I know these models are not exactly the same thing as one of them is a cargo plane while the other is the passenger version. The point here is to watch the level of detail each one it has and also to show some comparison photos.
Hope you like the pictures and let the comments begin.
They look pretty much identical to me. The only difference I can readily see is the colour of plastic used on the landing gear is slightly different. I have the IF model (which I was thrilled to finally receive), and have been considering the JC Wings Cargo version (the very model in your photographs, because I prefer the "Cargo" below the Air France, instead of all on one line.) Are there any significant differences? What is your opinion of the JC model?
Also thought they were the same, but didn't someone hint that a new mould was coming out?
At any rate, looking at the nose-to-nose (4th) picture, looks like the cargo version's nose is a bit rounder than the passenger's version. Was it placed at a different angle?
Ah, what the heck. I really like AF's livery, and my AF 747 needs a shelf mate, so...I ordered the Cargo version. DAC is a dangerous site, I log on to look at models, and I wind up acquiring yet another 747!
Location: Hangzhou, Zhejiang; Peoples Republic of China
Posts: 7,259
Re: Inflight vs JC Wings Air France jumbojet
Quote:
Originally Posted by young923
I think they are built by the same manufacuturer
The mould is Inflight200s!! Since the factory is operated by JC, it is not surprising that the 2 models look almost identical, however, if to choose, I would vote the Inflight200 as the better one!
I won't even get into the ethics of JC using IF's moulds to compete with them.
__________________
Enjoying aviation from a "TSA-free Zone"!!
Take the money-grab & deceit out of our hobby, and bring back ethics and quality!!
Just say NO to Apollo400/Black Box/NG(No Good)/Panda Models/Junk-X/First Choice/C&C/IF400/Witty400/Magic/AV200/AK200/Flightline/Flightline200/Flightline400/Pegasus/Blue Angle/5stars & any BigBirds (real or fake)
Are there really that many more 747-400 carriers left to do in 1:200 that warrants a new mold, or will we most likely see rereleases of popular ones such as BA, KL, LH and so on?
WOW, they are beautiful!! I will seriously consider both of them... Thank you for sharing...
__________________
BENJAMIN
Please visit "Other Scales & Antique Models" forum for my 1/100 models! To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
They look pretty much identical to me. The only difference I can readily see is the colour of plastic used on the landing gear is slightly different. I have the IF model (which I was thrilled to finally receive), and have been considering the JC Wings Cargo version (the very model in your photographs, because I prefer the "Cargo" below the Air France, instead of all on one line.) Are there any significant differences? What is your opinion of the JC model?
Hi wu6fiend:
I bought this model because I never had a diecast cargo 747 before, I missed the GJ200's UPS jumbo and this AF was the perfect chance to have the short hump 747.
As you can see in the pictures, both versions have identical details. I am surprised nobody has mentioned the slighty difference between the fonts. I think JC has the correct one, thicker letters (bold font). JC's model has also a lighter blue, just a little bit lighter. The freighter jumbo pylons have more printed details than Inflight's but it has smaller logos on engine cowlings.
If you ask me which one I prefer, I would tell to you BOTH. They are a the complement for each other. The BCF was never an option for me, but for those who didn't have the chance to get the Inflight, it should be a perfect donor to make the passenger version (have in mind the BCF has previous Air France livery).
Quote:
Originally Posted by wu6fiend
Ah, what the heck. I really like AF's livery, and my AF 747 needs a shelf mate, so...I ordered the Cargo version. DAC is a dangerous site, I log on to look at models, and I wind up acquiring yet another 747!
You won't regret about this cargo plane.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
So far, the only examples of the new Air France livery (in diecast) that I have seen correctly portrayed has been on Gemini's two 777's a year or two back. They nailed depth in the colours, the font weight AND the kerning (spaces between the characters) to accurately portray this new elegant livery. I remember at the time when we were freeking out about the lightness of the blue in the photos. It was just the photos.
But with these two, the new Air France markings on both of these are so all over the map -- I want none of them. But when you flip them over and examine the details of the engines and landing gear -- I want both of them!
Nice shots, Mr, Yogurtlite!!
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Although a polished re-release of a 747-100 would be great, I thought we were talking about a new -400 mould. We definitely need a "crackless" BA Landor.
__________________
Goal: One of every tail on one of every type. BA and ancestor airlines.
Now with the forthcoming new JC 747-400 mould, I am wondering if the opportunity of creating accurate PW4000 engines in addition to the GE & RRs will finally be taken - something currently (and strangely) ignored by IF200!!
If so, I may be tempted to buy a Singapore Airlines and/or United Airlines (tulip c/s) bird/s
The stripes on B744F F-GIUA's tail are longer in reality as well, as compared to the stripes on the tail of B744 F-GITH …
You are absolutely right.
I have found two more photos showing another -400 with these stripes.
A photo cannot lie.
So what I said in #20 was wrong,I apologize, but the least I can say is that I am surprised, it is not the standard livery.
Anyway, very nice model, too good to be missed.
