HK's Latest Mossie out mid May :D

[Aerobat]

There's some nice videos on the Calgary Mosquito Society's youtube page ... like this one:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skvHQ0YPZEQ

[Jeff]

There is a whole series of videos.....done by the CMS, keep looking , there is more...

[Guest Clunkmeister]

That seems to be the nature of the hobby these days. Usually those that piss on everybody's chips are those without the ability to have even modelled the thing realistically in the first place, or to show their own abilities. I can think of one retro forum where that is the case.

Good or bad, James, I just enjoy building model airplanes my way. I'll do some slight modifications or changes for myself if there is some gross inaccuracy, but usually, being that I build for me, not for a commission work, I let it be what it is.

I'm aided in one big way because many inaccuracies seem to be in open hatches with no guts,more the wrong guts, and I like to model an airplane ready for flight; fueled, primed, coolant filled, bombed up, gunned up, hatch or canopy open, with or without a crew depending on my mood.

I don't do the "Level 1 inspection" look, with all hatches and inspection panels open. If I did, I'd also have it up on stands so they can swing the gear at the same time...

Each to their own, and my way is the sitting on the ramp way.

Edited April 23, 2017 by Clunkmeister

[Artful69]

But when Jennings posted who would buy a car with a window crank (no electric windows), no A/C, I'll even throw in no power steering, and a manual transmission too boot. I'd spend my last saved dollar for a 1967 Ford Shelby 289 SC Cobra, and die a very happy man. And BTW they didn't even have windows but plexi that slid sideways.

 

Joel

 

 

Joel ... I'm with you on classic cars - one of my favourites is a 1971 426 Hemi Plymouth Barracuda ... another is the old 1971 Mini Cooper S ...

At least you could do your own servicing in the garage at home!! That said, I'd be happy to be able to afford one of the new basic ones - V8 of course!

 

However ... Jennings wasn't eluding to cars originally made that way - the classics. He was referring to present day new releases ... My first new car in 1996 had air-conditioning as a $2000 extra ... It's now standard on every new car released.

I was talking to a home builder in Perth a few months back about 'Inclusions' in House-and-Land package deals. In Perth, Western Australia, it's my honest opinion that NO modern home should be constructed without air-conditioning included.

I'll go one step further and say that ducted reverse-cycle air-conditioning should be the standard ... a lot of builders have realised this ... others are catching on. Of course, there will always be a market for those wanting a bare bones build - which they fill out with their own bits and pieces - being able to DIY it all bit cheaper.

 

My point is - What was acceptable as "Standard" 20-30 years ago ... even 10 years ago, is generally considered by most as "insufficient" today ...

market evolution is a part of life ...

 

Rog

[Artful69]

That seems to be the nature of the hobby these days. Usually those that piss on everybody's chips are those without the ability to have even modelled the thing realistically in the first place, or to show their own abilities. I can think of one retro forum where that is the case.

 

 

While I don't take any personal offence at the remark, Jim ... It does seem a little condescending and sweeping. 

Like a fully laden Lancaster painted in fluorescent orange, flying at 5000ft over hostile territory ... it was bound to draw FlaK!!

 

The HK Mosquito has some obvious errors - it's a given. I bought one anyway!! it's the only new tool Mk.IV bomber available presently.

From what I've seen review wise, It's reasonably well engineered, Has a good standard of included detail ... fit and finish is good.

It builds up into a nice model.

 

Pointing out the errors isn't being negative ... rather, it's providing relevant information to those making the decision on whether or not to purchase and, if so, whether to inject AM into the equation.

Some will deem the errors to be too significant ... others will disregard them completely.

 

Rog

[wunwinglow]

HK are keenly aware of the original Mosquito issues and I know they are making extraordinary efforts with the Lancaster and Phantom. I doubt if anyone need fret on those counts.

 

There are issues with the original Mossie no doubt, and some are happy to accept them, or fix them, or not to buy the kit, and thats all fine. What I do think is unneccessary though is the level of vitriol, thankfully rarely seen on this forum but prevelant elsewhere, that gets flung at manufacturers like HK, Hobbyboss, Trumpeter and so on. OK, they make mistakes. Its unfortunate, but it is also life. And a unique subject in your favourite scale is still more than nothing, even if it does have a few sink marks or overdone rivets. Sheesh, these things are generally easy to fix if you really want to. And if they push your personal boundaries to fix, thats a good thing isn't it? I've read reviews and build reports where the amount of negativity, the pain and anguish of having to fix this, replace that, grind those off, makes me wonder why the author is bothering at all! He clearly hates the work!!!

 

Sorry, rant mode off. Enjoy your modelling, whatever you choose to do!!

[Gerhard]

In my opinion, rivet counting takes the fun out of the hobby. Seriously, it's just a model guys. 

