH kit does look good. 
 

If you’re able to point out errors on the GWH kit from the pictures, could you then elaborate on the Academy errors that you mention? I’m sure there are many on here who would be interested to know, especially if they have the kit in their stash.

[Porkbits]

Too late! I already built my Academy kit months ago. Guess I'll throw it away?

[Zacharias]

2 hours ago, hopkp said:

If the Academy kit has a 'very pronounced' shortcoming that's also a 'huge shape and position error', I find it odd - to say the least - that no-one at all has either noticed it or mentioned it thus far!

I find it odd too, believe me.

With one exception, only on You Tube (on the channel of one South Korean  fellow modeler) is that glaring error pointed out.

 

Engine nacelle pylons on A-10A and A-10C are placed at an angle of 23° in relation to horizontal plain.

On any other 1/48 A-10 kit (and 1/72 A-10 kit, including ancient 1/72 Academy kit) that angle is well depicted (between 20° and 25°, and that is fair enough).

 

Well, new all shiny A-10C kit display an angle of 45° (instead of actual 23°) between engine nacelle pylons and horizontal plain.

That is looking terribly wrong at the first place, angle is twice as steep as it should be!

 

As result ...

- position of engine nacelles is wrong in two axis

- shape of pylons is terribly wrong

- "entry point" of pylons into engine nacelles is all wrong in shape and position

- width between "roots" of engine pylons (where they are attached  to rear fuselage section) is wrong

- pylons "enter" nacelles at wrong angle making all sorts of shape issues of nacelles outline and cross section 

- the whole fuselage tail section look is messed up beyond repair ...

 

... as I do not see how any "correction set" would correct above mentioned issues at any reasonable price.

 

That 23° angle detail is easy to find and see at first glance on thousands of real A-10 photos.

Also, all photos of finished Academy kit across numerous forums clearly show over the top 45° angle. 

 

So, is there any scientific explanation how such a huge shape/position issue went unnoticed for more then a year on every single modelling forum?  

 

Maybe somebody will say that it does not matter if angle is 45° instead of actual 23° on such a "tiny" detail such as utterly wrong, twisted looking twin engine nacelles and pylons position and shape?

 

So ... here you have it, once you saw it I know you will not be able to unsee it, sorry.

 

But it will help someone to avoid trap of being blinded by great looking details of some new kits, and learn to pay more attention to those big, obvious errors that are sometimes screaming at you.  

 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2024 by Zacharias

[whiskey]

3 hours ago, Zacharias said:

I find it odd too, believe me.

With one exception, only on You Tube (on the channel of one South Korean  fellow modeler) is that glaring error pointed out.

 

Engine nacelle pylons on A-10A and A-10C are placed at an angle of 23° in relation to horizontal plain.

On any other 1/48 A-10 kit (and 1/72 A-10 kit, including ancient 1/72 Academy kit) that angle is well depicted (between 20° and 25°, and that is fair enough).

 

Well, new all shiny A-10C kit display an angle of 45° (instead of actual 23°) between engine nacelle pylons and horizontal plain.

That is looking terribly wrong at the first place, angle is twice as steep as it should be!

 

As result ...

- position of engine nacelles is wrong in two axis

- shape of pylons is terribly wrong

- "entry point" of pylons into engine nacelles is all wrong in shape and position

- width between "roots" of engine pylons (where they are attached  to rear fuselage section) is wrong

- pylons "enter" nacelles at wrong angle making all sorts of shape issues of nacelles outline and cross section 

- the whole fuselage tail section look is messed up beyond repair ...

 

... as I do not see how any "correction set" would correct above mentioned issues at any reasonable price.

 

That 23° angle detail is easy to find and see at first glance on thousands of real A-10 photos.

Also, all photos of finished Academy kit across numerous forums clearly show over the top 45° angle. 

 

So, is there any scientific explanation how such a huge shape/position issue went unnoticed for more then a year on every single modelling forum?  

 

Maybe somebody will say that it does not matter if angle is 45° instead of actual 23° on such a "tiny" detail such as utterly wrong, twisted looking twin engine nacelles and pylons position and shape?

 

So ... here you have it, once you saw it I know you will not be able to unsee it, sorry.

 

But it will help someone to avoid trap of being blinded by great looking details of some new kits, and learn to pay more attention to those big, obvious errors that are sometimes screaming at you.  

 

 

 

 

45 degrees on a horizontal plane would be insanely obvious even to the most casual observer. Why has this not been more widely discussed if it is such a glaring issue? I know and understand that this thread is for the new GWH A-10 (which I do plan on spending my hard earned $$ on), but what you are saying needs to be addressed. Could you show us a comparison of the Academy, what you are using as a reference for the GWH as I know its not out yet, and the real aircraft?

[dreamwriter]

On 2/19/2024 at 5:19 PM, Stephen said:

According to a post from Tiger Hobbies, the UK RRP will be £89.99

 

 

Price for pre-order on one czech shop is 80€ plus shipping. At that price its highly attractive, at least for me.

[Narrowdown]

 

 

Please be noticed this is T2 test-shots quick building. Fitting is not as good as final product. 

