NG Models Airbus A330-800/900neo Mould Sample Review

[YesterAirlines]

I start my look at the new NG Models mould samples with the Airbus A330-800/900. There are 3 existing moulds for the neo but all come with some form of issues. The new NG samples also have one major issue but it is one that I'm sure NG will resolve before the moulds are launched. With that fixed they look like they could be the best of the bunch:

Airbus A330NEO 1:400 Scale Mould Sample Review

An exclusive review of the new 1:400 sample Airbus A330-800/900 NEO made by NG Models

www.yesterdaysairlines.com

 

[pons399]

The sharklets certainly look better than the existing moulds.

 

[1/400collector]

The fuselage looks great

 

[Sithan400]

Disappointing inaccuracies with the flap track fairings and vertical stabilizer. Although the rest of the sample looks awesome. Particularly the nose region - the major issue with AV400's recent rendering. NG needs to make some adjustments if they wish perfection.

 

[LeoMuse747]

Rule of thumb: NG samples are mostly quite crappy and have some teething issues, which they fix on production models. Maybe not at very first, but they usually fix it.

 

[Phantom]

Would you please have a picture of both v.tails next to each other? Are they different?
They look way out of shape. I'd think the one on the 339 looks like it could be ok for the 338, but no way on a 339.
They do have a good tail for their 333. That's the shape needed for a 339, 342 and 343.

 

[Phantom]

I wish I could get my hands on such samples...

As manufacturers (and collectors?) seem to struggle with the size and shape of Airbus v.tails, I quickly threw some drawings together to showcase the differences in shape and dimensions. (Source: Airbus)
Dimensions added in red to complete missing dimensions (like distance between trailing edge and tip of APU-exhaust)

Richard, do you have a caliper to check the dimensions? My eyes tell me that 339 tail is somewhere close to "C" instead of "A".

A : A340-200, A340-300, A330-300 and A330-900
B : A330-200 (original)
C : A330-200 (post Mod 48979), A330-800, A340-500 and A340-600 (note that 345/346 rudders have a small recess for stab/elevator clearance in full deflection)
330340t by Alexander Kern, auf Flickr

 

[YesterAirlines]

@Phantom that is impressive. It's late so I haven't gone over it in detail but a quick measurement of the heights gives

A330-800 = 2.4cm high (8.8m on yours above) - should be 2.2cm
A330-900 = 2.25cm high (8.3m on yours above) should be 2.07cm
A330-300 = 2.1cm high (8.3m on yours above) should be 2.07cm

So by your measurements the 900's stab is 1.5mm too tall. I'm not sweating it!

NG have said they will fix the flap track fairings.

 

[Aviation Enjoyer]

Well written article as always! One thing I noticed though was the bulge at the middle of the plane (I forgot the words for it) is completely off compared to the image used to compare the winglets.

 

[OscarBravo992]

That might be due to the angle, but if not, then the wingbox shape is way off.

Seems like no one can make a perfect A330neo! I was really disappointed about the AV400, the samples looked so promising, but the final product is quite sad in comparison.

 

[Madridista]

That might be due to the angle, but if not, then the wingbox shape is way off.

Seems like no one can make a perfect A330neo! I was really disappointed about the AV400, the samples looked so promising, but the final product is quite sad in comparison.

Please keep in mind this is far away from being a ‘final product’, so any qualified input can help to make the final product an as-real-as-it-can-get type.

And, yes, this particular detail may be looking different due to the photographer’s different positions. The real photo was taken from ground level, the model sample’s photo was taken from a decisively higher position. This, of course, doesn’t mean it actually is a problem of different angles but it might be.

 

[YesterAirlines]

Well written article as always! One thing I noticed though was the bulge at the middle of the plane (I forgot the words for it) is completely off compared to the image used to compare the winglets.

View attachment 22417View attachment 22418

It's just the angle of the photos. The fuselage is exactly the same as their A330ceos - i.e. effectively perfect

 

[Phantom]

So by your measurements the 900's stab is 1.5mm too tall. I'm not sweating it!

As long as you communicate it to NG (or make them read here)!

The thing is:
NG obviousely has all three tails as you measured, but just use it wrong. AV400 ruined their 339 exactly the same way

Most may not even notice, but to my eyes this issue I can't oversee from 3ft distance.

NG has the parts, make them use it properly. Your 340-200/300 samples will reveal the same issues btw.

 

[YesterAirlines]

As long as you communicate it to NG (or make them read here)!

The thing is:
NG obviousely has all three tails as you measured, but just use it wrong. AV400 ruined their 339 exactly the same way

Most may not even notice, but to my eyes this issue I can't oversee from 3ft distance.

NG has the parts, make them use it properly. Your 340-200/300 samples will reveal the same issues btw.

If the 340s do I'll bring it up. I'm planning on looking at them today if I get the time Can I use your image above if needed?

 

[B767Avia]

Well written article as always! One thing I noticed though was the bulge at the middle of the plane (I forgot the words for it) is completely off compared to the image used to compare the winglets.

View attachment 22417View attachment 22418

This really depends on how close you're from the plane and how much it's zoomed in. Generally model photos are taken closer compared to real life shots, making the nose appear larger than it actually is.

 

[Phantom]

If the 340s do I'll bring it up. I'm planning on looking at them today if I get the time Can I use your image above if needed?

Sure.
What's most interesting btw is the v.tail on the 338 sample. This is tail "B" in the above drawing - exclusively used on early (pre Mod 48979) A330-200s.
Wonder why they put it on this sample. The early 332 they did (like the bmi) seem to have the shorter "C" tail instead?

 

[Travertineeye]

Well written article as always! One thing I noticed though was the bulge at the middle of the plane (I forgot the words for it) is completely off compared to the image used to compare the winglets.

View attachment 22417View attachment 22418

It’s the camera lens. Basically what you have is a model with a picture equivalent of a selfie. The other most likely is a professional photograph, or at the very least the plane was less vulnerable to lens distortion due to its scale.

 

[OscarBravo992]

Please keep in mind this is far away from being a ‘final product’, so any qualified input can help to make the final product an as-real-as-it-can-get type.

I’m simply voicing my opinion on the provided samples. I have no doubt that NG will improve them before release, but I find it unlikely all the issues will be resolved, like with their 777’s APU.

 

[Sithan400]

I’m simply voicing my opinion on the provided samples. I have no doubt that NG will improve them before release, but I find it unlikely all the issues will be resolved, like with their 777’s APU.

Indeed... wish they'd address that issue.

 

[YesterAirlines]

I’m simply voicing my opinion on the provided samples. I have no doubt that NG will improve them before release, but I find it unlikely all the issues will be resolved, like with their 777’s APU.

That appears to have been a design choice by them, like the change to stop using pivot gear, rather than a defect per se