[Artful69]

... There are issues with the original Mossie no doubt, and some are happy to accept them, or fix them, or not to buy the kit, and thats all fine. What I do think is unneccessary though is the level of vitriol, thankfully rarely seen on this forum but prevelant elsewhere, that gets flung at manufacturers like HK, Hobbyboss, Trumpeter and so on. OK, they make mistakes. Its unfortunate, but it is also life. ... Agreed. There is no need for the exaggerated and often spiteful comments ... It is however, frustrating for some that have a love for that particular subject, only to see it treated with a lack of care in design - especially when it could have been avoided rather easily.

 

And a unique subject in your favourite scale is still more than nothing, even if it does have a few sink marks or overdone rivets ... It is, definitely! ... The real question is, though, would it have taken that much more effort to avoid the issues in design?

 

Sheesh, these things are generally easy to fix if you really want to. And if they push your personal boundaries to fix, thats a good thing isn't it? ... Not necessarily easy for a lot of us, and some can't be mended at all - cue the AM/Correction cottage industry!!

... and for a relaxing pastime, I can't speak for others of course - but I don't want my boundaries pushed all that much! ... So no, for me at least, not a good thing.

 

Rog

 

Edited April 23, 2017 by Artful69

[Haggis]

HK are keenly aware of the original Mosquito issues and I know they are making extraordinary efforts with the Lancaster and Phantom. I doubt if anyone need fret on those counts.

There are issues with the original Mossie no doubt, and some are happy to accept them, or fix them, or not to buy the kit, and thats all fine. What I do think is unneccessary though is the level of vitriol, thankfully rarely seen on this forum but prevelant elsewhere, that gets flung at manufacturers like HK, Hobbyboss, Trumpeter and so on. OK, they make mistakes. Its unfortunate, but it is also life. And a unique subject in your favourite scale is still more than nothing, even if it does have a few sink marks or overdone rivets. Sheesh, these things are generally easy to fix if you really want to. And if they push your personal boundaries to fix, thats a good thing isn't it? I've read reviews and build reports where the amount of negativity, the pain and anguish of having to fix this, replace that, grind those off, makes me wonder why the author is bothering at all! He clearly hates the work!!!

Sorry, rant mode off. Enjoy your modelling, whatever you choose to do!!

 

I don't think HK get the same treatment as Hobby Boss or Trumpeter.

 

Hobby Boss and Trumpeter have a very busy release schedule; produce kits with many minor inaccuracies regularly, some howlers every now and then and some very accurate kits which usually arrive with little or no comment. They have a reputation.

 

HK on the other hand have a very small catalogue, they have a reputation of releasing generally accurate kits sometimes with innovative design features. However with the Mosquito they dropped a clanger with the front half, some very obvious mistakes which totally spoil the look of the model and are nigh on impossible to correct. However, thankfully for the consumer it seems to be a one off.

 

Personally, I hate building the things, I find it a chore, a necessary process to get to the fun bit. Usually I'll ignore inaccuracies (normally I don't know the subject anyway and it looks good to me so I carry on in blissful ignorance), maybe I'll fix something which only takes a few swipes of a sanding stick if I've been made aware of it as most of the time I wouldn't know what was wrong. This Mosquito is a totally different problem, the shape of the nose for example is so far off, it's so obviously borked that it needs entirely scratch building and a new canopy if you want to correct it. I've not seen anyone attempt it yet! Mind you, many people will just build it as is, enjoy it and be pleased with the results.

[JamesHatch]

While I don't take any personal offence at the remark, Jim ... It does seem a little condescending and sweeping. 

 

 

Rog, why should you take any offence at that comment? I'm not even talking about any specific kit's accuracy per sé, or whether the HK is accurate or not, but the many people whose only job in this hobby is to steal someone else's joy, irrespective of the subject or company. Those many folk whose own works tends to stay in the shadows (if they indeed build at all), but like to beat up rivet pitch, slight decal inaccuracies, angle of attack of tailplace etc. These seem to be the ones who try to jump in on new release news or when someone has built something, and urinate all over their work because they think the kit is wrong. I like my kits to be as accurate as the next person, but even if a kit is damned good, there's always some killjoy will pick up on box art etc. 

Edited April 23, 2017 by JamesHatch

[wunwinglow]

Yes, for me its the Killjoy aspect that bugs me the most. You can report mistakes without the venom. You can offer ideas and references without enjoying the fact that they 'screwed up'. You can take the view that it is an opportunity to improve your skills. I agree it is ashame that the kit in question has problems, but that is only a matter of degree with EVERY kit ever made!! Such a kit is still way more than no kit at all! And if it is utterly beyond the pale, just don't buy it. That is by far the most effective way of registering your disapproval to the manufacturer!

 

And of course, there is always the option to knuckle down and design your own kits if you are REALLY passionate about it!!

Edited April 23, 2017 by wunwinglow

[DeanKB]

Rog, why should you take any offence at that comment? I'm not even talking about any specific kit's accuracy per sé, or whether the HK is accurate or not, but the many people whose only job in this hobby is to steal someone else's joy, irrespective of the subject or company. Those many folk whose own works tends to stay in the shadows (if they indeed build at all), but like to beat up rivet pitch, slight decal inaccuracies, angle of attack of tailplace etc. These seem to be the ones who try to jump in on new release news or when someone has built something, and urinate all over their work because they think the kit is wrong. I like my kits to be as accurate as the next person, but even if a kit is damned good, there's always some killjoy will pick up on box art etc. 

