NG Models Boeing 747-100 Sample Review
- Thread starter YesterAirlines
- Start date
Phantom
Well-known member
Finally found the time...
I'm totally puzzled as to how NG manages to put all these excellent moulds to market on one hand yet totally fail on the 747 on the other.
I'm honestly shocked to see that they still hadn't fixed the wing extensions.
As pics say more than words, here's a quick Photoshop of what could be done better - exactly the same issue as with the 747SP, plus the upperdeck.
Here, all I did was spinning the nose by a few degrees clockwise and the upperdeck also by some 1.5°. All this just a real quick job to give you an idea - nothing perfect, but a lot closer to the looks of a 747 already.
Unless NG at least fixes the nose section, this mould will be a 100% no-deal for me as it it IMO plays in the same league as a Phoenix and is a shame in NG's otherwise awesome mould catalogue.
I'm totally puzzled as to how NG manages to put all these excellent moulds to market on one hand yet totally fail on the 747 on the other.
I'm honestly shocked to see that they still hadn't fixed the wing extensions.
As pics say more than words, here's a quick Photoshop of what could be done better - exactly the same issue as with the 747SP, plus the upperdeck.
Here, all I did was spinning the nose by a few degrees clockwise and the upperdeck also by some 1.5°. All this just a real quick job to give you an idea - nothing perfect, but a lot closer to the looks of a 747 already.
Unless NG at least fixes the nose section, this mould will be a 100% no-deal for me as it it IMO plays in the same league as a Phoenix and is a shame in NG's otherwise awesome mould catalogue.
Phantom
Well-known member
Regarding engines and pylons, a quote from Richard's review: "In relation to these JT9Ds I have heard some call them too large. The nacelles are possibly a little too big but they appear to be the same as on the SP and I haven't heard complaints about them on that mould."
It always amazed me that there were not more complaints (there were a few) - personally I think never complained as my eyes were busy with the goofed up nose all the time, I just tried to ignore the large nacelles and weak pylons. Let's take a look at what we have:
In the world of diecast/injection moulding we need to deal with minimum wall thickness.
If I measure NG's JT9D on the 747SP I get fairly good results for intake/fan diameter, while the external dimensions are noticeable too big. On the other moulds I have at hand, it's the opposite. The overall dimensions are pretty good, while the intake is on the small side.
This is a quick cellphone snap of NG's SP. Next to it are DW, BB400 and an early GJ. NG's is definitely a lot larger. I still prefer the DW.
jt9d by Alexander Kern, auf Flickr
I'm not a fan of NG's JT9D pylons either. I think the #2/3 in particular aren't well shaped but I can't really put my finger on. Is it just the trailing edge? The leading edge, or is the entire assembly mounted too far aft?
It always amazed me that there were not more complaints (there were a few) - personally I think never complained as my eyes were busy with the goofed up nose all the time, I just tried to ignore the large nacelles and weak pylons. Let's take a look at what we have:
In the world of diecast/injection moulding we need to deal with minimum wall thickness.
If I measure NG's JT9D on the 747SP I get fairly good results for intake/fan diameter, while the external dimensions are noticeable too big. On the other moulds I have at hand, it's the opposite. The overall dimensions are pretty good, while the intake is on the small side.
This is a quick cellphone snap of NG's SP. Next to it are DW, BB400 and an early GJ. NG's is definitely a lot larger. I still prefer the DW.
jt9d by Alexander Kern, auf FlickrI'm not a fan of NG's JT9D pylons either. I think the #2/3 in particular aren't well shaped but I can't really put my finger on. Is it just the trailing edge? The leading edge, or is the entire assembly mounted too far aft?
LeoMuse747
Well-known member
Fantastic insights by Phantom. His adjustments of the nose section are simply amazing and shows precisely how the whole front section (including the hump) should be!!! And the engines are indeed oversized!
NoAddedSalt
Active member
Even with all the issues pointed out, for some reason there is something so satisfying about the rendition of it. To me it genuinely looks like a shrunken 747 where as other moulds just don't. Think half of it is the sheer details in the engines that the older models lack and make them very toy like. In that regard it is super well done.
planes_on_a_shelf
Well-known member
I have quite a few NG 747SPs - which is surprising because it's a type I've never really liked the design of - but also testament to the fact that NG's rendition is impossible to not love.
