Gemini Jets Boeing 767-400 First Photo Released

[YesterAirlines]

The first shot of the new Gemini 767-400 mould has surfaced and it shows the model from a useful angle, which is much appreciated. Overall the mould looks promising, but in keeping with some JC Wings made moulds maybe the undercarriage is a little short. The wing angle is also a little low. What do you think?

 

[thiscooldude]

The first shot of the new Gemini 767-400 mould has surfaced and it shows the model from a useful angle, which is much appreciated. Overall the mould looks promising, but in keeping with some JC Wings made moulds maybe the undercarriage is a little short. The wing angle is also a little low. What do you think?

View attachment 16813
View attachment 16814

I feel a different perspective more similar to that of the photo could be used. ive seen people call it short, but i dont see it.

 

[LeoMuse747]

Wing looks a bit low, and cockpit window placement isn't the best either.
I thought about the nose gear being too short, but now, seeing the pic of the real 767, I think it looks okay.

 

[Purpleplane]

Much like the MD-80, there aren't many options....especially for new releases. It's not perfect, but it is definitely acceptable in my opinion.

 

[Steinar]

I will not replace my old M826 MH from Dragon Wings 2000. It’s a keeper.

 

[Phantom]

What do you think?

Not much detail to see in this picture, but this looks kind of "old school" or even "herpa'esque" (nose, engines) to me.
Waiting for better pics here.

 

[Aviation Enjoyer]

The first shot of the new Gemini 767-400 mould has surfaced and it shows the model from a useful angle, which is much appreciated. Overall the mould looks promising, but in keeping with some JC Wings made moulds maybe the undercarriage is a little short. The wing angle is also a little low. What do you think?

View attachment 16813
View attachment 16814

The nose does seem just slightly too low and the cockpit printing is a bit messed up. If the cockpit windows were a little more straightened at the top instead of the usual angryness of these model planes then it might be a slight improvement. The wing angle is slightly off and I think the elevators angle is also slightly low. The wing-body area could maybe be slightly improved but other than that Gemini did a decent job!

 

[YesterAirlines]

I'm not saying I don't think it looks ok. The majority of it looks decent. If you're not happy with the comparison photo I used then go find another one, there are plenty about, but it is close to the Gemini and serves to obviously illustrate that the wing height is wrong. The wingtips are too low, which may well be a QC fit issue rather than a mould problem caused by the way the wings join the fuselage.

The wing/fuselage join is a little old fashioned. Aircraft moulds with an obvious fairing usually nowadays have the wing joining the fairing (like on the NG L-1011, NG 757, JC 747-400 and all the good A320s) not incorporating the fairing into the wing to create a less realistic seam line as has been done here. Basically the landing lights should be part of the fuselage not wing.

The landing gear is less certainly too short but does look too low to me (like the Herpa version). It will be interesting to see how the mould compares to the other 400 scale 767s. The Dragon version is excellent and the right height. The 767 is not a low aircraft. The Herpa 764 mould has always had too short undercarriage.

Comparisons with the JC/GJ 767-300 and the PHX 767-300 will be instructive on both wing height and undercarriage height. I tend to agree with Steinar though that this isn't obviously superior to the Dragon Wings 767-400.

 

[Jazajia]

I will not replace my old M826 MH from Dragon Wings 2000. It’s a keeper.View attachment 16817

Honestly, the DW 764 gets the job done nicely. I still like to see models getting renewed over time, it only makes sense as there are new collectors entering the hobby all the time. While I can't say that I am looking forward to any particular 764, I would like to see more re-releases of other subjects.

 

[Alzyerpal]

All these comparisons to the Herpa 764 make wonder if GJ have simply purchased it from them ?

 

[Purpleplane]

All these comparisons to the Herpa 764 make wonder if GJ have simply purchased it from them ?

That could explain why it was available so quickly.

 

[keji833]

DW certainly has very good mould on 764, but I would still replace it since it has just too little detail or even no detail at all, just casting + basic livery. Good for 2000s but not 2023. I think it looks good overall and it is prob time to say goodbye to my DW version now.

 

[Atlspotter]

Gear is too short, and the cockpit windows are… strange

 

[YesterAirlines]

All these comparisons to the Herpa 764 make wonder if GJ have simply purchased it from them ?

Looking at the photos it doesn't look like the Herpa mould. Check out the engine pylon attachment for example. It looks different.

 

[YesterAirlines]

DW certainly has very good mould on 764, but I would still replace it since it has just too little detail or even no detail at all, just casting + basic livery. Good for 2000s but not 2023. I think it looks good overall and it is prob time to say goodbye to my DW version now.

I really don't see the extra detail you refer too to be honest. Aerials and rolling gear with a small amount of extra printwork, when arguably the wings and undercarriage height are much larger issues and possibly inferior.

 

[JJ Skippy]

I’m going to have to see more photos and angles before I make a reasonable conclusion. Considering Airliners is coming up, I’ll be sure to see a good sampling to make a proper assessment on it.

On first impressions, it’s okay. Not great, not horrible. That’s all I’ll say. Regardless, I’m looking forward to picking this up at the big show.

 

[Jazajia]

Looking at the photos it doesn't look like the Herpa mould. Check out the engine pylon attachment for example. It looks different.

Given that the wings are slot-in, it could be new wings and gear only. I'm pretty sure that is the case with the Hogan 747 mold used for the Japanese airlines' commissioned models (the original Herpa mold, with nice wings and gears), but I have no experience with 764s.

 

[JJ Skippy]

Here’s Gemini’s production photo on the 764. From here I’m pretty satisfied with the product. Again I’d like to see this in-person to form a rock-solid opinion but my impressions are leaning positively for the moment.

 

[YesterAirlines]

Given that the wings are slot-in, it could be new wings and gear only. I'm pretty sure that is the case with the Hogan 747 mold used for the Japanese airlines' commissioned models (the original Herpa mold, with nice wings and gears), but I have no experience with 764s.

Hogan always use Herpa moulds though

Here’s Gemini’s production photo on the 764. From here I’m pretty satisfied with the product. Again I’d like to see this in-person to form a rock-solid opinion but my impressions are leaning positively for the moment.
View attachment 16857

That does look good, but those Gemini photos from that angle always hide a multitude of sins and can't be trusted

 

[Travertineeye]

What is that? An overdeveloped 737?

How can Herpa and Dragon get the nose decades ago and today we get …this one only option, take of leave it version for a 767-400?