What should we NOT still see on models these days?

[DogfighterZen]

What should we NOT still see on models these days?

Wheels down options only. Is it too much to ask for a set of fitting landing gear doors for in-flight builds? Stands seem to be making a comeback, so make it easier to model the planes flying by supplying fitting landing gear doors. Thanks a lot! 

Generic, one piece, hands-in-their-laps pilot figures. At the very least have the arm gripping the stick separate. Or go the Zvezda route. They have pretty decent multi-part pilots (split along wild cuts through the body at times  ) that are detailed AND fit their respective cockpits. 

Glass parts that don't fit when trying to model them closed.

Glass parts ending where the glass joins the frame, with the frame part of the non-translucent part. Just.... no.  Not for cockpit parts, not for fuselage windows, not for sensors. Everyone paints their models. The few kids that don't won't terribly mind a "too large" window. Make the frame big enough so there's no chance of the glue marring the transparent bits.

Sloppy, indifferent fit for wings and control surfaces. Spars establishing proper geometry are much appreciated.

Open (avionics) hatches that can't be closed properly. Mould the hatch closed and scribe a line on the inside showing where to cut if you do want to have it open. Same for open engine cowlings.

Engines that won't be seen. Just... why?

Agree with all of them, when i first came back into the hobby, all i wanted was to build aircraft in flight mode but some of the kits were quite a handful to get the gear doors, canopies and other panels like air brakes to fit properly...
But i also think that we should take into account the fact that most of us build a lot of kits that were made when the quality of the molding processes was still very limited.
Maybe only the kits that were designed and molded in the past 20/25 years have benefited from a better design process and plastic injection technology and should be called out for these deficiencies that we're talking about.
Fact is that with all the info available on the web about most kits, one only buys a crappy kit not being aware of it's quality if one wants to, right?

[zenrat]

Even if you are not building wheels up, properly fitting UC doors are usefull for masking the bays when painting the underside.

[Hobbes]

Engines that won't be seen. Just... why?

Why? Because it's fun to build those parts. And it gives more of an insight into what the original looks like.

The same goes for complicated parts breakdowns. As an example, I've built a few car kits where the suspension bits were moulded as part of the floorpan, and a few where each suspension component was moulded separately and had to be assembled. In the second case, you get to see exactly how the suspension works. In the first case, not so much.

I took up scale modelling because I enjoy building things. The finished model is nice and all, but not my main goal. So I like kits that give me more build time.

[zenrat]

I learnt a lot of what I know about car suspension design from building model kits.

[DogfighterZen]

Engines that won't be seen. Just... why?

I took up scale modelling because I enjoy building things. The finished model is nice and all, but not my main goal. So I like kits that give me more build time.

Second that, it's the same for me, the building part of the whole process is what i enjoy the most. Obviously, painting and getting the model all pretty is nice but the research and build, teaches one a lot of different things so i agree with Hobbes.

[PR19_Kit]

I learnt a lot of what I know about car suspension design from building model kits.

And they're a lot less heavy than heaving the real thing about! 

[NARSES2]

Glass parts ending where the glass joins the frame, with the frame part of the non-translucent part. Just.... no.  Not for cockpit parts, not for fuselage windows, not for sensors. Everyone paints their models. The few kids that don't won't terribly mind a "too large" window. Make the frame big enough so there's no chance of the glue marring the transparent bits.

Airfix are starting to go down that route with their recent new tools.

[The Wooksta!]

Hasegawa have been doing that on and off since the 1980s - their Me 262A has a three piece canopy with the rear solid section as part of the glazing.  Their 2000s Lancaster had the windscreen and part of the fuselage as glazing too.

MPM did it with their Blenheim I too.

[ChernayaAkula]

Glass parts ending where the glass joins the frame, with the frame part of the non-translucent part.<...>

Airfix are starting to go down that route with their recent new tools.

Some of the recent Airfix kits were what I was thinking of actually.  Absolutely love the way Airfix handled the windshield on the new F-4 Phantom(s) and 1/48 P-51D, for example. 
The recent 1/72 P-51D, however, is a prime example of how NOT to do it.  But since the Phantom and 1/48 Mustang came after the 1/72 Mustang, I guess we're good regarding future kits.

Engines that won't be seen. Just... why?

Why? Because it's fun to build those parts. And it gives more of an insight into what the original looks like.

The same goes for complicated parts breakdowns. As an example, I've built a few car kits where the suspension bits were moulded as part of the floorpan, and a few where each suspension component was moulded separately and had to be assembled. In the second case, you get to see exactly how the suspension works. In the first case, not so much.

I took up scale modelling because I enjoy building things. The finished model is nice and all, but not my main goal. So I like kits that give me more build time.

Good point.  Hadn't considered the fun factor. I guess I was a bit surprised by some recent things. For example the engines in Zoukei-Moura's Ho 229 (with several separate compression vane discs that end up in a non-transparent engine body) or some Kitty Hawk kits that have detailed engines as integral parts of the aircraft, meaning you can't display them outside (on a dolly or such).

I'm absolutely with you regarding complicated parts breakdowns. If they improve detail, I'm all for them.

I also like the building aspect, but I think I frequently leave out parts that won't be seen later (unless they add to the structural strength of the build). 

[Old Wombat]

Generally agree with ChernayaAkula & most of the comments that followed.

Jet engines with excessive detail, when the aircraft will be sealed around the engines with no removable access panels, I can't see the point of but exposed components, such as the turbine blades & afterburner cans, should all be better detailed. I'd like to see better detail on radial engines (especially) that are exposed to view, at least up to the fire-wall, as often a quick glance through the cowl flaps behind the engines reveal a distinct lack of engine, exhaust, etc.

[zenrat]

What would I not like to still see on one of my models?

Finger prints, glue on the clear parts, misaligned parts, detritus in the paint...

[Old Wombat]

What would I not like to still see on one of my models?

Finger prints, glue on the clear parts, misaligned parts, detritus in the paint...

[chrisonord]

That would be  just about  everything I  build  these days 
Chris

[DogfighterZen]

What would I not like to still see on one of my models?

Finger prints, glue on the clear parts, misaligned parts, detritus in the paint...

Oh yes, same here...

[AeroplaneDriver]

Agree ++++ on the topic of landing gear doors.  When I built Airfix's lovely Sea Fury I loved that they included closed gear doors that fit beautifully because I used them to mask the gear doors for painting. 

Having said that I started an OOB quick build of a Tamiya P-51D today, and was very pleasantly surprised when I tried fitting the gear doors in the closed position for painting and they fit perfectly.  Just press in to the gear bays and fit like a glove.  Well done Tamiya.