Bill Cross Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Well I guess that just killed this thread! Be careful what you ask for.... Jack 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightersweep Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I seem to have the knack of killing threads! Regards; Steve Bill Cross 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Cross Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Hey, Steve, we're all happier to know about the Italeri Mirage than to whine about there not being one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark P Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Geez, I guess Italeri must monitor trends on LSP... Mark Proulx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssculptor Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) I'm with you on this one Brian - maybe it is a form of laziness to leave off the ' " ', 'in' or 'inch' off after 'Quarter' or '1/4', but it does make a big difference. Derek When we say 1/4 scale when referring to a thing that is 1/4 of the real size, we are saying 1/4 size. However no one really worries about it. Like I said, "...very few people in the USA give a rat's ass for mathematics. Math forces people to think and their brain hurts when they do that. :(" Essentially we are making the words size and scale interchangeable. Well, that is OK because language is always in a state of change. There will always be the old guard who insist that the old way is correct and lots of younger people who insist that their misinterpretation of the rules is correct. If enough people say it wrong then it becomes correct, especially as the older, conservative people die off. When I taught math at the university I showed the students the correct way, and then the wrong way which was in the process of becoming correct simply out of usage by the majority of the people. Interesting, isn't it? Stephen P.S. I am overjoyed that Italeri is bringing out the Mirage III in 1/32. I just find it interesting that an Italian company is bringing out a French plane. Edited January 29, 2015 by ssculptor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waroff Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) I always understood that "1/4" was a rapport between a measure in inches for an équivalent in feet. 1" for 4' , and the slash is not a fraction symbol. The slash used as fraction began since the modern mathematics (1972/1975, not reading as 1972 divided by 1975 ) I suppose that to say "quarter scale" was a oral shortcut or familiar expression and the units implied, easier than say "one forty-eighth scale" This is how I understood when I was a little boy. Edited January 29, 2015 by waroff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menelaos Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 just wrote it many times ago...Mirage PLEASE! I do either don't understand why we don't have many of them in 1:32 or even in 1:24 scale... The Mirage has a great history background and was flown by many AFs... I remember a crew chief standing in front of a HAF-Mirage F1 (now gone since 2003) and told me: They are great aircrafts...I never found a single crack in the structure all those years. He put his Hand on the fuselage and knock on it.... http://greekmilitary.net/Airforce/2005075902809152757_rs.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotsman Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Wow1.. well news is both a shocker , and logical, after the 104 , it seems they're getting the taste for 1/32 .. and seconded Eli.. IAf markings PLEASE!!! Lts just hope its better value for money that the 104... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony T Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Yes, Mirage III C (and then III E / 5 and maybe a twin-stick) is a cause for serious series purchasing and building. Hoping Gen will still do SEPECAT Jaguar A (and GR.1A of course) That leaves quite a few still, esp. Mirage F.1, IV, 2000, Rafale, Super Etendard, Etendard, Super Mystere and Ouragan, plus that dinky trainer with the butterfly tail, and a bunch of British and Soviet stuff which gets little love. Tony Out2gtcha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loic Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 That is great news and it will definatly make me build my first post WWII jet since.... 25 years or so Thank you Italeri !! (and I hope you may offer us the Mirage 2000 someday) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAGNEW Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Well I guess that just killed this thread! Kinda funny actually. it killed mine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerobat Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 it killed mine I'm sorry to hear this, but understand the financial realities. Keep dreaming ... you're certainly on the right track for a lot of us. Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero77 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) It baffles me, too. And it even makes me angry ! You model manufacturers anti-french racists ! Is that because we eat frogs that we dont have the right to have our own aircraft in 1/32? Of course, i'm joking ! The only time i've been eating frogs was... in China ! Edited January 29, 2015 by Zero77 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero77 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Wow, i've just seen the forthcoming Mirage IIIC from Italeri ! That's great ! And they even have had the good idea to release a different version than the old Revell one ! So i'd be able to build both, and the C with a desert camo ! (there never was a desert camo on any E version). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Boillot Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Of course, i'm joking ! The only time i've been eating frogs was... in China ! That reminds me of one ... Do you know why the Vatican are absolutely sure that Adam and Eve were not Chinese ? Because they would have eaten the snake ! Hubert Zero77 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now