NG Model 1:400 June 2025 Release Hints

[miaoyimiaozhongl]

I don't necessarily disagree with you here but they have made the 2 CAAC MD-80s, CZ A318, CZ MD-80, MU Winter Games A320, West Air A319s and Sonongol A318s. All unique and not made before well. These are certainly better than what JC Wings, Phoenix and Panda have announced this year for China.



I am honestly interested in your perspective and the perspective of Chinese customers and have no wish to clash at all. I appreciate you answering me. I staunchly support any brand that does well or produces good products. NG are nothing special to me but they do get a lot of criticism and yet still seem to be better than most of the rest.

I guess for me the question remains who is doing it better in 400 scale in your opinion and which other brand is producing more and more varied Chinese models?

The responses you've given so far are the same issues non-Chinese collectors have, but as I always say is anyone doing it better and if not does it make sense to get angry with NG rather than angry with everyone in 400 scale?

Who truly leads in the 1:400 scale arena? I dare not presume to declare. But this much I believe most would agree: only when a brand consistently achieves a benchmark level in mold quality, subject matter appeal, and authenticity verification can it be considered accomplished in this field.

Among existing brands—each with distinct strengths and weaknesses, each possessing exceptional molds—no one can claims monthly supremacy in subject selection. Speaking purely as a Chinese consumer, my assessment is this:
NG's 2025 releases show flashes of promise in subject matter but fall short of excellence, paling notably compared to pre-2025 output. I genuinely hope they produce outstanding models, yet currently they appear hampered by significant operational challenges and longstanding communication failures with consumers (as evidenced by neglected wishlists).

It is precisely this convergence of multiple factors that leaves me profoundly disappointed with NG.

 

[YesterAirlines]

NG's 2025 releases show flashes of promise in subject matter but fall short of excellence, paling notably compared to pre-2025 output. I genuinely hope they produce outstanding models, yet currently they appear hampered by significant operational challenges and longstanding communication failures with consumers (as evidenced by neglected wishlists).

It is precisely this convergence of multiple factors that leaves me profoundly disappointed with NG.

I 100% agree with you here and that is very well put except I'd say they've been like this since at least 2023.

 

[miaoyimiaozhongl]

I 100% agree with you here and that is very well put except I'd say they've been like this since at least 2023.

Unless they initiate changes themselves, our opinions voiced on forums may ultimately prove ineffective. This underscores precisely why open communication between both parties is crucial—yet certain individuals within their teams appear resistant to engaging with consumers.

 

[Alphaless]

miaoyimiaozhongl,
I am not part of this conversation but I highly appreciate your perspective. There is a lot I don't know about the Chinese market and you help shed some light on that part of the collector base.

On another topic, in regards to the European models that NG has (or has not) done, I think it's an unusual situation. This year has seen a handful of very interesting European releases (Condor rizzi bird, SAS MD87s) as well as the Icelandair 757-300s. I think these are great choices, and perhaps their existence implies that NG is not finished with this region. I cannot remember if the Iberia MD80 was released this year, but it is another standout that comes to mind. I would also like to bring up the recently created Instagram account ngmodelseurope. If they were actually done with European models, why would they create an account specifically about them? The purpose of the separate handle is unclear to me. In any case, I hope more European models are coming down the pipeline.

 

[MIAv8Diecast]

This does look like a disappointing set from a diversity perspective, but it's hard for me to get too upset when it contains 2 MD-80s and 2 Tristars - assuming the subject matter is decent that is. That makes this much better than say the entirety of Gemini's output this calendar year.

I 100% get the frustration - NG aimed so high and now produces these very middle of the road sets. However I still think some of the moaning is wide of the mark. 'The Year of Classics' was always a Chinese translation of a Chinese slogan for the Chinese market and they did produce a year of 'Chinese classics'. As for people getting scammed on the QF Lite 787. Although disappointing they made a Lite version it was 1 point of a programme that is free to collectors. They gave you something for free - and you used a tiny portion of it.

