EnterpriseH
Active member
Don't asked me why I disappeared for like a month. Many of my JC Wings and even some NG models are start to peel off paints, which made me very frustrated. My SF Express B-2422 is a blank plane now. Sad.
Anyway, somehow, seems like JetHut just made an odd move - they added aerials, rolling wheels, gear hubs, and new paintings on their JAL Magazine 747-100 moulds, and start to relaunching them now!
Still looking better than Phoenix, if you asked me.
I mean, really, just look at the nose:
It could be even better if they moving the windshield sllightly a bit up, and flaten the roof line (if they didn't modified the mould, this mould should have a very tall and sharp forehead according to my example).
Let me turn on my Photoshop:
I also tweaked the nosecone, but there you go. ”Hot To Kicked Phoenix 747s' ass with a ￥150 Cheap Model”, by JetHut.
I still remembered that Richard said, "If your argument is Dragon had simple landing gear and no aerials so must be inferior then you could literally gather up a turd and add those features and have a 747. That is after all not far off what Phoenix has done. " Ironically,This is basically what JetHut is doing now, and they really end up with something that looks could be better than Phonenix's 747s!
Still, ￥150 sounds a bit of expensive to me. I could try one if they can down the price to somewhere around ￥120.
As you can see, they have 2 variants and 6 liveries for chosen - 3 early and 3 later variants of JAL's 747-100s, respectively the JA8101/8102/8103, and JA8112/8115/8116. I have showed pics of both variants above.
They even accurately recreated this small detail - during the time that corresponding to their chosen livery, there were only 2 upper deck windows on the port side of JAL's early 747-100s, not 3:
Still, this model lacking of details (apart from the aerials) in both mould and painting, and the mould itself is very dull and outdated, almost feels like a clumsy copy of the old GJ mould (Honestly I think most of JAL Magazine's moulds looked like that), and that's why I thought ￥150 sounds a bit too expensive. But it's an interetsing effort to a "entry-level" model, and a good reuse of an old mould.
Anyway, somehow, seems like JetHut just made an odd move - they added aerials, rolling wheels, gear hubs, and new paintings on their JAL Magazine 747-100 moulds, and start to relaunching them now!
Still looking better than Phoenix, if you asked me.
I mean, really, just look at the nose:
It could be even better if they moving the windshield sllightly a bit up, and flaten the roof line (if they didn't modified the mould, this mould should have a very tall and sharp forehead according to my example).
Let me turn on my Photoshop:
I also tweaked the nosecone, but there you go. ”Hot To Kicked Phoenix 747s' ass with a ￥150 Cheap Model”, by JetHut.
I still remembered that Richard said, "If your argument is Dragon had simple landing gear and no aerials so must be inferior then you could literally gather up a turd and add those features and have a 747. That is after all not far off what Phoenix has done. " Ironically,This is basically what JetHut is doing now, and they really end up with something that looks could be better than Phonenix's 747s!
Still, ￥150 sounds a bit of expensive to me. I could try one if they can down the price to somewhere around ￥120.
As you can see, they have 2 variants and 6 liveries for chosen - 3 early and 3 later variants of JAL's 747-100s, respectively the JA8101/8102/8103, and JA8112/8115/8116. I have showed pics of both variants above.
They even accurately recreated this small detail - during the time that corresponding to their chosen livery, there were only 2 upper deck windows on the port side of JAL's early 747-100s, not 3:
Still, this model lacking of details (apart from the aerials) in both mould and painting, and the mould itself is very dull and outdated, almost feels like a clumsy copy of the old GJ mould (Honestly I think most of JAL Magazine's moulds looked like that), and that's why I thought ￥150 sounds a bit too expensive. But it's an interetsing effort to a "entry-level" model, and a good reuse of an old mould.
Last edited:
