~Removed due to off topic~
You're both as bad each other, unfortunately callipers can't help rearrange what holds people ears apart.
As always, no one is forcing anyone to read or to participate. If the topic doesn't amuse anyone, just move on. That is what will really show some functioning gray matter between the ears.
But it does look like over 2,600 people have visited this post, so the subject must be interesting to many.
Last edited by make.me.laugh; 04-15-2016 at 11:54 PM.
Reason: off topic comments removed
Interesting or mind blowing non-sensical argument draw a variety of readers.
The one thing which may bring the debate to a practical resolution is a challenge:
TONKA repeatedly has provided pictures as evidence supporting his assertions regarding the JC engine accuracy.
Charlie Alpha retorts with an opinion from his point of view - no counter evidence via pictures or other means to substantiate JC is wrong or IF is better.
Therefore:
suggest Charlie Alpha does same = bring your evidence to the table rather than standing behind personal preference or bias towards one manufacturer over another.
__________________
On the bench....or in the queue:
A good first step would be to post a comment on any of the other 5 or so threads where I have posted numerous pictures. But a good start would be one of the pictures above comparing the real thing and the 2 engine molds. I haven't bothered to repost because I thought the difference was obvious. Even though Tonka's pictures are carefully hand picked to show the JCW engine in the best light, and the IF engine from the worst angle, lets start with this one. In my opinion the JCW engine shape is just terrible.......
MANY more pics to follow.
Last edited by make.me.laugh; 04-15-2016 at 11:58 PM.
Reason: off topic and personal attack removed
Playing with fire...are you for real?
...only because I may perpetuate this rather childish debate...my bad.
Haven't read your other posts where you've posted pics - good on you for that.
Bottom line...why don't you counter with your own pictures of the two rather than reuse his images and just express your opinion again.
Your argument in this thread lacks facts and evidence, rather it's appears from my read your an IF fanboy and are pizzed to concede JC may have knocked your favourite manufacturer off the perch on this one.
Question: do you have some financial or other interest in IF therefore stand to benefit from proclaiming they are the supplier of accurate 300ER's?
Footnote: let me give you a suggestion - try using the pics of the same engines. Using the GE110 and the PW doesn't work for either model beause the cowlings are indeed different due to the pylon arrangement. That is even for me, an obvious differentiator of why things don't appear accurate. Try GE110 vs GE110 (JC and IF) then there's apples for apples.
__________________
On the bench....or in the queue:
Too many kits and not enough time!
Last edited by make.me.laugh; 04-16-2016 at 12:01 AM.
Just from the photos above, the one on the left looks more like the Cathay 777 pictured.
But good grief!! These 777 critique posts will just not stop! Every time a photo of a 777 is posted it becomes a debate about which 777 is better...IF or JCW. Just pick the one you want and go on!
I do not own any IF 777's, I may get one at some point, thinking about the JFox Qatar 777 "One World". But I can say that I do have several of the new JCW/Gemini ones and they are very nice and the engines look great! I'm sure any collector will be happy with any choice they make.
Just from the photos above, the one on the left looks more like the Cathay 777 pictured.
But good grief!! These 777 critique posts will just not stop! Every time a photo of a 777 is posted it becomes a debate about which 777 is better...IF or JCW. Just pick the one you want and go on!
I do not own any IF 777's, I may get one at some point, thinking about the JFox Qatar 777 "One World". But I can say that I do have several of the new JCW/Gemini ones and they are very nice and the engines look great! I'm sure any collector will be happy with any choice they make.
Best post so far!
__________________
On the bench....or in the queue:
No financial stake in IF. I'll just buy the best 777-300ER mold available and right now, that is the IF mold.
Please read my previous post. If JCW gets their nose and engines right, I'll happily switch. JCW is cheaper, and lighter *(for shipping), but until they produce a noticeably better model, I'm sticking with Inflight.
I'll have to take some more pics. I deleted all of the comparison shots I had because I thought we were done with this stupid continuing argument.
Last edited by make.me.laugh; 04-16-2016 at 12:08 AM.
Reason: off topic
Simply encouraging an accurate debate based on fact rather than unsubstantiated personal opinions, therefore let's say I'm being a mediator.
Incorrect, I have yet to express my opinion about which is better or not.
__________________
On the bench....or in the queue:
First of a few pictures. I prefer the Inflight KLM model because the shape looks more accurate. The size of the engine also looks more proportional to me. The fan cowl is also mmore alligned with the hot section.
More to follow in a bit. I need to try to get some work done.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 05-24-2016 at 08:45 PM.
Finally! I would have to support your comment re the hot section and possibly could be even larger however, I would say the JC pylon is closer to the EK picture.
I'm not going to enter the diameter debate but I will say the side profile of both is too close to call re complete accuracy from my eyes.