As for the dearth of N regs this is almost certainly tariff related. This hasn't gone away - it is just as bad as ever unless your retailer is getting small deliveries, cheating through 3rd party countries or someone has cut out a distributor to keep prices low and still suck up the 30% extra.

They clearly don't think European models sell and since I have heard exactly that from Phoenix and JC Wings they are probably right. I don't see why they couldn't theoretically keep on making these Asia focused sets forever. It is exactly what Phoenix used to do.

I apologize as I personally am not trying to come off as someone who is complaining but someone who is providing objective criticisms where its due from my lived experience being a loyal customer of their products. I personally believe that NG has failed to communicate what they meant by "Year of classics" given that a large portion of their customers live in the west and most people I know did not interpret it as mentioned above. As for the QF Lite 787, I personally don't collect Qantas and do hear your point however, I do believe the breakdown of why people are upset with this is because there was a lack of communication and expectations set by NG Models. When people voted for that model, they were expecting to get a normal release version, not the half-baked version and there was no justification provided for their decision, and they released a normal version of everything else in the wishes and commissions. Whatever the point ratio to free models could be discussed separately but the point is the lack of communication and expectations from a shotty system.

 

[ghqv2988]

How can four retro planes in this release make up for what Gemini has been producing for half of this year? I understand the frustration some people have with them making the same airlines over and over, but they have made some awesome MD-80s like the Delta Ron Allen and Frontier this year — clearly subjects NG aren’t interested in doing. Factoring in NG’s wishlist with multiple subjects having double digit votes, it baffles me they haven’t made more by now. Therefore, GJ has been able to hold an advantage despite them having an inferior product. It’s not worth it to wait for NG to do these Mad Dogs anymore because of their unreliability, so I’m glad I’ve stuck with buying the models hitting the market first and holding off an NG acquisition until they make something GJ hasn’t and/or I don’t have yet. I don’t like to wait for models if I know I have other options when a likelihood exists that the best hard product won’t get used for said model.

I would also like to clarify that I’m not trying to defend Gemini here. While tariffs may be a contributing factor to the lack of US aircraft in recent months, there’s no denying that the China market has been a long-term target for NG, and I think the tariffs are giving them the perfect reason to fully jump into that market now. That’s fine for them, since that will be where most of their money comes from, but as we’ve seen already western collectors are upset about the change. Having the best hard product in this scale in many faucets is what brought many people over to them in favor of the competition, so having their release strategy change to what we have now is horrible for these collectors.


I have a hard time believing European models wouldn’t sell. Clearly there is a market — it’s just Herpa dominates that market in 1:500, and since they are the only manufacturer in that scale they have become complacent and quality issues are rampant. It makes you feel blessed we have as many options in this scale as we do, despite the issues some manufacturers tend to have. I’ve heard some are trying to jump ship to 1:400 as a result, so I think doing one or two a release wouldn’t hurt for those folks.

I agree with everything you stated JJ. I too think it’s extremely bold to make the claim that NG outdoes Gemini’s entire year’s performance simply because NG announced two mad dogs and two tristars. We don’t even know what they will be yet. That just shouts bias.

Also I find it hard to believe the notion that NG doesn’t release European models because they don’t sell well. There are plenty of non-European models that NG released months ago that are still sitting on retailer shelves, and NG still continues to release repetitive models that will likely not sell out. Besides, if cost was such an issue, then why the free CRP program?

Gemini’s mould isn’t as great, but they indeed have released some great models in both scales.

 

[YesterAirlines]

I apologize as I personally am not trying to come off as someone who is complaining but someone who is providing objective criticisms where its due from my lived experience being a loyal customer of their products. I personally believe that NG has failed to communicate what they meant by "Year of classics" given that a large portion of their customers live in the west and most people I know did not interpret it as mentioned above. As for the QF Lite 787, I personally don't collect Qantas and do hear your point however, I do believe the breakdown of why people are upset with this is because there was a lack of communication and expectations set by NG Models. When people voted for that model, they were expecting to get a normal release version, not the half-baked version and there was no justification provided for their decision, and they released a normal version of everything else in the wishes and commissions. Whatever the point ratio to free models could be for discussed separately but the point is the lack of communication and expectations from a shotty system.

