Gemini Jets January 2024 Release Predictions

Usually the airlines that have different designed boxes are the corporate licensed ones. American is an exception though.
 
So that means we'll have to do custom to get a FedEx A300 on a decent mold?
It might be the case but maybe if the decent mould is well received then the FX one is not quite far away. My advice is to be patient. Many rereleases came recently, both classic and modern (Lufthansa 748s spree from PHX, YY Wings and NG; or the Aeroclassics 747s, etc).
 
It might be the case but maybe if the decent mould is well received then the FX one is not quite far away. My advice is to be patient. Many rereleases came recently, both classic and modern (Lufthansa 748s spree from PHX, YY Wings and NG; or the Aeroclassics 747s, etc).
It would be the first time many of GJ regular corporate customers would be able to commission licensed A300 models.
 
Richard has implied that there may be more 1:400 A300s coming. Inflight200 will likely make a Fedex with their new A300 mould as well.
But IF200 is doing an A300 "Classic". FE's "600" is something completely different except maybe v.tail and gears (depending on the variant they model)
 
Honduras Air B737-200
Pic taken from Squatchy's Facebook page.
I'm not sure but the nose section looks better than previous GJ B732 releases. Maybe it's just the cockpit window placement, but I like it a lot. The engines still look quite weird though, with those strange panel segments. Anyway, hope to see Gemini releasing more B737-200s now.
1708908067899.png

These below were taken by Michael Isidro (Instagram: @woohoomymodels).

1708909741360.png

EK A300, taken from Squatchy's Facebook page.
Doesn't look too bad from this angle but we already know how bad it really is!

1708909820268.png

Delta B757-200 looking good. Not as good as NG, though!

1708909867643.png
 
Avior's only 737-200 just came out of a long overhaul and they took the opportunity to unveil a new livery. I hope GJ does it. They have done similar releases in the past.
 
Quick reply!! Would this further prove it being in the warehouse for a while?
That’s about the only logical explanation at this point. I saw box art and it had 821 printed on the tail for the fleet code which further supports that theory. There’s also no registration printed on the box art of the model.
IMG_0228.jpeg
 
That's really poor with the Delta CRJ but I do feel rather vindicated. That CRJ was made at the same time as the first one and has just sat in the warehouse for years as I said it had. This is common practice at Gemini and has been for years and years. It's almost like I know what I'm talking about ;)

Now you can make up excuses with other messed up releases as to why these things keep on getting out of the factory but in this case there is no excuse as they knew of the problem with the first release in 2021. The fact that they just left the second release as it was illustrates my big issue with the brand and why I'm not much of a fan. They only care about the bottom line, not the collector or quality of their output. Sometimes they get it right and the models are great, but often they don't and the models aren't. They don't care enough to fix these issues. They know people will buy them anyway so why change it when it'll cost them $. It is a complete disregard for the people buying the models.

I just don't know any other way to see it.
 
That's really poor with the Delta CRJ but I do feel rather vindicated. That CRJ was made at the same time as the first one and has just sat in the warehouse for years as I said it had. This is common practice at Gemini and has been for years and years. It's almost like I know what I'm talking about ;)

Now you can make up excuses with other messed up releases as to why these things keep on getting out of the factory but in this case there is no excuse as they knew of the problem with the first release in 2021. The fact that they just left the second release as it was illustrates my big issue with the brand and why I'm not much of a fan. They only care about the bottom line, not the collector or quality of their output. Sometimes they get it right and the models are great, but often they don't and the models aren't. They don't care enough to fix these issues. They know people will buy them anyway so why change it when it'll cost them $. It is a complete disregard for the people buying the models.

I just don't know any other way to see it.

You are not wrong. But I don't think it is a complete disregard for the collectors, at least they fixed the issue on subsequent releases (at least my Mesa example has the main landing gear properly applied).

They knew the issue, and some of their bosses who are also active among us knew we were going to start talking about this the second photos of the models surfaced. Still, they chose to do that. You explained exactly why they did it.

But let's think about what they could have done:

1) Have the factory unpack all the models, rip off the main landing gears, reglue them, hope they don't screw it up again during the second round, and most importantly, get them to that for cheap.

2) Scrap off the entire production run.

3) Just push the dammed things to the market anyway. Not only will they sell, like you said, but I bet most people will never notice the gears are flipped. Also, those who notice can fix the issue at home relatively easily if they wish to do so.

Not trying to be a GJ apologist, but that is just how the world works. As far as 1:400 diecast airplane model manufacturers go, GJ is a well-oiled money-making machine and quite frankly there does not seem to be enough of an incentive to make any major changes to their modus operandi.

Hey, I'm with you guys. My latest 767 from them came with a bent winglet, detached vertical stabilizer, nosewheel bent sideways and aft, sitting with nose raised, and gaps between the wing seam and fuselage. I was able to fix up at home many of the issues. Not great, but I can either take it or leave it.
 
You are not wrong. But I don't think it is a complete disregard for the collectors, at least they fixed the issue on subsequent releases (at least my Mesa example has the main landing gear properly applied).
I get the feeling that is just pot luck and not any specific change in behaviour by GJ.
They knew the issue, and some of their bosses who are also active among us knew we were going to start talking about this the second photos of the models surfaced. Still, they chose to do that. You explained exactly why they did it.

But let's think about what they could have done:

1) Have the factory unpack all the models, rip off the main landing gears, reglue them, hope they don't screw it up again during the second round, and most importantly, get them to that for cheap.

2) Scrap off the entire production run.

3) Just push the dammed things to the market anyway. Not only will they sell, like you said, but I bet most people will never notice the gears are flipped. Also, those who notice can fix the issue at home relatively easily if they wish to do so.

Not trying to be a GJ apologist, but that is just how the world works. As far as 1:400 diecast airplane model manufacturers go, GJ is a well-oiled money-making machine and quite frankly there does not seem to be enough of an incentive to make any major changes to their modus operandi.

Hey, I'm with you guys. My latest 767 from them came with a bent winglet, detached vertical stabilizer, nosewheel bent sideways and aft, sitting with nose raised, and gaps between the wing seam and fuselage. I was able to fix up at home many of the issues. Not great, but I can either take it or leave it.
Yeah I understand, you are 100% correct. However, even Aeroclassics do number 1 and 2 quite regularly (as you can imagine with the state of their factory). I think given it has been 3 years in this case number one was the right approach and not especially expensive given the production run is like 500 units.
 
I get the feeling that is just pot luck and not any specific change in behaviour by GJ.

Yeah I understand, you are 100% correct. However, even Aeroclassics do number 1 and 2 quite regularly (as you can imagine with the state of their factory). I think given it has been 3 years in this case number one was the right approach and not especially expensive given the production run is like 500 units.

I thought about it, could have turned into a huge mess though.
 
Top