Jump to content

Gary Needham

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Detail of the parts is phenomenal and if post & duties isn't a deal killer, I may well get some of these sets! Thanks for bringing the company and product to our attention. Gary
  2. Thank you and you too. I just use non-prescription glasses for general and an Opti visor for close up detail work (I also paint miniature figures). It isn't so much the 'seeing' per-se but rather, eye strain after lengthy session which are now curtailed to 2-3 hours at most. I have so many nice kits (and expensive too!) that I want to get build and if someone wants to start taking photos of them and then overlaying them with red lines when I do - then crack on. Strange too how none of those who obsess about minutiae of detail, never seem to set up their own model company or get employed by companies as technical advisors for new modelling projects. I suppose the salary they would need to pay said advisor would way exceed the actual return of increased kit sales by a kit having wings or fuselage with a 'corrected' 0.50 of a degree (in scale) or an extra row of rivets made to the tooling. Gary
  3. Well said! The number of modellers who engage in 'paralysis by analysis' and never actually build anything or rarely complete a build never ceases to amaze me. I am not for avoidably bad kits or those with overt shape and engineering issues etc. but some of the forensic 'observations' of otherwise lovely kits escapes me. There is 9will be!) plenty of time for people if they wish to engage in such activity to do so when their (inevitable) ailing health with hands and eyes means they can't build or paint anything anymore; or certainly not at the standards they were used to - accurate kit or otherwise! I'm 60 and I already see a deterioration especially in my eyes from even 5 years ago and so I'm building as much as I can, whilst I still can and enjoying many of these new 'uber kits' in 1/32 which even just a few short years ago, would have been considered as fantasy choices to release and irrespective of warts and all. Gary
  4. 1/32 in order of desirability and ALL new tool kits preferably by an 'A' company - Tamiya, Z-M, GWH, Eduard etc. or even ICM as a B+ MIG-15 MIG-21 MF/Bis/SMT versions. SU-15 SU-9 and / or 11 ..A man can dream!
  5. Thierry summarised it perfectly with his sportscar analogy and whilst I am sure there will be some enthusiasts of the subjects on offer prepared to pay these prices, the vast, vast majority ( even those with the disposable income to do so) will simply not identify any corresponding value or 'need' for the prices being asked. I mean, Euro 28 for a pair of Mirage III main wheels..really? Whats so wrong with those offered from aftermarket companies like Eduard and Reskit etc. for about half or slightly more than that? Are these almost twice as good? I just wonder if they can sell enough to make a return on their investment of time and effort and especially so in the current economic climate as this is a (very) niche customer base within a niche hobby genre (48 & 32 jets) and collectively, within an already niche hobby of building plastic model aeroplanes. Ultimately, it's their business model and I wish them well in their endeavours. Gary
  6. One of the true enigmas in this hobby is why none of the A companies (Tamiya, GWH, Z-M, Eduard etc.) do either a MIG 15 or a F-86 in 1/32 given the historical importance and multi nation operators of both. Even some of the better B & B+ companies like Academy, ICM and Kinetic would turn out cracking models with a new tool kit of these subjects. As others have said, the Trump MIG 15 is virtually toy-like and Kinetic's original F-86 is a bit 'clunky' in places with quite a basic pit for the scale especially. Fingers crossed! Gary
  7. Back up to £82.95 but it's still a heck of a lot of kit for the money and 'Jadlam' are also great with customer aftersales service in the highly unlikely event of any problems. They are a great company to deal with. Gary
  8. Initial reports (suggest) the main gears are fine but looking at the nose, that's a must. I'm sure Ali with his experience and fine track record, will review the issue once he gets the parts in his hands and come up with the optimal solution. Gary
  9. Yes - 'Tanmodels' who also around the same time (About 8 Years +..?), also announced a 1/32 SU-33 and then provided CAD of it.....but there has been absolutely nothing since. Being pragmatic and as a best guess, short of Trumpeter / Hobbyboss tackling this subject in 1/32 (along with the known issues for accuracy these companies normally attract), then I can't think of another mainstream company who would be likely to take this on. Others may know more or propose other companies likely to create a new tool and state of the art 1/32 F-111..? Gary
  10. A new tool N11 and something like a Siemans Schukert DIII and also a SPAD VII to the standard of CSM's other 1/32 kits would be a complete no brainer for sales. This company are the salvation of us WW1 fans after WNW. Great news and glad they are still carrying the WW1 torch. Gary
