Sanderman
-
Posts
13 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Sanderman
-
-
So where is this fantabulous wing correction that makes this bag of hammers of a kit less homely?
-
-
OK, so can we talk about the other big error now?
Does that look even slightly like this to you?
Notice how the cowl profile is wrong - too rounded on the sides vs the almost flat sided profile of the real thing? Never mind how the side air inlets are the wrong shape and lack interior finishing?
I know, I just can't lave bad enough alone
Joe
-
14 minutes ago, juvatwad said:
Shots with the flap on and the best I could get of the airfoil.....
Well that certainly doesn't look even slightly like a Davis wing (or a B24).
For those of you who think "it looks enough like B24 to me" here are few more pictures of B24s you might enjoy:
;-)
Joe
-
On 12/3/2018 at 11:43 PM, PhilB said:
The OP of this topic is an expert who has made initial observations based on photographs only.
As he says in his post: "Please note that these comments are based upon what I could determine from photos - not handling the plastic - and thus may be open to further discussion. "
We always need an expert to give a balanced and subjective view based on whatever evidence is available at the time.
Otherwise we just get people making sensationalist comments and throwing rocks when they don't even have the kit in their hands.
Sigh. I’ve been all around 2 different B24s first hand. The airfoil is wrong. I don’t need an “expert” to tell me. I’ll just shut up now and wait for you to catch up.
Joe
-
8 hours ago, Markjames1968 said:
This one seems pretty good..
Indeed it does. Looking at the ancient Monogram kit in 1/48 it looks like this too to my eye. And the one thing Monogram almost always got got right in their 1/48 kits was shape.
- Dennis7423 and David66
-
2
-
Do we really need a subject matter expert? For anyone who knows B24s even vaguely or can look at pictures of the real thing this wing root error is visible from space.
- Alburymodeler, hanna and Jeff T
-
3
-
On 11/15/2018 at 5:39 PM, acresearcher said:5 hours ago, Pup7309 said:
Not that I'm aware of, not here on LSP anyway, just some statements that it's wrong somehow. Eventually, someone may supply some documentary evidence as to the nature of the error, but I'm not really sure how you do that with a kit that hasn't been released yet.
+1 Please supply evidence thanks!
OK, here you go. The Davis wing was extremely thick in cross section just behind its leading edge. It resulted in a distinctly downward sloping profile on the upper wing root that is so steep it looks concave in profile towards the trailing edge.
The pics in the post above show it. This one does too (ignoring the shadow):
And this one too:
Look at how thick the wing is just behind the leading edge and the sharp downward slope of the wing at the wing root towards the trailing edge.
And here too:
Instead of that, HB gives us this:
It completely lacks the dramatic high shouldered leading edge / steep downward slope of the trailing edge at the wing root of the real thing. In fact it actually appears to have a convex profile from leading edge to trailing edge on the upper surface, which is simply wrong.
It looks to me that the main error is in the wing being too thin in cross section just past the leading edgeLook just how thick the Davis wing actually was. It was one of its most distinctive features:
It appears the wing in the model is simply too thin in cross section just past the leading edge which flattens the slope from the leading to trailing edge at the root giving it the wrong profile:
I can't unsee it. It's the single most distinctive aspect of the plane to me.
- Kagemusha, Alburymodeler, John1 and 2 others
-
5
-
OK, OK, so the turrets suck. But what about the wingroot / fuselage junction where the B24 rubber really meets the road?
You want to nitpick turret model variants to the nth degree and ignore a wing root error that's visible from space with the naked eye?
I don't get it.
The most distinctive feature of the B24 is the wing. And this not only fails the smell test. It fails the faint whiff test and the ever popular "if it looks like a B24 I'm happy" test.
- Dennis7423 and Alburymodeler
-
2
-
If I built this, I’d be highly tempted to try and sand and polish the internal framework away to give a clear view of the interior. That framework is highly distracting...
-
Heigh- ho, another day, another set of pictures
I haven't glued the screen in place, shimmed it or trimmed the dashboard, it's just balanced on the fuselage
Richard
How much money is worth saving for surface detail this sketchy? The surface detail on this kit looks like a vac form kit from the 80s.
HobbyBoss 1:32 Liberator GR Mk.VI - RAF Coastal Command
in Works in Progress
Posted
Dead, but not forgotten.....