 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2024 by Narrowdown

[Zacharias]

47 minutes ago, whiskey said:

 

45 degrees on a horizontal plane would be insanely obvious even to the most casual observer. Why has this not been more widely discussed if it is such a glaring issue? I know and understand that this thread is for the new GWH A-10 (which I do plan on spending my hard earned $$ on), but what you are saying needs to be addressed. Could you show us a comparison of the Academy, what you are using as a reference for the GWH as I know its not out yet, and the real aircraft?

To be more specific leading edge of Academy engine pylons are at 45°, while trailing edge is somewhat closer to correct angle.

When I'll get a chance I could take a picture of pylons on my Italeri, Hobby Boss and Academy kits. 

In the meantime I suggest you to do your own diligence.

As result, your own "... would be insanely obvious ..." will turn into " ... is insanely obvious ...".

[whiskey]

1 minute ago, Zacharias said:

To be more specific leading edge of Academy engine pylons are at 45°, while trailing edge is somewhat closer to correct angle.

When I'll get a chance I could take a picture of pylons on my Italeri, Hobby Boss and Academy kits. 

In the meantime I suggest you to do your own diligence.

As result, your own "... would be insanely obvious ..." will turn into " ... is insanely obvious ...".

 

I'm good. You are dowling out the critiques, I suggest you use evidence to back them up.

[Zacharias]

25 minutes ago, whiskey said:

 

I'm good. You are dowling out the critiques, I suggest you use evidence to back them up.

I suggest you to be patient a bit (till tomorrow probably), then will tell us how it feels to face an evidence that does not fit your beliefs.

[RupertTheBear]

12 hours ago, Stephen said:

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration, in the UK the price difference between Academy and GWH A-10s is approximately £50. The Academy kit does not require £50 of aftermarket, the only items actually needed are intakes and anything else is a "nice to have". 

Well in Germany the kit itself costs 45€ and resin engines go for around 30€ to 35€ after a quick search and I'm guessing in the end the GWH A-10 is going to cost 90€ to 95€ so it's a 15€ gap. Sure if you can correct the engines yourself (which I can't  ) you are far better off. 

[Narrowdown]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/215551215532252/permalink/1891539711266719/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/215551215532252/permalink/1891535847933772/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/215551215532252/permalink/1891544714599552/

 

Some defects of Academy that discussed in this thread earlier.

[whiskey]

9 hours ago, Narrowdown said:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/215551215532252/permalink/1891539711266719/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/215551215532252/permalink/1891535847933772/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/215551215532252/permalink/1891544714599552/

 

Some defects of Academy that discussed in this thread earlier.

 

All of these posts were removed by the admin because someone continuing to bash another manufacturers product whilst seemingly advocating for one from a manufacturer that they have a connection with. 
 

Again I suggest that claims of the GWH being the ‘holy grail’ of A-10 kits in quarter scale are backed with evidence instead of just saying it. Show us comparisons with the actual aircraft, the Academy or other kits, and the GWH kit. 
 

I am almost to the point where I no longer want to buy the GWH kit because of reading the comments from one individual in almost every model forum regarding it.

[Ka-Efka]

GWH kits seem very 'susceptible' for this kind of marketing... 

[baldwin8]

16 minutes ago, whiskey said:

Again I suggest that claims of the GWH being the ‘holy grail’ of A-10 kits in quarter scale are backed with evidence instead of just saying it. Show us comparisons with the actual aircraft, the Academy or other kits, and the GWH kit. 
 

I am almost to the point where I no longer want to buy the GWH kit because of reading the comments from one individual in almost every model forum regarding it.

 

Thank you for pointing that out. I checked the linked YouTube video and interestingly, the all the other posters videos all feature GWH products.

I didn't need a GWH A-10 anyway.

[Piotr Mikolajski]

1 hour ago, whiskey said:

I am almost to the point where I no longer want to buy the GWH kit because of reading the comments from one individual in almost every model forum regarding it.

 

I was hoping they would release it in 1/72, but after reading all this I'm not sure I have any desire to buy it. I'm leaving aside the ridiculous price, because that's what I can be sure of.

[Homebee]

11 hours ago, Narrowdown said:

Some defects of Academy that discussed in this thread earlier.

See here: https://www.facebook.com/dt.jin

 

V.P.

[Zacharias]

14 hours ago, whiskey said:

 

I'm good. You are dowling out the critiques, I suggest you use evidence to back them up.

Here is surprise evidence for you any everybody else interested in some firm facts, hope it helps a bit.

 

 

Edited February 21, 2024 by Zacharias

[Julien]

Im sorry those are not evidence, looking at them you are choosing them to match your narative, and yours alone, im really suggesting you wind down your views and what you say here as its becoming troll like. I have the academy kit, and from what ive see of the GWH kit they are both good.

 

I would also add at this point that I have access to and have worked on an actual airframe.  Ive helped restore one and yes both these kits, and other kits out there do a fairly good of representing the A-10 in its various guides.

 

Please stop this bickering in this thread now or there will be moderating actions forthcoming. 

 

Julien

[Julien]

Well someone has now left the discussion for a month, no more please.

 

Julien

[dragonlanceHR]

20 hours ago, hopkp said:

If the Academy kit has a 'very pronounced' shortcoming that's also a 'huge shape and position error', I find it odd - to say the least - that no-one at all has either noticed it or mentioned it thus far!

It was noticed and it was mentioned. Do you want the pic in the pm? I'm not abou to kill someone's joy in the topic 😇