  11. YES I received mine from Jadlam last week. It was good to see that Kotare appear to have corrected the squadron codes colour too as this new kit has them in what actually looks the correct MSG whereas in the original box which I also have, the codes in that boxing appear to be, subjectively, way too 'blue' in tone. Gary
  12. By design or otherwise, you appear to miss the point people are making about this kit. It isn't the cost by default which is questioned but rather, the inconsistent quality of what Italeri put out (their Mirage III by way of example was a big disappointment) and especially so when priced as a competitor to triple A model companies with consistency and an established track record in producing a quality end product for a premium price i.e. Tamiya, Z-M, now defunct WNW etc. I always see Italeri as a model company who put out a 'Walmart' product but ask a 'Harrods' price for it. As such, it isn't "running around whining it costs too much" as you propose, nor the somewhat patronising suggestion people should buy 'bargain bucket kits' if they are questioning of a kit's price absent sight or confirmed knowledge of the end result. My stash (insane I know) is worth easily £50K upwards and insured for that amount (current retail and collector for OOP prices combined) and the majority of which are all predominantly top end 1/48 and 1/32 quality kits including close on 80+ WNW kits and so, I think that qualifies me to say I don't object to high prices and price consideration is hardly a limiting purchase factor or 'a whinge' for me, so long as the content of the box appears to justify the cost. So, let's see what Italeri delivers on this one. Ultimately, you may be happy to unquestioningly pay kit RRP prices and then hope the content meets your expectation whereas others who are more circumspect, likewise have the equal right to see or question what they are buying beforehand and just like I would expect you to at least inspect and possibly even test drive the doubtless high value Porsche or racing car you refer to (before) you went ahead and bought it...or would such a due diligence then qualify as you "running around whining" too? Gary
  13. Whilst I am sure it will be nice, that's a lot of money for a single seat 1/32 WW2 fighter. Personably, I am more than happy with those that ICM have been bringing out in 1/32 for about £40.00 (retail) here in the UK and IMHO are amongst the best value kits on the market today and great value for what is in the box. They provide the perfect balance for enough detail OOB for the majority of modellers and as a canvas for those who want to go to town and add everything the aftermarket has to offer. Whilst I haven't seen the Italeri plastic, by way of a WW2 Italian comparison, I would comfortably bet that in the base kit form and absent the extra 'goodies' that ICM's 1/32 CR42 kit plastic is every bit as good as the Italeri M-202 kit will be..? Just add some seatbelts or as I tend to do a nice seated pilot figure (plastic or resin AM ones) and the ICM kits look great and build well. I have nearly all of them and the one I built (IL-16) was a very enjoyable and fuss free build with great details. The Italeri 202 kit will have to be something (really) special to get me to folk out the same money here in the UK (based upon the given RRP for the US) as I would pay for the superlative GWH 1/32 P-40 kit. Gary
  14. From what I have seen of the Takom kit builds on YT so far, the missing parts and other matters you mention seem to be the least of the worries what with almost useless instructions and some illogical engineering sequences throughout the build. I wanted to build a big Apache but not enough to deal with the issues some (decent and capable modellers) are reporting with this Takom kit. I have also noticed some quite significant discounting here in the UK on original release kit rices so maybe word is getting out it has some 'issues' and it isn't selling as well as anticipated..? If the Meng is easier to build (I can clean up a seam line) and the Takom instructions don't get revised, then this is the one I shall go for. Gary
  15. Speaking for myself, I would have bought this in a heartbeat were it 1/32 but I assume that sales of this 1/35 aircraft range have justified their decision for Border (unless) the 1/35 range is some Border Models executive's indulgence ala Peter Jackson at WNW - i.e. what they 'want' they 'get'...? In my own modelling circle of friends and amongst club memberships (x2), I only know one LSP builder who has bought one of these 1/35 aircraft kits and even he says his 109, whilst a lovely kit which he enjoyed, looks 'odd' on a shelf alongside his 1/32 builds and so, he won't be buying any more. Perhaps the AFV builders are dipping their toe into this scale with aircraft, or their good quality (as I understand them to be) attracts the more casual modeller..? Gary
  • Create New...