Mikeymag
Well-known member
Yes it is.
Cockpit Printing
- Thread starter ATP
- Start date
Purpleplane
Well-known member
Glad to hear that. I wonder how GJ got theirs so horribly wrong.
OscarBravo992
Well-known member
Lack of care. Gemini have just given up on quality. Sadly they have decided that as long as the products come off the shelves, they are good enough, even if it is the bare minimum.
Purpleplane
Well-known member
That is sad. GJ was never like that back in the early days
OscarBravo992
Well-known member
It is very sad. I was not in this hobby back in the early days, I only really started collecting as things started to fall apart. Sadly that’s just the way the cookie crumbles. I’m just thankful that we have NG to give us good quality moulds.
pons399
Well-known member
I'm just glad NG exists, because I won't have to spend close to 200 bucks on 1:200s anymore; I've found that NG 400s offer the same level of detail at less than half the price. NG's Tristar actually has more printed details than IF200's version, and this is coming from someone who adores the latter.
Purpleplane
Well-known member
I'm so thankful for NG. I only collect 1:400, but they are hard to beat with their level of detail...especially the L-1011s
pons399
Well-known member
IMO NG's Tristar and 747SP are their strongest moulds. I think it's the chrome that makes them look a little classier than the modern types. That, and twins just don't have the same presence as tris and quads.
Purpleplane
Well-known member
That's true. Hard to beat DC-10s, MD-11s, L-1011s and 747s.
OscarBravo992
Well-known member
Yep. Chrome just makes any model look stunning. I don't think that the SP and Tristar are just NG's strongest moulds, I think they might be the strongest moulds in the whole of 1:400.
pons399
Well-known member
Definitely. There's really nothing to critique about any NG mould other than the 777, but the Tristar and 747SP excel even for their standards. Which makes me all the more hyped for the other 747s...
OscarBravo992
Well-known member
And even with the 777, it is still an excellent mould in it's own right.
pons399
Well-known member
Yeah it's not that the mould is flawed, but it just lacks that extra detail of a moulded-in APU.
B767Avia
Well-known member
Av400, NG, and JC are all fantastic, but I feel like the NG version is closest to being a perfect 777. Other manufacturers simply do not match the level of NG's Boeing cockpit windows, and NG has always been keen in terms of modifying mould features such as the APU. Don't understand what's taking them so long this time!
OscarBravo992
Well-known member
pons399
Well-known member
I also have NG's Qatar 77W, and the cockpit windshield is indeed spot-on. The NG does have a more upscale feel than the JCW, and I think that's because of the printing, landing gear and aerials. JC's colors are quite dull, while NG's printing is vivid and detailed. Landing gear moulding's a lot more crisp, and they actually roll smoothly. The aerials are not oversized like every other 1:400 manufacturer; AC's rationale for not including them is that they're too minute to properly replicate in 400 scale, but NG's made them work. Minor details, but they make all the difference.
Purpleplane
Well-known member
Looks like they may have the issue fixed.
Why is everything always about NG?? They are just bottomfeeders and copycats, and have printed plenty of misaligned cockpits as well; we all have!!
Cloudchasermodels
Member
As much as I hate to discredit Gemini and the recent horrible cockpit printing the reality is Gemini has made the Airbus narrow body mold worse as well as the printing on the cockpit. My advice for many collectors is save your energy and anger on Gemini and don’t buy these narrow body airbuses. With NG soon to release many Airbus models as well as Panda models new and amazing mold, these next few years are definitely going to see everything Gemini has produced and then some.
Similar threads
