What should we NOT still see on models these days?

[DogfighterZen]

I may have a bad impression on PE parts, i admit, especially since i used the Airwaves set for the Monogram 1/72 F8F Bearcat but i blame it on bad measuring by the maker...
I did use the Eduard 1/72 F-16I set on Hasegawa's Sufa and it had some parts that sacrifice shape accuracy for a more "in scale" look like the air data probe that goes on the F-16's left side on the nose. They're just flat bits and the real antenna is not flat at all so, even if it's not in scale, i normally prefer the plastic bits that the kits supply. there were parts that would probably be very hard to reproduce in IP, that for sure.
I have to agree that some PE bits are very beneficial but, IMHO, not all of them.

[TheChronicOne]

Lee touched on this when he mentioned four piece wheels...... .......  but......  parts that could easily be moulded as one shouldn't be 2 or more. I have never felt myself to be "less" of a builder because I didn't glue two wing halves or 2 or 4 pieces to make one wheel. I mean.... I don't want some kit that is 3 pieces or anything but a lot of this just equates to wasted time and effort. I remember not too long ago having to glue fins onto a missile... but only half of them. Two were already moulded onto the missile body but then they had me glue two separate loose ones on. They can't claim that it's not possible to mould them on as half of them already ARE..........  just seems like "lip service" in some cases kind like how cake mixes could easily be made with eggs in the mix instead of having to purchase and crack eggs into the batter but they figured the person making the cake would feel as if they were no longer "cooking" if such a step weren't included, as superfluous as it may be. I say.... put the egg in the mix, and don't give me tire halves.

[AeroplaneDriver]

Im a huge fan of two piece wheels....as long as the two pieces are hub and tire!  Makes painting sooo much easier.  Revell's 1/48 Tornadoes come to mind as kits that seem to have many more parts than they need. 

[PR19_Kit]

Im a huge fan of two piece wheels....as long as the two pieces are hub and tire!  Makes painting sooo much easier.  Revell's 1/48 Tornadoes come to mind as kits that seem to have many more parts than they need.

I'm with you there on the 2 piece wheels, but very few manufacturers use that method.

Try Special Hobby for the ultimate parts count, I reckon they only have one moulding machine that can handle large parts, so all the other bits have to moulded with VERY tiny machines!

[Weaver]

Lee touched on this when he mentioned four piece wheels...... .......  but......  parts that could easily be moulded as one shouldn't be 2 or more. I have never felt myself to be "less" of a builder because I didn't glue two wing halves or 2 or 4 pieces to make one wheel. I mean.... I don't want some kit that is 3 pieces or anything but a lot of this just equates to wasted time and effort. I remember not too long ago having to glue fins onto a missile... but only half of them. Two were already moulded onto the missile body but then they had me glue two separate loose ones on. They can't claim that it's not possible to mould them on as half of them already ARE..........  just seems like "lip service" in some cases kind like how cake mixes could easily be made with eggs in the mix instead of having to purchase and crack eggs into the batter but they figured the person making the cake would feel as if they were no longer "cooking" if such a step weren't included, as superfluous as it may be. I say.... put the egg in the mix, and don't give me tire halves.

Part of the reason for that is that 'deep' parts, i.e. going away from the plane of the sprue, are hard to get to fill and mould right, so one-piece missiles oftem have two nice fins at 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock and two crappy undershot ones at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock.

It'd be nice if, when they decide to do missile fins separately, they'd also put a jig on the sprue to help you get them straight.

[NARSES2]

Try Special Hobby for the ultimate parts count, I reckon they only have one moulding machine that can handle large parts, so all the other bits have to moulded with VERY tiny machines!

You may not be that far from the truth there  A lot of the "limited run" boys had severe limitations when it came to their ability to mould complex parts so went down the multi-part route. A lot of them still do even though there's probably less need to (just ask Lee re Eduard's Spitfire) I think it's simply down to the fact that reviewers nearly always quote the number of sprues and or parts and the producers think it looks good to have a large number. The higher the number the higher the detail 

When I first got back into the hobby I thought that etch and resin was de rigueur for a serious modeller ? Didn't take me long to work that one out  No seriously, if you are good at it great, but I'm not    Having said that I'll always use a Yahu pre-painted instrument panel if there is one. No assembly, simply glue it in place 

[AeroplaneDriver]

After looking through old kit boxes for a Martin-Baker seat, here is one that we should definitely not be dealing with in 2020.  END OPENING BOXES!! 

[The Rat]

After looking through old kit boxes for a Martin-Baker seat, here is one that we should definitely not be dealing with in 2020.  END OPENING BOXES!! 

There aren't enough of these  on earth to mark my agreement!

[PR19_Kit]

After looking through old kit boxes for a Martin-Baker seat, here is one that we should definitely not be dealing with in 2020.  END OPENING BOXES!! 

Too right!

Here's looking at you Messers Revell and Pavla!

