NG Models Airbus A340-200/300 Mould Sample Review

[YesterAirlines]

Ok moving quickly onto the Airbus A340-200/300 samples. @Phantom is correct, now armed with his excellent diagram, which I've purloined for the review, they do indeed have the too tall vertical stabiliser on them as well. Should be an easy fix to replace it with the A330-300 tail they already have. Otherwise they are both solid versions, which they need to be because somewhat surprisingly competition in the A340 space is stronger than in the A330 space.

Airbus A340-200/300 1:400 Scale Mould Sample Review

An exclusive review of the new 1:400 sample Airbus A340-200/300 made by NG Models

www.yesterdaysairlines.com

 

[KG3036_SS]

Just curious - are NG reusing the A332 body for A342?
There are minor discrepancy between the two models which means that in a best case scenario it would need a separate tooling from A332 - something Phoenix haven't bother with.

 

[Phantom]

Just curious - are NG reusing the A332 body for A342?

Curious as well. I was hoping for the review to also cover this detail as my eyes don't alert me here.

 

[YesterAirlines]

C'mon guys it's 57cm difference in length!!

By the way they've said they will remedy the tails

 

[B767Avia]

C'mon guys it's 57cm difference in length!!

By the way they've said they will remedy the tails

Same applies for the A330neo as well, correct?

 

[YesterAirlines]

Same applies for the A330neo as well, correct?

I told them to look at all the tails

 

[B767Avia]

I told them to look at all the tails

Great, thanks.

 

[Phantom]

C'mon guys it's 57cm difference in length!!

Yes, but this is supposed to be a "new" mould, isn't it.
If it's just the existing 332 mould with 2 additional engines and a center gear, why bother handing out such sample? And when they make efforts to really tool a new one, then have it right.

Did you actually measure the fuselage and compared it to the 332? Just curious.

 

[YesterAirlines]

No I didn't because the difference would be by my estimate 1.4mm and I don't think it is enough to make any difference. There is a level of review which is way too much in 400 scale and this is surely in that category.

However, the A340-200 measures 14.3 by my ruler (not the 5857/400=14.64 it should) and the A330-200 measures about 14.15 (not 5751/400=14.3). So they are different but both incorrect.

That's it NG should scrap both moulds and start again!!!

 

[YesterAirlines]

Rather than measuring moulds with lasers or checking the molecular makeup of the alloy with an electron microscope what I have been doing is looking at possibilities for the A340 in 400 scale. Plenty has been made already but there is still plenty that hasn't, or has been made on obsolescent moulds from many years ago. To that end rather than produce a monster wishlist I've come up with 20 A340s that should be at the top of the production list based off of those criteria:

The 20 'Most Deserving' A340s

There have been a significant number of A340s made in 400 scale to date (267 series 300s and 45 series 200s) but that doesn't necessarily mean the type has great coverage. Although there are plenty of decent existing A340 moulds they don't get used a lot

www.yesterdaysairlines.com

 

[mike_charlie_lima]

having read the story recently, i'd like to see the one-and-only a340-8000 being made, which is based on the a340-200 but with specially modified internal fuel tanks.

 

[Atlspotter]

I’m just happy we’re getting NG A340s, I hope they make a fantasy NWA A343, sad they never got them because then Delta might have flown them.

 

[KG3036_SS]

No I didn't because the difference would be by my estimate 1.4mm and I don't think it is enough to make any difference. There is a level of review which is way too much in 400 scale and this is surely in that category.

Rather than measuring moulds with lasers or checking the molecular makeup of the alloy with an electron microscope

Hold on - I just raised a question on the fulselage length without giving out any indication on trying to comment on NG or whatsoever. Why are you being so grumpy on it?
I am just trying to know (I think many of us who can't attend the AMS fair to see up close would also like to know) if it's really a "NEW" mould as NG claims or if it's a reuse of their already well-received A332 - which is still a nice addition to NG's portfolio and is a decent choice of A342 notheless Afterall, a new A340 mould would probably put quite some pressure on Phoenix and Aeroclassics to create some nice/unreleased A340s to the market, benefitting us collectors

However, the A340-200 measures 14.3 by my ruler (not the 5857/400=14.64 it should) and the A330-200 measures about 14.15 (not 5751/400=14.3). So they are different but both incorrect.

Nice to know that a separate tooling was indeed present for A342

That's it NG should scrap both moulds and start again!!!

I don't mind if you think that's the word to tell NG

 

[YesterAirlines]

Sorry if I came across grumpy. Sometimes I feel the expectations of collectors are a little unrealistic. This is one of those cases.

