It is true that GJ will pull out the FX A300 as I previously stated. But not the rumored incoming A300 player.I thought GJ had a corporate contract with FedEx
So that means we'll have to do custom to get a FedEx A300 on a decent mold?It is true that GJ will pull out the FX A300 as I previously stated. But not the rumored incoming A300 player.
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.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).So that means we'll have to do custom to get a FedEx A300 on a decent mold?
It would be the first time many of GJ regular corporate customers would be able to commission licensed A300 models.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).
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)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.
Still better than paying close to a hundred bucks for either that or the older GJ release I’ll take this any day!
I saw that and was severely disappointed about it. Welp, at least I can put my $40 towards another model instead
Quick reply!! Would this further prove it being in the warehouse for a while?I saw that and was severely disappointed about it. Welp, at least I can put my $40 towards another model instead
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.Quick reply!! Would this further prove it being in the warehouse for a while?
Oh wow, we probably have our verdict then.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.
View attachment 27900
totally with you on this.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.
I get the feeling that is just pot luck and not any specific change in behaviour by GJ.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).
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.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.
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.