 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / January 2006Trumpeter 2006 Release List
Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 years old. The old guard is fading away. I can see around $1000 of my salary going to Trumpeter next year...... :( Craig http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml > Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows > just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml Yes it's amazing how much more you can produce with a labor force that gets paid 1/10 (or less)of western rates, has no unions, retirement or insurance plans, and lower safety and pollution standards and laws. It really allows you to plow those cost savings back into R&D and extra tooling. So much of Walmarts stuff is produced in china now its hard to find anything made in the states that's not a consumable foodstuff. > Yes it's amazing how much more you can produce with a labor force > that gets paid 1/10 (or less)of western rates, has no unions, retirement [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > So much of Walmarts stuff is produced in china now its hard to find > anything made in the states that's not a consumable foodstuff. Not that this will stop me from picking up 1 each of their new 1/48 stuff. I mean a model is a model and I buy my share of stuff at walmart. But he left out one more thing. A 1/72 scale Tu-160 Blackjack bomber. I saw it on Trumpeters website...  SignatureWILLIAM L. POWELL JR. VICE COMMANDER DAV CH.6 FOLEY, AL > >> Yes it's amazing how much more you can produce with a labor force [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Not that this will stop me from picking up 1 each of their new 1/48 stuff. > I mean a model is a model and I buy my share of stuff at walmart. > Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows > just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml Oh, YEAH...there's at least 4...5...6...on that 1/32 list that are MINE! Signature- Rufus >> Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows >> just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Oh, YEAH...there's at least 4...5...6...on that 1/32 list that are MINE! better add a wing to those house plans. >>>Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows >>>just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > better add a wing to those house plans. Yeah...plans. TIme I started making new ones, I think... Gotta go pick up a 1/32 Academy F/A-18D today. Merry Christmas to ME! Signature- Rufus Is the 1/72 C-17 still on their list or have they dropped t? Tom >Is the 1/72 C-17 still on their list or have they dropped t? I think that was Panda rather than Trumpeter Remove nospam to reply!! Ah, yes. Panda. I should probably read those listings in ESM 72. :-) Tom I here that. I found about a dozen on the list for my personal consumption.... I have been waiting for a 1/350th USS Massachusetts and I can see the 144th Gato joining my collection. Barry > Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows > just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml Both of the 1/72 Thuds are a high priority for me. Now I'm just waiting for that D#&n Italeri 1/72 B-26K Counter Invader to finally get released. Markm >I here that. I found about a dozen on the list for my personal >consumption.... [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> >> http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml Your wait's over. They're on eBay & Hannant's has them. > Both of the 1/72 Thuds are a high priority for me. > Now I'm just waiting for that D#&n Italeri 1/72 B-26K Counter Invader to [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >> > >> http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml >http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml Since they're taking another shot at a 1/24 scale Merlin P-51 I wonder if they'll get the shape of the nose correct this time around... SignatureAl Superczynski, MFE, IPMS/USA #3795, continuous since 1968 My "From" address is munged - use 'modeleral (at) swbell (dot) net' to respond via email. Check out my want lists and eBay listings at "Al's Place": http://www.network54.com/realm/modeleral/ "Build what YOU like, the way YOU want to, and the critics will flame you every time." >>http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml > > Since they're taking another shot at a 1/24 scale Merlin P-51 I > wonder if they'll get the shape of the nose correct this time > around... Probably not, they f.cked up Hornet, Lexington, North Carolina and Ticonderoga. They refused to buy real research and the fuckups are the result. > Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows > just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.cybermodeler.com/news/news051229.shtml Darn. They do such nice 1/350 kits, I was hoping an HMS Hood might be there. I really wish some one would do one. That is, one that doesn't cost a whole month's pay. RLM Now why would they do the CH-47A and D in 1/32 and 1/72 scale?? We really need one in 1/48 scale! Don't have a garage large enough to fit the 1/32 one in, and italeri already does the 1/72 one nicely. Dave >> Amazing how things have changed. A look at the Revell website shows >> just a few ships in their inventory, with the newest one around 40 [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > RLM > Darn. They do such nice 1/350 kits, I was hoping an HMS Hood might be > there. I really wish some one would do one. That is, one that doesn't > cost a whole month's pay. Giggle, snort, guffaw..........they attempt nice 1/350 kits and manage to f.ck them up royally with poor research and stupid engineering. > > Darn. They do such nice 1/350 kits, I was hoping an HMS Hood might be > > there. I really wish some one would do one. That is, one that doesn't > > cost a whole month's pay. > > Giggle, snort, guffaw..........they attempt nice 1/350 kits and manage > to f.ck them up royally with poor research and stupid engineering. What can I say, I'm not anal retentive about accuracy. I build for the pleasure of it. If its a kit of a subject I like, I'll build it. I don't count rivets. RLM good, cuz they were one rivet short. :-) I agree with you. I build for fun, have not built an accurate model since 1965. See no need to start now. Craig >>Giggle, snort, guffaw..........they attempt nice 1/350 kits and manage >>to f.ck them up royally with poor research and stupid engineering. > What can I say, I'm not anal retentive about accuracy. I build for the > pleasure of it. If its a kit of a subject I like, I'll build it. > > I don't count rivets. Who said anything about rivets? We're talking major accuracy errors visible from 6 feet away and engineering fuckups that make Revell's ancient Arizona look well designed. > >>Giggle, snort, guffaw..........they attempt nice 1/350 kits and manage > >>to f.ck them up royally with poor research and stupid engineering. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > visible from 6 feet away and engineering fuckups that make Revell's > ancient Arizona look well designed. Okay Ron; then don't buy them. It's your right to not buy/build whatever you like. People whine about accuracy issues on virtually every new release --- from everyone. I get tired of it. Ron, next time Trumpeter releases something, write a review for Internet Modeler or whatever. Spell out the engineering gaffs, inaccuracy issues and all that stuff. That would be more helpful than referring to the entire Trumpeter line as 'fuckups'. I suggest this respectfully, not sneering in any way. Just my two cents. --- Tontoni > Okay Ron; then don't buy them. It's your right to not buy/build whatever > you like. People whine about accuracy issues on virtually every new > release --- from everyone. I get tired of it. Since I do in fact do original source research in the genre when I give a bad review of a ship kit's accuracy it is from a sound basis of fact and original source documents. I will also slam piss poor design every time. It doesn't help Trumpeter's cause that the North Carolina kit's engineering and overall quality are a few steps backwards from the Essexes. > Ron, next time Trumpeter releases something, write a review for Internet > Modeler or whatever. Spell out the engineering gaffs, inaccuracy issues > and all that stuff. That would be more helpful than referring to the > entire Trumpeter line as 'fuckups'. I suggest this respectfully, not > sneering in any way. Take a look at the ship sites, I've voiced plenty of specifics on both Lexington and North Carolina as kitted by Trumpeter. I won't do an "in box" review because they're generally worthless when it comes time to build. By the time I've cleared any commissions off my bench and finished any paying research jobs in progress any given kit has been out more than six months...nobody wants a build review that late in the game. As for Trumpter's line of ships, Yorktown 2 and Frankling are the only US ship kits that do not have major fuckups in accuracy or engineering. Here I'll issue blankets for blankets...blankets statements like Trumpeter is great will be met with blanket statements that they've managed to fuckup a specific kit or kits. > Just my two cents. Sorry, my time is billable at $100/hour. Okay Ron, it's still your prerogative to not purchase said kits. Regarding your reviews/research/projects, I'm not a ship modeler so I don't believe I've had the opportunity to see our writing yet. I'm sure your information in those articles is very helpful. In here, however, lacking specific information, it just sounds like you're ranting on Trumpeter in general terms. That by itself, is not very helpful. --- Tontoni > Okay Ron, it's still your prerogative to not purchase said kits. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > lacking specific information, it just sounds like you're ranting on > Trumpeter in general terms. That by itself, is not very helpful. Yes I am stomping all over their 1/350 ships kits in general. Now that I can get back to it I'll post a list of the NC's errors, most are simple engineering screw ups. > >>Giggle, snort, guffaw..........they attempt nice 1/350 kits and manage > >>to f.ck them up royally with poor research and stupid engineering. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > visible from 6 feet away and engineering fuckups that make Revell's > ancient Arizona look well designed. Visible to who? Some one that has memorized every minor aspect of the subject being modeled? No kit would ever make their grade. Visible to the 99.99999% of people who will see it on my shelf at home, not likely. They'll look at the kit I've built, the paint job I've done and say "That looks nice." I've seen guys like you at kids/young adult local model shows. The kid will have invested months getting this kit right enough to show it. At the show, you'll be the guy who will walk up to the finished kit as the kid stands there, and proceed to tell him everything that's wrong with it. Everything that's not "accurate". And folks wonder why modelling is dying. RLM >>Who said anything about rivets? We're talking major accuracy errors >>visible from 6 feet away and engineering fuckups that make Revell's >>ancient Arizona look well designed. > Visible to who? Some one that has memorized every minor aspect of the > subject being modeled? No kit would ever make their grade. Anyone remotely familiar with the ship in question. > Visible to the 99.99999% of people who will see it on my shelf at home, > not likely. They'll look at the kit I've built, the paint job I've done > and say "That looks nice." If you're happy with something overpriced for it's quality fine. Personally I'm pissed off when the information is there to obtain easily and cheaply. I'm even more pissed off when the engineering of a kit shows clear signs of rectal/cranial inversion. > I've seen guys like you at kids/young adult local model shows. The kid > will have invested months getting this kit right enough to show it. At > the show, you'll be the guy who will walk up to the finished kit as the > kid stands there, and proceed to tell him everything that's wrong with > it. Everything that's not "accurate". Actually you are so far off it's funny. I prefer to judge junior entries when I vounteer because I like some of the things kids think up. But an adult that presents something as "accurate" that isn't might get told otherwise. Have another foot you'd like to taste? Shall I salt it first? > Actually you are so far off it's funny. I prefer to judge junior entries > when I vounteer because I like some of the things kids think up. But an > adult that presents something as "accurate" that isn't might get told > otherwise. Have another foot you'd like to taste? Shall I salt it first? Actually, I've inserted no foot anywhere. That's one of the things about the internet, a person can say they do whatever they want, that doesn't necessarily mean they really do it. RLM > Actually, I've inserted no foot anywhere. That's one of the things about > the internet, a person can say they do whatever they want, that doesn't > necessarily mean they really do it. What's really funny is there are a few guys on here that can back me up on my judging preferences and how I deal with juniors. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.