No need to apologise at all to me. Your opinion is your own and I don't need to agree with it. The year of classics thing was translated by collectors who then ran with it. I agree with what you and many others are saying about NG. They have been infuriating, but at the same time the level of hyperbole can get a bit much sometimes and as always I don't see it in relation to other brands. And nobody else even tries to do things like points or free models so it is hard to get too self-righteous about it when it is basically giving away things.

I agree with everything you stated JJ. I too think it’s extremely bold to make the claim that NG outdoes Gemini’s entire year’s performance simply because NG announced two mad dogs and two tristars. We don’t even know what they will be yet. That just shouts bias.

If the MD-80s end up being more AA variants then I might take it back but the rest of GJ's output this year has been of almost zero interest to me and most of it is on mediocre moulds too. As I said I have bought 1 model from them in 2025 and 22 NGs. So it is bias in the sense that I don't collect it, no more than the bias that sees you make the hyperbolic statements you made and JJ collect models that are often low quality. By definable measures such as mould quality and adherence to my collection criteria (which is no doubt much much wider than your own) what I said is I think defendable.

Also @ghqv2988 and @JJ Skippy here is GJs' entire output for 2025. Please go through that and tell me what 4 models are better than a pair of NG Tristars and MD-80s (assuming they aren't repeats). Let's leave the May models out as GJ hasn't completed them yet:

Database | MADb

Model Aircraft Database

www.modelaircraftdatabase.com

I don't see 4 better models myself based on mould or my collection criteria. What ones would you select?

Also I find it hard to believe the notion that NG doesn’t release European models because they don’t sell well. There are plenty of non-European models that NG released months ago that are still sitting on retailer shelves, and NG still continues to release repetitive models that will likely not sell out. Besides, if cost was such an issue, then why the free CRP program?

The CRP programme makes no sense to me at all, but it really doesn't matter what you find hard to believe because Phoenix and JC have literally told me this about European models and I gave you definable measures about the lack of European stores. There are plenty of all brands models sitting on shelves as sales are tanking from what I hear, but the one place they don't seem to be is in China.

Gemini’s mould isn’t as great, but they indeed have released some great models in both scales.

I don't collect 200 scale so can't say anything about that scale and that wasn't up for discussion here

 

[Alphaless]

Please go through that and tell me what 4 models are better than a pair of NG Tristars and MD-80s (assuming they aren't repeats). Let's leave the May models out as GJ hasn't completed them yet:

Database | MADb

Model Aircraft Database

www.modelaircraftdatabase.com

I don't see 4 better models myself based on mould or my collection criteria. What ones would you select?

For each one of us that is happy to see a new MD80 or Tristar, there is one who is happy to see that Tui max or SAF 787. I don't think it is fair to argue subjectivity here.

 

[YesterAirlines]

For each one of us that is happy to see a new MD80 or Tristar, there is one who is happy to see that Tui max or SAF 787. I don't think it is fair to argue subjectivity here.

Agreed, but when I am subjective apparently I'm being 'biased'. But if I was going to argue the point I'd say both those models haven't seen the light of day yet and the TUI MAX has been made already by Phoenix.

 

[pons399]

NG has repeatedly faltered in model quality control and after-sales service. Missing parts are a common occurrence, and quality assurance feels like playing the lottery.

Fully agree with this. I’ve bought a ton of NG recently, and was shocked to see most had loose/broken antennas. This is on top of repeated livery mistakes that don’t get fixed, even after multiple rounds of feedback. Both were unthinkable even just a year ago.