I don't think whether it is a 'new' fuselage or the A330-200 will make an ounce of difference to whether Phoenix or anyone else make A340s.

 

[Phantom]

No I didn't because the difference would be by my estimate 1.4mm and I don't think it is enough to make any difference. There is a level of review which is way too much in 400 scale and this is surely in that category.

However, the A340-200 measures 14.3 by my ruler (not the 5857/400=14.64 it should) and the A330-200 measures about 14.15 (not 5751/400=14.3). So they are different but both incorrect.

That's it NG should scrap both moulds and start again!!!

You receive samples for review. And even if you don't care, others may. Maybe even NG cares? I don't know.

When I'm sending out a sample for review I expect it to be analyzed/measured/used/abused... or whatever helps getting as much feedback out of it as possible. My reviewers are to provide me with everything they find and I will sort through and decide what to do with the info. I'd be really pissed when my reviewers would find something but wouldn't communicate it. And if it's just 1.4mm, I'd be the one to decide how to deal with the info.
I thought that your role behind writing those public reviews is to gather info from the collectorate to channel it to NG.

 

[Phantom]

Sometimes I feel the expectations of collectors are a little unrealistic.

I might be too technical here, but when a "new mould" is announced, I expect it to be "new" and as such to be accurate in such regard.
But I was just asking a question.

Talking about expectations, this is what I would expect when someone who has an A330 mould would announce an A340:
- cast as many 330 parts as remaining tool life permits
- at the next overhaul retool the cavities to 340 (center gear, pylon 1/4 recess)
- cast 340s
Would the 342 fuselage have the correct length then? Sure not. This would only be the case if the entire cavity could be exchanged to effectively have a "new" mould.

 

[YesterAirlines]

I'm sorry @Phantom I'm not living up to your expectations but although I generally appreciate your eye for detail I'll review the models the way I want to and if you don't like it that isn't my concern since I don't get paid for any of this free service I am providing and even if I did you are not just an outlier but 'the' outlier. You are also in my opinion being unreasonable and often have unrealistic expectations. None of that is to say I don't mainly like hearing your opinion just that I will take some of it with a grain of salt.

I also think you need to be careful that your expectations aren't beyond what is really reasonable and that your effective demands for a 1:1 accurate replica don't ultimately become detrimental to 400 scale in general and NG making new moulds (or their willingness to share them like they do). They could easily make what would be, in your eyes anyway, a much less accurate A340 and I imagine few would notice or care.

Also NG may invite this by sending out samples but I don't see this eye being cast over other brands moulds even when they have sent samples out that have been reviewed.

 

[Phantom]

I'm sorry @Phantom I'm not living up to your expectations but although I generally appreciate your eye for detail I'll review the models the way I want to and if you don't like it that isn't my concern since I don't get paid for any of this free service I am providing and even if I did you are not just an outlier but 'the' outlier. You are also in my opinion being unreasonable and often have unrealistic expectations. None of that is to say I don't mainly like hearing your opinion just that I will take some of it with a grain of salt.

I also think you need to be careful that your expectations aren't beyond what is really reasonable and that your effective demands for a 1:1 accurate replica don't ultimately become detrimental to 400 scale in general and NG making new moulds (or their willingness to share them like they do). They could easily make what would be, in your eyes anyway, a much less accurate A340 and I imagine few would notice or care.

Also NG may invite this by sending out samples but I don't see this eye being cast over other brands moulds even when they have sent samples out that have been reviewed.

Maybe this is another case of lost in translation. Again:

All I was asking for is to have the dimensions of this fuselage. NOT because I want it accurate on the ONE A340-200 model I'll get, but just because I'm interested in what's behind. That ONE model I'm interested in for personal memories is Lufthansa "as delivered" and I don't care about 1.4mm give or take on that model. I'm just interested whether a "new" mould is actually new or just old stuff re-tooled/re-used.
And yes, I'm the outlier as I'm way more interested in story and tech. behind than in the actual model collecting dust on a shelf

And again, I'm not telling you how to review, I just told you what I think you do - and I was wrong. So in case NG isn't aware of the issue (but might be interested in fixing) you are not the right channel to get through to them. That's all I said.

All good. So now let's move on to the MD-80 review. Because that one's way more interesting than any 342 could ever be.

 

[YesterAirlines]

It'll be the 747s next so I'll take a few prozac before the feedback!!

 

[Phantom]

It'll be the 747s next so I'll take a few prozac before the feedback!!

Nice!
Take one for the 744 maybe, but save the one for the 742 until you have an actual 747Classic at hand.