Jump to content

JamesHatch

LSP_Members
  • Content Count

    1,879
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About JamesHatch

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 02/26/1970

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://largescalemodeller.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    LSM HQ, Northern UK Division.
  • Interests
    Great War aviation, in large scale. Anything esoteric.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,141 profile views
  1. I built a test shot and had no issue with fit....even the plug-in wings.
  2. No. I knew about the 'issue' beforehand but opted to keep them in situ. Maybe the wartime birds had similar struts for maintenance etc?It does make sense. I also thought the extra rigidity they may offer was worth the trade off in keeping them.
  3. Yup, a matt surface is needed. I think they suggest that. Even my beloved Prismacolor pencil won't touch a gloss surface.
  4. They are very similar to Gunze and spray with the same properties and thinner mixing ratios.
  5. WRONG!!! Now available at Uschi van der Rosten's web store: https://www.uschivdr.com/shopping-categories/shop-tools-hardware/
  6. Got the new complete set and can't wait to give them a try.
  7. Thanks Tim, I am using the nozzle and wheels, but they always fit without persuasion. If there are any things to look out for with the CMK stuff, that would be a help.
  8. I have all the sets, but need to know if there's anything unusual to expect along the way, or stuff that will make fitting them easier. I don't mind getting my hands dirty, but a tight deadline means that to be forewarned etc... Got to say they do look great. I have all the sets they make, including the engine, weapons bay, undercarriage, radar, avionics etc.
  9. Hi, Has anyone here experience of fitting the various CMK sets to Italeri's F-104G/S? My plan is to put as much as I can into the plastic kit, but the instructions are sparse regarding fit, regarding thinning plastic etc. Cheers, Jim
  10. Undercarriage more than holding up my Lanc.
  11. Undercarriage is plenty solid enough. No need to worry. It holds the model with zero issues.
  12. There is a form on your site for feedback. That is what I filled in before the FB post. I presume your software will send out an automatically generated email to you of any contact? HK is a very small company, and decisions about anything are up to Neil. He is the final arbiter of what is acceptable standard for HKM products. The kit has many flaws, non very critical, such as lack of chutes, dinghy panels on both wings, stabiliser confusion meaning two lower faces are shown as a matching pair, missing cockpit details, postwar/tropical intake filters, maintenance strut on undercarriage etc. In all cases, the first time we were aware of these was when (i) the kit had already been tooled, and (ii) customer feedback through both the HK Fans FB page and Lancaster Assembly Line FB page. Several of these are schoolboy errors. I'll PM you now.
  13. Only for external shapes, as I've repeatedly told you. AK were involved too, and as I told you, they had no input on how HK present their model outside of specifics. Decisions such as instructions etc. are HK's prerogative. I don't honestly give a flying one what weak points it has outside of my input. If LSM screwed uo, then yes, that would be on us. Do you not think this is something that they've been told endless times? Another assumption on my part, maybe. Did you email them after your review to tell them of your preference? I did, via your website before the Facebook post exploded. Your call.... Correct. I can agree with that. I was trying to make your review more correct, but I am 'a guy' who criticised you after repeatedly telling you were incorrect about your assumption.
  14. You post a review. You get mixed feedback. You come to LSP and complain about those that did it. What did you expect? Be critical in your reviews. Assume where you have to, but never a good idea to make critical assumptions.
×
×
  • Create New...