 

[ghqv2988]

No need to apologise at all to me. Your opinion is your own and I don't need to agree with it. The year of classics thing was translated by collectors who then ran with it. I agree with what you and many others are saying about NG. They have been infuriating, but at the same time the level of hyperbole can get a bit much sometimes and as always I don't see it in relation to other brands. And nobody else even tries to do things like points or free models so it is hard to get too self-righteous about it when it is basically giving away things.



If the MD-80s end up being more AA variants then I might take it back but the rest of GJ's output this year has been of almost zero interest to me and most of it is on mediocre moulds too. As I said I have bought 1 model from them in 2025 and 22 NGs. So it is bias in the sense that I don't collect it, no more than the bias that sees you make the hyperbolic statements you made and JJ collect models that are often low quality. By definable measures such as mould quality and adherence to my collection criteria (which is no doubt much much wider than your own) what I said is I think defendable.

Also @ghqv2988 and @JJ Skippy here is GJs' entire output for 2025. Please go through that and tell me what 4 models are better than a pair of NG Tristars and MD-80s (assuming they aren't repeats). Let's leave the May models out as GJ hasn't completed them yet:

Database | MADb

Model Aircraft Database

www.modelaircraftdatabase.com

I don't see 4 better models myself based on mould or my collection criteria. What ones would you select?



The CRP programme makes no sense to me at all, but it really doesn't matter what you find hard to believe because Phoenix and JC have literally told me this about European models and I gave you definable measures about the lack of European stores. There are plenty of all brands models sitting on shelves as sales are tanking from what I hear, but the one place they don't seem to be is in China.



I don't collect 200 scale so can't say anything about that scale and that wasn't up for discussion here

That still reads to me as bias. It’s a negative bias against GJ and a positive one towards NG. Many collectors have purchased GJ models this year and have been satisfied with them. Just because you chose not to doesn’t mean those releases are inherently poor. With all due respect, your opinions are valid, but they don’t set the standard for everyone else. No one is the God of collecting in this hobby.

The criticism directed at NG was specifically about their recent decline in quality and customer service yet you brought GJ into the conversation. Interestingly, I rarely see you criticize JC Wings, even though they use the same moulds; your focus always seems to be on GJ.

For example, several people have noticed a decline in NG’s quality control (just scroll up a few posts). When I raised this issue in the past, you denied this and defended NG by comparing their QC to GJ’s. Consistently defending NG while drawing unnecessary comparisons to GJ does give the impression of bias. And when you present your purchasing choices as if they set the standard, it further suggests that your opinions may not be entirely objective

 

[swagninja84]

That still reads to me as bias. It’s a negative bias against GJ and a positive one towards NG.

This is based on overall track record, and I do not think it is unwarranted. NG has not produced anywhere close to the disasters GJ has.

With all due respect, your opinions are valid, but they don’t set the standard for everyone else. No one is the God of collecting in this hobby.

I don't see him with a gun to anyone's head saying they cannot buy GJ or preventing anyone from buying GJ.

The criticism directed at NG was specifically about their recent decline in quality and customer service yet you brought GJ into the conversation. Interestingly, I rarely see you criticize JC Wings, even though they use the same moulds; your focus always seems to be on GJ.

GJ compares itself to the "other non-licensed" manufacturers all the time. UA 738 evo blue, Delta 100s

When I raised this issue in the past, you denied this and defended NG by comparing their QC to GJ’s. Consistently defending NG while drawing unnecessary comparisons to GJ does give the impression of bias.

Yes, NG is not as flawless as they once were, but when your alternative is an inferior product. Especially if GJ is more expensive.
A ham sandwich might seem great when all you previously had was just bread, but when you have had a taste of A5 wagyu, the ham sandwich is going to seem like trash.
The flaws in NG's products are minor, logos are slightly too high, and missing tiny antennas or wheels. knocks on wood. I have not received any NG models with the issues mentioned. While GJ's are bent engines, obliterated landing gear, paint that looks like it was colored in with a sharpie.