[TheChronicOne]

Im a huge fan of two piece wheels....as long as the two pieces are hub and tire!  Makes painting sooo much easier.  Revell's 1/48 Tornadoes come to mind as kits that seem to have many more parts than they need. 

Yes!!!   Hubs and tires are great.  Always happy to see that arrangement in a kit.

[TheChronicOne]

Lee touched on this when he mentioned four piece wheels...... .......  but......  parts that could easily be moulded as one shouldn't be 2 or more. I have never felt myself to be "less" of a builder because I didn't glue two wing halves or 2 or 4 pieces to make one wheel. I mean.... I don't want some kit that is 3 pieces or anything but a lot of this just equates to wasted time and effort. I remember not too long ago having to glue fins onto a missile... but only half of them. Two were already moulded onto the missile body but then they had me glue two separate loose ones on. They can't claim that it's not possible to mould them on as half of them already ARE..........  just seems like "lip service" in some cases kind like how cake mixes could easily be made with eggs in the mix instead of having to purchase and crack eggs into the batter but they figured the person making the cake would feel as if they were no longer "cooking" if such a step weren't included, as superfluous as it may be. I say.... put the egg in the mix, and don't give me tire halves.

Part of the reason for that is that 'deep' parts, i.e. going away from the plane of the sprue, are hard to get to fill and mould right, so one-piece missiles oftem have two nice fins at 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock and two crappy undershot ones at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock.

It'd be nice if, when they decide to do missile fins separately, they'd also put a jig on the sprue to help you get them straight.

Makes sense to me, thanks!! Learned something new.    I still have seen things like one missile having all four fins moulded on while the one next to it only has half of them (All other things being or nearly being equal, such as overall size and thickness of the fins).  Then again, I just thought of something... this example comes from a whole set of nothing but weapons (Italeri NATO set) so the possibility exists that they were moulded at different times initially long before they were brought together for the set and could explain why one missile is one way while the one next to it is broken down into more parts.     

[Weaver]

Lee touched on this when he mentioned four piece wheels...... .......  but......  parts that could easily be moulded as one shouldn't be 2 or more. I have never felt myself to be "less" of a builder because I didn't glue two wing halves or 2 or 4 pieces to make one wheel. I mean.... I don't want some kit that is 3 pieces or anything but a lot of this just equates to wasted time and effort. I remember not too long ago having to glue fins onto a missile... but only half of them. Two were already moulded onto the missile body but then they had me glue two separate loose ones on. They can't claim that it's not possible to mould them on as half of them already ARE..........  just seems like "lip service" in some cases kind like how cake mixes could easily be made with eggs in the mix instead of having to purchase and crack eggs into the batter but they figured the person making the cake would feel as if they were no longer "cooking" if such a step weren't included, as superfluous as it may be. I say.... put the egg in the mix, and don't give me tire halves.

Part of the reason for that is that 'deep' parts, i.e. going away from the plane of the sprue, are hard to get to fill and mould right, so one-piece missiles oftem have two nice fins at 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock and two crappy undershot ones at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock.

It'd be nice if, when they decide to do missile fins separately, they'd also put a jig on the sprue to help you get them straight.

Makes sense to me, thanks!! Learned something new.    I still have seen things like one missile having all four fins moulded on while the one next to it only has half of them (All other things being or nearly being equal, such as overall size and thickness of the fins).  Then again, I just thought of something... this example comes from a whole set of nothing but weapons (Italeri NATO set) so the possibility exists that they were moulded at different times initially long before they were brought together for the set and could explain why one missile is one way while the one next to it is broken down into more parts. 

I've got that set too, so I just had a look at it and I think I can see the answer. All the ones where they've moulded the fins separately are ones where the trailing edges of the fins are swept back (B61 and Kormoran). If you think about the sprue in the mould, such a fin protruding down into the mould would form a 'hook' that would stop the sprue from coming out of the mould. Chances are you'd break it in the process. All the ones that are moulded in one piece have fin trailing edges that are either straight or swept forwards, so this isn't a problem.

[TheChronicOne]

Brilliant! Yes, I get it now... there's no way those would come loose shaped like that. That's some damn fine deductive reasoning Mr. H. I gave up at the time on trying to explain it myself. 

This is cool... I'll have an "eye" for such things in the future and it'll be interesting looking at sprue/parts design so far as how they interact with the moulds as they are released. Pretty fascinating stuff, really.

[ChernayaAkula]

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?

[TheChronicOne]

Second the bit about wheels-up options. Oddly enough, I want wheels-down 99% of the time. BUT, I've had instances where I was "making like" I was doing otherwise for whatever reason and the parts fit like garbage and I had to use copious cutting, putty, sanding, etc. Other times when I didn't actually close things up I would still check fitment just for giggles & I've noticed things being way oversized and shapes themselves completely wrong. Parts that don't fit, period. Parts that are sunken. Parts that are proud. Parts not long enough. Parts too long. On and on.