Jean Pierre.
Last edited by AIR FRANCE 340; 06-19-2014 at 10:24 PM.
Reason: correcting a mistake
Great to hear the Cargo's stripes are correct. Ever since the "discrepancy" was pointed out, I've been noticing it, as my two AF Jumbos are displayed side by side (along with the Gemini 777).
Are there really that many more 747-400 carriers left to do in 1:200 that warrants a new mold, or will we most likely see rereleases of popular ones such as BA, KL, LH and so on?
I don't think a Air Canada was ever done? That would be welcome.
Are there really that many more 747-400 carriers left to do in 1:200 that warrants a new mold, or will we most likely see rereleases of popular ones such as BA, KL, LH and so on?
Lots of possibilities left, several widely known carriers that come to mind are:
1. United Saul Bass
2. Northwest "Bowling Shoe"
3. Korean
4. Canadian Airlines International
5. El Al
The stripes on B744F F-GIUA's tail are longer in reality as well, as compared to the stripes on the tail of B744 F-GITH …
You are absolutely right.
I have found two more photos showing another -400 with these stripes.
A photo cannot lie.
So what I said in #20 was wrong,I apologize, but the least I can say is that I am surprised, it is not the standard livery.
Anyway, very nice model, too good to be missed.
Jean Pierre.
It is interesting that AF would allow such a discrepancy in the execution of their livery.
Those tail stripe lengths are wildly different, for sure.
Even though the model makers got the wrong length on the wrong model,
I don't think that error alone would be enough to pass on any of these.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Élégance en vol . . . Airfrance-style!
Last edited by Upkeep; 06-20-2014 at 07:33 AM.
Reason: speeling
These are great comparison shots Eric thank you. I guess we all would like to know more about the new 747-4 mould from Jetboy & Tonka. Is the new KLM's on the new 747 mould? Are these AF models the last on the last tooling?
Last edited by Aussiejets; 06-21-2014 at 04:23 AM.
I apologize for reviving this, also if this was already discussed. I actually JUST received F-GIUA. I try not to over analyze models and obsess over errors...otherwise, I'll have no models and a "not-quite-right" model is better than no model. I also fully realize that no model is perfect. But it's not often I buy one so when I do, there's a lot of time to analyze it (I am NOT an expert on 744's...no single person is. Boeing probably doesn't have ONE person who knows every detail of the 744.).
I really like the fact that the JCW model has finally replicated the Marconi, which appeared as a printed detail or was completing missing on planes that should have them (note the Inflight's 744 doesn't have it). The addition of the ELT is also a nice detail. I also like the fact that they have more closely replicated the VHF comm systems, which is not quite right on Inflight's. I also like the new printing details that they are now capable of doing...none of my old mold 747's have such fine details around all the cargo doors, passenger doors, valves, sensors, etc. The painted stripes on the VHF antennas are also a nice touch. The flight deck window, in my opinion, also has been getting progressively better over the years and is nearly perfect (WAY better than what was capable back in 2004).
I noticed that both the APU air inlet and exhaust, both on the old mold, are now gone (the F-GIUA has the right inlet, but it's painted on where it was once part of the mold...but I'm not sure if Air France 744's has a different APU. Our 744's had separate inlet and exhausts, as depicted in the old 1:200 mold). The APU fuel, HST, and aft heated drain masts are also now gone. The dual drain mast by the PACKS is now in the wrong position (both JCW and Inflight) where in the old mold was correct. These small changes leads me to believe that more of these details that existed on the old mold might be dropped in future releases (e.g. no more landing lights, no more ATC transponder, no more ADF, etc.). This is understandable as I suppose it no way impacts the aesthetics of the mold.
I also understand that these small details, especially those that people don't generally see, are meaningless. However, models such as Herpa Premium has a great deal more detail (e.g. nose cone details, radio altimeter, marker beacons, etc.) which collectors seem to both covet and be impressed by. So are they really meaning less? What if the much anticipated KLM re-release had no antennas and masts, no anti-collision lights, no exhaust lovers, no PACKS, etc.?
In my opinion, it's been about 10 years since the 1:200 744 mold came out and we should not be getting new details with the expense of loosing other details. Our die-cast 1:200 744's SHOULD be looking more like the Herpa Premium (I don't know anything about how die-cast models are made...it'll be cool if they are CNC'd out of a single solid block of 6065 using Boeing spec's)...I guess the price will be exponentially higher, but I bet people will still buy them given the crazy prices paid on the secondary market.
Dondi, very well put.There was a couple of comments in another thread about this detail and accuracy issue....apparently many around here couldnt care less....others fortunately seem to think the opposite.Im the picky collector, myself...details make a model.
At this scale, at this time and age, with the technology available?! - theres no excuse on a manufacturer side to explain the loss or absence of quality printing, mould accuracy, packaging, etc...the question is, are they willing to move forward and up ?! Or their only worry would be flooding the market rapidly before other manufacturers with cheap(er) models?!