And when you present your purchasing choices as if they set the standard, it further suggests that your opinions may not be entirely objective

2025: 74 models, 37 NG, 5 GJ.
Pre NG, the GJ number was a lot higher. Being in the US, you could say I am GJ's prime demographic. Based on RS's videos, I have a very different collecting criteria from him.

NG spoiled us, we should still hold them to a high level, but I think the criticism is bordering on ridiculous because the alternative isn't better.

 

[ghqv2988]

This is based on overall track record, and I do not think it is unwarranted. NG has not produced anywhere close to the disasters GJ has.


I don't see him with a gun to anyone's head saying they cannot buy GJ or preventing anyone from buying GJ.


GJ compares itself to the "other non-licensed" manufacturers all the time. UA 738 evo blue, Delta 100s


Yes, NG is not as flawless as they once were, but when your alternative is an inferior product. Especially if GJ is more expensive.
A ham sandwich might seem great when all you previously had was just bread, but when you have had a taste of A5 wagyu, the ham sandwich is going to seem like trash.
The flaws in NG's products are minor, logos are slightly too high, and missing tiny antennas or wheels. knocks on wood. I have not received any NG models with the issues mentioned. While GJ's are bent engines, obliterated landing gear, paint that looks like it was colored in with a sharpie.


2025: 74 models, 37 NG, 5 GJ.
Pre NG, the GJ number was a lot higher. Being in the US, you could say I am GJ's prime demographic. Based on RS's videos, I have a very different collecting criteria from him.

NG spoiled us, we should still hold them to a high level, but I think the criticism is bordering on ridiculous because the alternative isn't better.

Why does an objective discussion about NG so often turn into an obligatory criticism of Gemini? When I mentioned that I hadn’t purchased as many NG models this past year, RS immediately jumped to the conclusion that I must be a GJ loyalist—which is ironic, considering I haven’t bought GJ models either. I fully acknowledge GJ’s shortcomings and have never hesitated to point them out. However, this thread isn’t about GJ.

It’s worth asking: why does every objective critique of NG seem to spiral into a debate about GJ? Is it possible that brand loyalty or bias is influencing the conversation, consciously or not?

While it’s fortunate that you haven’t encountered problems with broken NG products, many others have reported issues such as broken wings, paint chips, and smudges. QC goes even beyond this. Forget logos placed too high, what about severe misprints such as missing or incorrect details? What about moulds that clearly missed the mark (despite feedback)? Why is it so hard to objectively acknowledge these experiences, even when they come from fellow collectors? Dismissing these accounts is like insisting a tree didn’t fall simply because you didn’t see or hear it yourself. The reality is that NG’s quality control has undeniably declined in recent times.

Ultimately, this thread was meant to be an impartial analysis of NG—not a comparison between brands. Unfortunately, bias continues to cloud what should be an objective discussion.

Change is impossible if we keep making excuses for poor performance or missteps. The same principle applies to NG, which is why it’s so frustrating when RS seemingly finally acknowledges the company’s issues yet still finds ways to justify or overlook their practices by comparing them to a weaker competitor. Why are we content to lower our standards, rather than demanding better and holding NG accountable for real improvement? Otherwise, they will forever have the mindset that they can do whatever they want because they have superior moulds. Yes, technically they can do whatever they want, no one is "holding a gun to their head," but with this mindset they won't make any significant improvement for the better. And that is the vibe I am getting from NG right now (the reference to their new leadership as being egocentric and obstinant)

 

[swagninja84]

It’s worth asking: why does every objective critique of NG seem to spiral into a debate about GJ? Is it possible that brand loyalty or bias is influencing the conversation, consciously or not?


Ultimately, this thread was meant to be an impartial analysis of NG—not a comparison between brands. Unfortunately, bias continues to cloud what should be an objective discussion.

To be fair, RS was not the first person to throw Gemini into the discussion.

In my opinion there were three things that made them revolutionary.

1. They were the new kid on the block putting out groundbreaking molds / quality that was breaking the vice grip that Gemini had on the market forcing much needed competition with humble beginnings.