__________________
On the bench....or in the queue:
As has been mentioned by NUMEROUS people including me, neither model is perfect. Each may be a little more accurate in different areas to different people. In my case I think the Inflight model is better for nose shape and engines, JCW for engine pylons and landing gear. But it is really personal preference.
What is cr%p is the suggestion that someone who likes either mold better is 'not seeing things' or 'ignoring faults'. Both are decent models. This ENTIRE discussion began LONG ago when I suggested that is was nice TO HAVE A REAL CHOICE in 777-300ER models, but apparently a certain someone just couldn't accept that idea and tried to ascribe my liking the Inflight mold to 'missing something' or 'ignoring faults' or trying to deceive other members.
So at the risk of repeating myself, again, IT IS NICE TO HAVE A REAL CHOICE OF GOOD (not perfect) 777-300ER MODELS.
Judge for yourself and make up your own mind. I've tried to include enough reference pics to help you do that.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 05-24-2016 at 08:45 PM.
Final thought (maybe). Another area of difference is the tail cone detail. I prefer the Inflight tail because of the actual APU hole and extra details.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 05-27-2016 at 07:02 PM.
I will leave my small work and suggestion to JC for a V3 (they are not far from a perfect representation of the GE90-115b in my opinion)
in the over side, IF200 needs more updates in my opinion (but a good attempt for a V1)
I do understand that we buy what we like but I would like to share my view
__________________
Swanny,
My favorites are 747, 777, 787, 737 in 1/200
my best model is Herpa Premium KLM B747-400 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
my bad : 1/200 addicted To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I will leave my small work and suggestion to JC for a V3 (they are not far from a perfect representation of the GE90-115b in my opinion)
in the over side, IF200 needs more updates in my opinion (but a good attempt for a V1)
I do understand that we buy what we like but I would like to share my view
I think I agree with most of what you say. I would only add that the pic of the Inflight engine is not the best. It would be interesting to use my second pic above for the comparison.
But in any case, personal thanks for the great analysis. It is nice to have someone else taking a good look at the models and making positive suggestions for improvements.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 04-14-2016 at 07:21 PM.
Just to make sure, do you take into account that the nose front is not the white paint part (this plane has a blue line on the nose that is hidden by the dark of the night)
__________________
Swanny,
My favorites are 747, 777, 787, 737 in 1/200
my best model is Herpa Premium KLM B747-400 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
my bad : 1/200 addicted To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Just to make sure, do you take into account that the nose front is not the white paint part (this plane has a blue line on the nose that is hidden by the dark of the night)
I do realize that, but I am not sure this is the cheatline livery and this pic gives a good idea of the bluntness of the 777 nose. The 777 nose is really rounded. Anyone who has worked in or around 777s knows this. I have blueprints on my hard drive of the 777 nose area also, but they are write protected and copyright laws prohibit publishing them here. This picture of the nose matches the blueprint profile pretty well though.
I like this picture because, even though it is slightly distorted, gives a really good idea of the contours of the 777 nose.
I'm not sure these picture are any better. It is REALLY hard to get a good picture directly above or directly below the nose area.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 09-07-2016 at 05:48 PM.
check this pic (the angle looks better) the nose is pretty pointy like JC don't you think ?
I still think the real nose shape is between the the shape of the 2 models. If you look at the whole nose and not just the radome, the shape from the L,R-1 passenger doors forward look closer to the Inflight profile to me, but others have seen that differently too. I'll see if I can get a pic of the 2 models with more if the nose showing. I also think the picture is slightly distorted due mainly from the nose up pitch of the aircraft.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 04-15-2016 at 11:43 AM.
I am the one worked with 777 and have the blueprint, I think just because you like to argue with me. The major problems for me is also the nose and engines on Inflight, plus the wings.
As I said, I think the real nose area is right between the 2 models. JCW's nose is a little too short and pointed, and the Inflight nose is a little too long and rounded, although both models are REALLY, REALLY close already..
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 09-07-2016 at 05:48 PM.
CA
When you think JCW don't spend any effort on improving, they move far far away already.
They just concentrate on what should be done, which manufacturer you think is better than them?
"Should we open a new thread ourselves? Hijacking again "
And mainly by 2 people. I'm one of them. We all know who the other is.
Funny how 'hijacking' is brought up by people when the discussion is not going the way that they want. Consensus so far seems ot be that both model are decent models, separated mainly by personal preference. Just saying.
CA
When you think JCW don't spend any effort on improving, they move far far away already.
They just concentrate on what should be done, which manufacturer you think is better than them?
I think you missing the whole point of this discussion. JCW is THE MOST LIKELY TO LISTEN TO SUGGESTIONS, NOT THE LEAST. That is why these threads come up. I think most people here (me included) believe that they stand the BEST change of a near perfect model from JCW because they do listen to feedback. The current mold is just not there yet for either model. And if JCW wants to be in the lead, they better get going.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 04-14-2016 at 10:20 PM.
