Jump to content

Model Aircraft are not toys


RonG

Recommended Posts

I have been working on the Tamiya 1/32 Zero Fighter (Zeke) off and on for the past several months. It is a wonderfully detailed kit but it is irritatingly difficult because of all the movable parts. How do IPMS members feel about moving parts? IMHO they are a big waste of time and resources. After all, we don't play with our models (do we?). Why do we need landing gear that can fold in and out? Gear, flaps, canopy etc. that may be fastened in alternate positions is one thing, but fully movable just seems darned silly to me.

 

Grumpy old man

Ron G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron,

I don't know about airplanes. But I like moveable turrets, roadwheels, tracks and barrels. I have been known to occasionally play with my tanks (when no one is looking).

 

:smiley20:

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also like Mark. I like movable parts on my models. After all, it's a model of a vehicle/machine. Why not also model what parts of it are able to do?

 

Yeah, I play with mine too. Sometimes even in public on a war game table! :blink:

 

One of my biggest pet peeves with model companies is when they tell you in an early step to "be very careful not to allow these parts to glue so they can move". Then in a later step you're told "glue this piece here so that this (movable) part stays in one position. AAGGHHH! If you wanted the part to move in the first place, then finish your half cocked engineering and stop being lazy!

 

I'm faced with that problem on the Blackjack Russian bomber I have. I'm supposed to choose whether I want the wings to be extended or retracted because of the wing fences at the base of the wing. I'm gonna engineer this bad boy so the wing fences rise when the wings are retracted and lower when the wings extend! Too bad Trumpeter didn't finish their engineering so that I didn't have to do this extra step!! To me that is lazy!!

 

 

Okay, back to your regular scheduled programming...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, moveable parts on a model are a mixed bag. For aircraft, I generally accept that most parts except for the propeller will be fixed. Airplanes are delicate things, so when scaled down to miniature size, moveable parts become either overscale or extremely fragile. I loved swing wings when I was younger, but when I found out that inflatable bladders are used to seal the gaps in the fuselage, I grudgingly accepted choosing full forward or fully swept position wings. I think the Tu-160 is the exception, as it does not have bladders, and the internal guts of the wing root are visible when the wings are fully forward. If the fairings were to be hinged, you could have an authentic model with moveable wings, the best of both worlds. The Tamiya Zero is gimmicky in my opinion, especially the retactable landing gear. It looks like the first thing that would break after the model was done. I also didn't like the removable leading edge panels and the grease in the gear pinions. The rest of the model is outstanding though.

 

For armor, only a moveable turret is a must-have. A lot of tanks have a dust cover over their mantlet, so short of making one from a flexible material, I accept the fixed pose of the gun.

 

I completely switch gear when it comes to robot things. Thanks to Bandai's recent efforts to make crazy-poseable kits, I now demand it. Plus making servo and beam gun noises wouldn't be cool if the model was in a static pose. Pew-pew!

 

Neal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know where you're comin' from........

 

I agree that aircraft models are a different breed from armor and other vehicles. Give us aircraft builders posable parts, not movable parts.

 

And while we're ranting about "options"....I wish the manufacturers would CLOSE UP ALL of the optional access panels and add "cut lines" on the INSIDE of the fuselage/wing. That would allow those of us who want to delete all that stuff to do so and not have to worry about the fit of the door/panel cover; while still allowing for easy cutting/opening for those guys who do want to use the option.

 

But I'm not gonna hold my breath.....Cheers!

 

GIL :smiley16:

Edited by ghodges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too have mixed feelings about the optional moving parts.

On armor kits, I like that I can move the turret around to make traveling to shows easier, but I usually glue the road wheels and most of the other movable parts in place.

Same goes for aircraft. Props that move are sometimes better, as I don't break them off as easy, but I don't bother with most of the other movable options.

I have a few big scale Tamiya Zeros here, but have yet to dive into one. Not sure what I will do when I get that far...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, moveable parts on a model are a mixed bag. For aircraft, I generally accept that most parts except for the propeller will be fixed. Airplanes are delicate things, so when scaled down to miniature size, moveable parts become either overscale or extremely fragile. I loved swing wings when I was younger, but when I found out that inflatable bladders are used to seal the gaps in the fuselage, I grudgingly accepted choosing full forward or fully swept position wings. I think the Tu-160 is the exception, as it does not have bladders, and the internal guts of the wing root are visible when the wings are fully forward. If the fairings were to be hinged, you could have an authentic model with moveable wings, the best of both worlds. The Tamiya Zero is gimmicky in my opinion, especially the retactable landing gear. It looks like the first thing that would break after the model was done. I also didn't like the removable leading edge panels and the grease in the gear pinions. The rest of the model is outstanding though.

 

For armor, only a moveable turret is a must-have. A lot of tanks have a dust cover over their mantlet, so short of making one from a flexible material, I accept the fixed pose of the gun.

 

I completely switch gear when it comes to robot things. Thanks to Bandai's recent efforts to make crazy-poseable kits, I now demand it. Plus making servo and beam gun noises wouldn't be cool if the model was in a static pose. Pew-pew!

 

Neal

 

Amen on the Zero landing gear! I have broken off the small doors at least 5 times. One can't even rest the aircraft on one's workbench with the doors sticking out (they will snap off in a wink), unless it is upside down or propped on a raised stand of some kind. (I find I am balancing it on paint bottles all the time!) It would have been better to save the doors until the landing gear was in place.

 

Ron Gove

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would rather do without the movable parts. I really liked them when I was younger. Remember the Monogram Phantom P-51! Somehow I managed to put it together with all the functioning parts working when I was maybe 12 years old. It was so cool to play ...uh show my friends how it worked. Funny I built one a few years back and could not repeat that success. Plastic is just not a material that supports the small scale hinges and pins needed to move parts. But movable tank turrets, thats a must.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...