3. They actively engaged with the community and seemed to hear and take the criticism coming toward them in a constructive manner in a way the collectorate had never gotten. If you dared to criticize AC or Gemini, you were written off or blocked on social medias.

Because it is something we can point to and compare. Just like how we are using previous NG releases to compare to subsequent releases.

Bias absolutely plays a role in how we see everything. Where you were born, when you were born, where you have lived, shapes how we all see things, and what airlines and planes we are interested in collecting. Different people have different tolerances for errors or mistakes they are willing to accept, again this is based on their own experiences and biases.

Having seen the excellent work NG is capable of, is your bias of knowing they can do better.

The only way to have an impartial analysis would be to have someone who knows zero about aviation and models, put 2 models in front of them, and ask which they think looks better or more realistic. Our knowledge of aviation affects how we see things.

 

[YesterAirlines]

Why does an objective discussion about NG so often turn into an obligatory criticism of Gemini? When I mentioned that I hadn’t purchased as many NG models this past year, RS immediately jumped to the conclusion that I must be a GJ loyalist—which is ironic, considering I haven’t bought GJ models either. I fully acknowledge GJ’s shortcomings and have never hesitated to point them out. However, this thread isn’t about GJ.

It’s worth asking: why does every objective critique of NG seem to spiral into a debate about GJ? Is it possible that brand loyalty or bias is influencing the conversation, consciously or not?

I didn't jump to that conclusion at all - I know you aren't a GJ loyalist not that there's anything wrong with being one. There are three reasons I brought up GJ.
1. Because you quoted JJ and he is always about GJ
2. Because JC Wings doesn't make American releases and this conversation has largely been about the lack of N regs
3. Because GJ is NG's main competitor outside China

Ultimately, this thread was meant to be an impartial analysis of NG—not a comparison between brands. Unfortunately, bias continues to cloud what should be an objective discussion.

Change is impossible if we keep making excuses for poor performance or missteps. The same principle applies to NG, which is why it’s so frustrating when RS seemingly finally acknowledges the company’s issues yet still finds ways to justify or overlook their practices by comparing them to a weaker competitor. Why are we content to lower our standards, rather than demanding better and holding NG accountable for real improvement? Otherwise, they will forever have the mindset that they can do whatever they want because they have superior moulds. Yes, technically they can do whatever they want, no one is "holding a gun to their head," but with this mindset they won't make any significant improvement for the better. And that is the vibe I am getting from NG right now (the reference to their new leadership as being egocentric and obstinant)

In this thread I have said that this set is 'disappointing', '100% get the frustration', 'I agree with most of the criticism of NG', criticised their bad communication and liked multiple comments with strong criticism of NG.

Yet despite that you accused me of bias. I can't win. Why should they be held to a higher standard than the rest of the brands in 400 scale who get a free pass and barely warrant any criticism at all? It is a crazy double-standard that makes no sense.

Why are you not making this statement 'Why are we content to lower our standards, rather than demanding better and holding [brand] accountable for real improvement?' about everyone else?

This is what I want to understand. In this thread I have responded to the near accusations made and tried not to mention the person making the comments at all, but your responses have been largely about my percieved bias rather than answering the points about the models. The irony is I don't even really disagree with most of what you've said but the hyperbole of your earlier comments stuck out. Why does this one brand get to be beaten with a stick and the others not?

Regardless of the many valid issues raised NG are still producing the best models in the scale at the moment (or near best - Panda and affiliates are giving them a run) yet the conversation towards them is largely negative. I would have thought it would be more balanced.

 

[YesterAirlines]

I rarely see you criticize JC Wings, even though they use the same moulds; your focus always seems to be on GJ.

You clearly don't watch my JC videos then! They get the same mould criticism that GJ does. I equally don't see people criticise JC, GJ, AV, PA, PH - their focus always seems to be on NG.