@charlie Alpha :
relax, we are trying to talk like friends
Tonka :
I am going to concentrate on JC first as it needs less work in my opinion :
I know it has a cost because I am talking about the metal master
can we expect this modification first as I think it is really eye catching
__________________
Swanny,
My favorites are 747, 777, 787, 737 in 1/200
my best model is Herpa Premium KLM B747-400 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
my bad : 1/200 addicted To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
@charlie Alpha :
relax, we are trying to talk like friends
Tonka :
I am going to concentrate on JC first as it needs less work in my opinion :
I know it has a cost because I am talking about the metal master
can we expect this modification first as I think it is really eye catching
Hello Tonka, the red line is the current line of the actual new mold
this is where the current mold starts to spread out with a 15 or 20 degrees angle to reach the exhaust cone
in the pic below you can see where the flat section of the pylon is supposed to stop :
__________________
Swanny,
My favorites are 747, 777, 787, 737 in 1/200
my best model is Herpa Premium KLM B747-400 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
my bad : 1/200 addicted To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Is it bad to ask for some potential modification ?
Answer =NO
I have got lots of 1/200 from different manufacturers and I am happy with it but willing to get an improve version is a good part of the hobby as a collector..... anyway I have nothing to justify.....
__________________
Swanny,
My favorites are 747, 777, 787, 737 in 1/200
my best model is Herpa Premium KLM B747-400 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
my bad : 1/200 addicted To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I have to say that it looks pretty well aligned when you use a good profile of the new engine.
I am taking one of your pic that I found pretty good in regards of the angle used
the virtual ruler is of course out of scale
let me know what you think
__________________
Swanny,
My favorites are 747, 777, 787, 737 in 1/200
my best model is Herpa Premium KLM B747-400 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
my bad : 1/200 addicted To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It still looks a little off to me. Extend your lines from the front of the intake lip all the way back to the real of the fan shroud and see where they hit the rear of the shroud. that should be telling, I think.
This is what I come up with. keep in mind the top of the fan cowl slopes downward towards the real so there should be MORE space, not less between the lines. Red lines are centerlines between the top and bottom of the hot section and cowl.
The opening in the back of the fan shroud looks a little too big too.
Last edited by Charlie Alpha; 09-07-2016 at 05:48 PM.
if IF200 sands down both side the top view would really similar to JC (no big sanding but just a bit to match the real thing)
This picture really shows how close the nose shape shape of both models is to each other. The angle at winch the front cockpit window sweeps back seems to be the major difference. Can't really see what all the complaining about the top of the Inflight nose was all about. They BOTH look pretty good.
Hello Tonka, the red line is the current line of the actual new mold
this is where the current mold starts to spread out with a 15 or 20 degrees angle to reach the exhaust cone
in the pic below you can see where the flat section of the pylon is supposed to stop :
This picture really shows how close the nose shape shape of both models is to each other. The angle at winch the front cockpit window sweeps back seems to be the major difference. Can't really see what all the complaining about the top of the Inflight nose was all about. They BOTH look pretty good.
This is what I concern about, JCW also need adjustment, but Inflight can't be better. This is what you keep emphasizing on every post. We all know your points already!
This is what I concern about, JCW also need adjustment, but Inflight can't be better. This is what you keep emphasizing on every post. We all know your points already!
Not what I said. My suggestion would be to actually read and understand what I am saying. Never said the Inflight nose was perfect (check back with ALL my posts). I think they are actually pretty close as I just said above.
We actually have been focused on the engines, and YOU brought up the nose. And we ALL really know those arguments.
Last edited by make.me.laugh; 04-16-2016 at 12:27 AM.
Reason: slightly off topic
No, not brought up by me, just an answer to your question:
'Can't really see what all the complaining about the top of the Inflight nose was all about'
It still looks a little off to me. Extend your lines from the front of the intake lip all the way back to the real of the fan shroud and see where they hit the rear of the shroud. that should be telling, I think.
This is what I come up with. keep in mind the top of the fan cowl slopes downward towards the real so there should be MORE space, not less between the lines. Red lines are centerlines between the top and bottom of the hot section and cowl.
The opening in the back of the fan shroud looks a little too big too.
Hello,
sorry for the late reply
I kind of get your point but I am not an expert.
In my opinion the issue looks really small, I think that they just need to reduce the size of the inlet ring and the whole aspect of the engine will look good enough and help a lot for the global aspect of the engine
Not far hey from a pretty good GE90-115b!
cheers
__________________
Swanny,
My favorites are 747, 777, 787, 737 in 1/200
my best model is Herpa Premium KLM B747-400 To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
my bad : 1/200 addicted To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Re: Jc Wings 777-300ER new color awesome
Re: Jc Wings 777-300ER new color awesome
Your Privacy Choices
