1/72 - North American AJ-1 Savage by Roden - released

[Trenton guy]

According to “Tailspin Turtle” here, that canopy was also used on early production aircraft, although often replaced later. The second canopy was related to internal changes that raised the third the crew member to flight deck level thus necessitating additional headroom. Existing AJ-1’s did not have the cockpit rearranged, hence not all canopies were replaced. There were tailplane and stabilizer changes that were universally retrofitted as they were a flight safety issue. All this does mean that the kit can only be finished in the early blue schemes ( as the kit provides. Not claiming that the kit schemes are all correct for an early machine. Still need to research that before building. Fortunately, I still have my Anigrand AJ-2 for a gray/white scheme.

 

How quick we are to condemn. 

[Ad-4N]

6 hours ago, vit79 said:

I bought this model, looked. The model has the wrong canopy. Its canooy  was only on an early prototype.

 

Well, go ahead and wait for the 1/72 Tamiya version of the AJ-2.  I understand it is scheduled for release Q3, 2178.  

[vit79]

14 hours ago, Ad-4N said:

 

Well, go ahead and wait for the 1/72 Tamiya version of the AJ-2.  I understand it is scheduled for release Q3, 2178.  

No, Q4 2535🙂

[Sabrejet]

15 hours ago, Trenton guy said:

According to “Tailspin Turtle” here, that canopy was also used on early production aircraft, although often replaced later. The second canopy was related to internal changes that raised the third the crew member to flight deck level thus necessitating additional headroom. Existing AJ-1’s did not have the cockpit rearranged, hence not all canopies were replaced. There were tailplane and stabilizer changes that were universally retrofitted as they were a flight safety issue. All this does mean that the kit can only be finished in the early blue schemes ( as the kit provides. Not claiming that the kit schemes are all correct for an early machine. Still need to research that before building. Fortunately, I still have my Anigrand AJ-2 for a gray/white scheme.

 

How quick we are to condemn. 

 

It's annoying to find negative comments, often based upon incorrect assumptions - you only have to look at the Airfix Anson thread to see that. Going further back, a negative review of Revell/Monogram's 1/48 F-86D kit damned it with comments over 'massively' incorrect wing sweep (also untrue) and I've seen kits described as 'unbuildable' that I've found to be a pleasure to put together.

 

I doubt that the moderators have the time or willpower to weedle out these spurious comments, but so long as we can counter with accurate and positive clarification then all is not lost.

[vit79]

Please, read a last post of this topic https://www.greenmats.club/forums/topic/9511-roden-172-aj-1-savage-—-в-разработке/#comment-116846.

Only the first option can be assembled from the box with сanopy out the box, the lantern of the other 2 options is completely different

Edited October 26, 2022 by vit79

[Sabrejet]

5 hours ago, vit79 said:

Please, read a last post of this topic https://www.greenmats.club/forums/topic/9511-roden-172-aj-1-savage-—-в-разработке/#comment-116846.

Only the first option can be assembled from the box with сanopy out the box, the lantern of the other 2 options is completely different

 

Aha! Apologies you are correct: the kit version is the early sliding canopy. 👍

[Ad-4N]

10 hours ago, vit79 said:

No, Q4 2535🙂

 

 

Wait, what?  Guess I will have to wait for the Enterprise to pick me up from the Botany Bay, lost in space from the year 1996, with myself and ship's company in cryogenic freeze?

[TEXANTOMCAT]

Ah of course it will be issued by Khanetic models👍

[Ad-4N]

37 minutes ago, TEXANTOMCAT said:

Ah of course it will be issued by Khanetic models👍

 

 

Oooooohhhhhhh, well played.  

[Piotr Mikolajski]

12 hours ago, Sabrejet said:

It's annoying to find negative comments, often based upon incorrect assumptions

 

In an ideal world, comments about the accuracy of models would be backed up by factory documentation and photos and would be written in a tone that shows how something should look, taking into account the technical capabilities of the modelling industry.

At the same time, companies commenting on their products would also back up their statements with factory documentation, rather than a mere "it's the way we did it because it's right, and it's right because we did it that way".

 

Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world, so a company that puts a lot of effort into releasing a kit for which there is no (readily available) documentation will be criticised on the basis of vague photographs or myths that have persisted for 30-40 years.

At the same time, a company producing a kit, for which documentation is readily available, will be praised even if the model has dozens of errors - assurances of their professionalism and a group of loudly clapping fans are enough for no serious discussion to arise.

 

The same applies, by the way, to critics - those who use the documentation and explain what has been done wrong and how, will be labelled as "company haters". But criticism that is based on fantasy or someone else's personal opinion, written in a harassing or insulting tone, will not be met with any response.

 

I have been seeing these behaviours for many years, in different forums, in different languages.... and apparently we have to get used to the fact that there are also such people in our hobby.

 

[Fullofit]

2 hours ago, Ad-4N said:

 

 

Oooooohhhhhhh, well played.  

You’re both wrong. It’ll be made by Rodians in a galaxy far, far away.

[Piotr Mikolajski]

3 hours ago, Fullofit said:

You’re both wrong. It’ll be made by Rodians in a galaxy far, far away.

 

Damn it, the Hutts will add such a margin that the model will cost a fortune.