For example, several people have noticed a decline in NG’s quality control (just scroll up a few posts). When I raised this issue in the past, you denied this and defended NG by comparing their QC to GJ’s. Consistently defending NG while drawing unnecessary comparisons to GJ does give the impression of bias. And when you present your purchasing choices as if they set the standard, it further suggests that your opinions may not be entirely objective

It isn't bias if it is true! Also you originally accused me of bias because I compared GJ's output this year to NGs. However later on I'm told that choosing preference in releases is subjective. You can't have it both ways. My purchasing history is entirely relevant to the accusation of bias and I never presented them as any kind of standard - they are merely what they are, proof that I don't find Gemini's releases interesting and that in my opinion 2 Tristars and 2 MD-80s are better than everything GJ has made this year.

Nobody's opinions are entirely objective - I don't honestly know what you're looking for here.

 

[KamiSchmolz]

No need to apologise at all to me. Your opinion is your own and I don't need to agree with it. The year of classics thing was translated by collectors who then ran with it. I agree with what you and many others are saying about NG. They have been infuriating, but at the same time the level of hyperbole can get a bit much sometimes and as always I don't see it in relation to other brands. And nobody else even tries to do things like points or free models so it is hard to get too self-righteous about it when it is basically giving away things.



If the MD-80s end up being more AA variants then I might take it back but the rest of GJ's output this year has been of almost zero interest to me and most of it is on mediocre moulds too. As I said I have bought 1 model from them in 2025 and 22 NGs. So it is bias in the sense that I don't collect it, no more than the bias that sees you make the hyperbolic statements you made and JJ collect models that are often low quality. By definable measures such as mould quality and adherence to my collection criteria (which is no doubt much much wider than your own) what I said is I think defendable.

Also @ghqv2988 and @JJ Skippy here is GJs' entire output for 2025. Please go through that and tell me what 4 models are better than a pair of NG Tristars and MD-80s (assuming they aren't repeats). Let's leave the May models out as GJ hasn't completed them yet:

Database | MADb

Model Aircraft Database

www.modelaircraftdatabase.com

I don't see 4 better models myself based on mould or my collection criteria. What ones would you select?



The CRP programme makes no sense to me at all, but it really doesn't matter what you find hard to believe because Phoenix and JC have literally told me this about European models and I gave you definable measures about the lack of European stores. There are plenty of all brands models sitting on shelves as sales are tanking from what I hear, but the one place they don't seem to be is in China.



I don't collect 200 scale so can't say anything about that scale and that wasn't up for discussion here

But in fact, "Year of classic" is its literal meaning, classic types of aircrafts. NG announced that they were developing a series of moulds for classic models on AMS in 2023, but they did not produce many. Instead, they kept releasing lots of N and B registration numbers. So in fact, there has never been a misunderstanding of collectors about the term "Chinese classics", because China basically has no civil aviation culture, and there are not many Chinese airlines with a long history.

 

[YesterAirlines]

But in fact, "Year of classic" is its literal meaning, classic types of aircrafts. NG announced that they were developing a series of moulds for classic models on AMS in 2023, but they did not produce many. Instead, they kept releasing lots of N and B registration numbers. So in fact, there has never been a misunderstanding of collectors about the term "Chinese classics", because China basically has no civil aviation culture, and there are not many Chinese airlines with a long history.

It never said 'Year of classic' and wasn't related to the classic moulds from AMS 2023. It was the translation of the Chinese text, which was aimed at the Chinese market. It has been said several times by Chinese speakers that the term classic here better translated as 'special or meaningful'. It was always aimed at Chinese airliners with well known special schemes like the Phoenix Liner 777s. It wasn't about classics as we would understand the term.

Massively disappointing I agree, but exactly the issue I raised of people scouring every word NG say for meaning and the issue others raised at NGs imperfect communication with English speakers.

 

[planes_on_a_shelf]

Any idea when we'll get to know the releases @nb.aviation ?

 

[pons399]

Any idea when we'll get to know the releases @nb.aviation ?

Probably early next week, 1 post per week has been NG’s MO these past few months.