I'd agree with this - there are some people who see themselves as the harbingers of inaccurate models. That's what they do, spot "errors" and do so as publically as possible. There just seems no sense of perspective, no wider enjoyment of the hobby.

 

I don't mind people being obsessed with "mistakes", but as Jim points out, this can be done constructively, without cheesing people off. The Revell Mk.II Spitfire seems a perfect example, with threads basically ending up as critical musings - the fact that we had a brand new 1/32 tooling of an early Spitfire for less than £20 was lost & it was compared to Tamiya's £75 offering!

 

I feel sorry for people who have bought the kit, came onto LSP to share the fact, or look for some advice, only to leave with the impression they've bought a pup. 

 

I hope people realise that the musings on here can sometimes be of anal LSP modellers. They are not representative of the hobby as a whole. Just buy a kit & build it - I've never seen a kit that didn't look like it's subject. 

 

It's a fun hobby, not being gatekeepers of historical accuracy.

[Artful69]

Rog, why should you take any offence at that comment? 

 

It appears to be lost here, that I specifically said I didn't!!

 

I'd agree with this - there are some people who see themselves as the harbingers of inaccurate models. That's what they do, spot "errors" and do so as publically as possible. There just seems no sense of perspective, no wider enjoyment of the hobby.

 

I don't mind people being obsessed with "mistakes", but as Jim points out, this can be done constructively, without cheesing people off. The Revell Mk.II Spitfire seems a perfect example, with threads basically ending up as critical musings - the fact that we had a brand new 1/32 tooling of an early Spitfire for less than £20 was lost & it was compared to Tamiya's £75 offering!

 

I feel sorry for people who have bought the kit, came onto LSP to share the fact, or look for some advice, only to leave with the impression they've bought a pup. 

 

I hope people realise that the musings on here can sometimes be of anal LSP modellers. They are not representative of the hobby as a whole. Just buy a kit & build it - I've never seen a kit that didn't look like it's subject. 

 

It's a fun hobby, not being gatekeepers of historical accuracy.

 

 

I don't recall Tamiya releasing an early Spit in '32 (lord, I wish they did!) ... But I do agree that some comments on the Revell offering were over the top!!

IIRC someone was banned from here because they wouldn't stop attacking people who liked the kit!! ... Not on at all!

It is important, though, to remember critique on a kit is not a personal attack on someone who has, is or is going to buy it.

 

Personally I'm not a huge fan Revell's Mk.IIa - although I bought two! ... The much earlier tooled Revell/Hasegawa offering appears to be much better in shape.

The fact that the kit was new tooled and cheap in some parts of the world did not escape my attention ... as I said I bought two ...

and some AM has hit the market to address a couple of the issues, anyway!

 

Accuracy DOES mean something to a lot of people - including me ... although it's certainly nothing warranting the abuse of others or their choice - or throwing toys out of the pram for.

While it is good to consider the feelings of others ... It's also good not to be too precious about ones own 'feelings'.

... and it's also good to tell the truth ...

 

If someone see's a flaw in a kit - I'd like to know about it!! ... It helps me make a decision on whether to purchase or not - or whether to bother correcting the flaw.

Having said that ... I think I can agree in the main with the comments posted ...

We just have to remember that it goes both ways!

 

Rog

[Haggis]

Rog, why should you take any offence at that comment? I'm not even talking about any specific kit's accuracy per sé, or whether the HK is accurate or not, but the many people whose only job in this hobby is to steal someone else's joy, irrespective of the subject or company. Those many folk whose own works tends to stay in the shadows (if they indeed build at all), but like to beat up rivet pitch, slight decal inaccuracies, angle of attack of tailplace etc. These seem to be the ones who try to jump in on new release news or when someone has built something, and urinate all over their work because they think the kit is wrong. I like my kits to be as accurate as the next person, but even if a kit is damned good, there's always some killjoy will pick up on box art etc.

 

I remember one bloke going into meltdown over the Trumpeter HU-16 Albatross because the ship in the painting on the box art was sinking in an inaccurate way! Hilarious.......

[Tony T]

We had to endure a hail of premature judgement before the new MiG-29 came out, with squeals of pleasure at some very dodgy red lines. It was all rather negative and unnecessary, especially given that the quite delicate 1.5mm-thick moulding scales up to a skin nearly two inches thick. (Oh dear Mum, and it has that error all over!)

 

The issues with the HK Mosquito radiators/inner upper wing L/E is well known and, for me, is in the category of TWNSMENSTTOMW (this will not spoil my enjoyment nor sully the taste of my whisky). I can't quite see what's wrong with the nose and canopy but then I never bought the first edition. Can somebody please be more specific?

 

As stated previously, I am sad there's no PR camera fit option but the Met Flight version looks attractive and CMK or Profimodeller might come up with the recon mod. at an affordable price.

 

Tony