I think its a shame that WesternModels stopped making any more Constellations, for instances...they have quality all over, we all know that, and usually sold out rapidly.
Inflight I trust is coming with better models, taking more time to complete them...usually worth it when opening a box and checking the model from a collectors point of view.
Details are everything on a model, any model...
Isnt the mould basically perfect already?
What other improvements can they make on it?
Hopefully they release another BA jumbo with the new mould.really liking BA's livery and would complement the superjumbo really well!!
__________________
SU-34 SR-71
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
...the question is, are they willing to move forward and up ?! Or their only worry would be flooding the market rapidly before other manufacturers with cheap(er) models?!
I think the problem is that they will always sell - the best example are the Inflight 707's and 737's. Why change if the product continuously sells out year after year. Collectors like you and me are the minority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetdin
Isn't the mold basically perfect already?
What other improvements can they make on it?
Let me be clear that 99% of my small collection is die-cast 1:200 747’s. In the grand scheme of things, these are toys sitting in a display case and can’t be mistaken for anything other than a model of a 747. “Perfect” models don’t exist – but the Herpa Premium 747-400 is close and based on what I have seen, by far the best scale 747 model made to-date; none of the die-cast 747’s come close. I feel there's an endless amount of details that can be added to a die-cast 747 at this scale. But I have no clue as to how these things are made so I’m sure there are both manufacturing and cost limitations.
It’s perfectly reasonable to believe that the model is “perfect”…ask anyone and I’m sure they’ll give you a different set of standards on what a “perfect” model is. The fact of the matter is that there are visual mistakes on every model; it might not be the biggest of mistakes, but they are still mistakes that collectors can relatively easily pick up. It's up to me to identify errors, gauge how “bad” that error is, and weather or not it warrants purchase (given that these things are not cheap).
I purchased the JCW version of the Air France 747 as there are a lot of small details that result in a fairly sharp looking model…the lack of or incorrect details on the Inflight model, in my opinion, is what somewhat lowers the quality and I have been passing on each release. To summarize my initial post above:
Inflight molds never had the “bump” depicting the Marconi dome (the fuselage for the newer JCW and BlueBox 744’s now has it). Maybe this is a personal preference. When my (former…now retired) company received the MD-11, it was the first plane (I think, it was a long time ago) that had the new Honeywell SATCOM system. Externally, it resulted in a distinctive “bump” by the forward fuselage. On the 747, the “bump” was more toward the aft, forward of the ELT and the aft equipment center.
All the masts on the aft for both molds are now gone – this one bothers me as it existed and well replicated on the old mold. One step forward, two steps backward.
Inflight mold has a strange VHF communication system (JCW is correct) – this might also be a personal preference. I’m sure the average collector could care less.
Forward mast is in the wrong position on both – was correct on the old mold
APU inlet is now painted on - previously part of the mold, depicted in the open position
APU exhaust is now completely missing - existed on the old mold
The P&W engine has already been discussed many times…I get it: it’s hard to tell the difference between P&W - GE. Again, the models sell out, so why invest in replicating it.
Biggest improvement on a new-mold 744 would be the wing leading edge root/fairing area (this mold's is more like a -100/200 than a -400's), and the availability of PW engines, for UA/NW/DL/KE/SQ/etc.
(and proper PW engines on all those liveries more than justify those liveries---I know I am not the only person on this forum to have passed on IF200 UA 744's etc due to having the wrong engines)
If a $20 Dragon 744 can have both proper GE's and PW's as needed---I sure as heck expect something 10x as expensive to!
__________________ We need more TWA twin-stripes!
Last edited by David Hingtgen; 08-20-2014 at 06:08 AM.
....others fortunately seem to think the opposite.Im the picky collector, myself...details make a model.
. . . Details are everything on a model, any model...
I couldn't agree more, Rui. Without details, what is left? WHERE is that 'magic'? Commercial airliners are pretty bland without them, IMHO. The more physical and surface (tampo) detail models take on, the more interested I am on considering them. My pride-and-joy for this sort of thing is still my Gemini Air France 777-228ER. Hard to beat, only equalled.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The problem of retooling a mold and also making bits more detailed will put a higher price to these models. Just like Herpa Premium and Modell Edition was on their time, making that kind of detailed model won't be fast as normal, releases will be no so often as usual and they will need more dedicated time to achieve "perfection" and therefore costs go higher, I repeat.
I really wish Herpa Premium comes back from the graveyard even knowing my budget will be more limited, but until then, I will be happily getting this beautiful diecast models.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Loving those AF birds. I have to be honest, personally, the exact position of antennae on the models is not so important for me. I'd prefer, for instance, corrected PW engines
I would LOVE to see a NW Bowling Shoe and would buy it in an instant if it ever were released.
__________________
Regards, Andy
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Inflight vs JC Wings Air France jumbojet
Re: Inflight vs JC Wings Air France jumbojet
Re: Inflight vs JC Wings Air France jumbojet
Re: Inflight vs JC Wings Air France jumbojet
Your Privacy Choices