NG's mould has its undeniable flaws. But it's also got undeniable details in other places, plus NG's exquisite print details.
As a whole it works. It's not a 10/10 like NG's Tristars - it's probably a 7.5 or 8 - and that's still way ahead of the competition. I refused to pick up GJs recent Air Mauritius. It's just not a 2023 model anymore.
I'd love though, for NG to update their 747 classic nose and wing crucially, and make a properly sized JT-9D mould, considering there's still time and it's unreleased yet, and the collectors who have been faithfully waiting won't mind waiting a month or two more.
NG's mould has its undeniable flaws. But it's also got undeniable details in other places, plus NG's exquisite print details.
As a whole it works. It's not a 10/10 like NG's Tristars - it's probably a 7.5 or 8 - and that's still way ahead of the competition. I refused to pick up GJs recent Air Mauritius. It's just not a 2023 model anymore.
I'd love though, for NG to update their 747 classic nose and wing crucially, and make a properly sized JT-9D mould, considering there's still time and it's unreleased yet, and the collectors who have been faithfully waiting won't mind waiting a month or two more.
B767Avia
Well-known member
NG seems to be particularly inconsistent with the wing details it seems.
The expectation isn't necessarily to get them right the first try but to be able to update them promptly. On one hand they've done that quite well with the 777 and 748 control surfaces, whereas they don't seem to budge when I ask about the A321neo overwing markings, and now this.
Also one can only wonder why they didn't adopt the now refined 748 nose for the classics.
The expectation isn't necessarily to get them right the first try but to be able to update them promptly. On one hand they've done that quite well with the 777 and 748 control surfaces, whereas they don't seem to budge when I ask about the A321neo overwing markings, and now this.
Also one can only wonder why they didn't adopt the now refined 748 nose for the classics.
Bulgogi77
Well-known member
That sounds great but we'll just have to wait and see. The release sets over the past year or so have had way too much repetition, and it's really a shame since NG has some of the best molds out there. Many of those molds are not being utilized well. I feel nowhere near the amount of hype that these release sets used to receive.
There's so many aircraft out there that I know would be huge sellers but with NG's current strategy, I would be shocked if they released them. Maybe that'll change, maybe not...I'll keep my fingers crossed.
These 747s, while not perfect, look good. It's encouraging that they'll be refining the nose and the wings.
Last edited:
New to the forum and thought I'd contribute my $0.02.
Looking at Phantom's photos, no one seems to have noticed that NG's PW hot section is probably the least accurate among all the brands shown. NG has interpreted the seam on the hot section to be an angular kink, when actually the entire thing just gently slopes inward. It is also too narrow compared to the nacelle. DW captured it much better IMO.
There is also the issue with the cockpit windows. The reality is that NG's 747 cockpit windows on any of its variants are neither shaped properly nor correctly placed. It is too tall at the midline (especially on the 748). The entirely of the cockpit window should sit above the crease where the nose protrudes from the cockpit area (the attached KLM photo really illustrates this.) The superior margin should be a completely flat horizontal line.
Getting into the weeds here, a big issue also lies in the way that the cockpit windows interact with the nuances of the shape of the nose. The lateral cockpit windows lie on a completely flat plane before it meets the curvature of the center two windows. The entire upper lateral nose section is actually quite geometric, although one can really only appreciate this on video when seeing the surface interaction with light (but I've attached a few photos of the LH 747 to illustrate my point.) This is an issue considering the 747sp/748 nose tooling are so different, and neither have really captured these nuances (but I am assuming they are using the same cockpit window printing.)
Looking at Phantom's photos, no one seems to have noticed that NG's PW hot section is probably the least accurate among all the brands shown. NG has interpreted the seam on the hot section to be an angular kink, when actually the entire thing just gently slopes inward. It is also too narrow compared to the nacelle. DW captured it much better IMO.
There is also the issue with the cockpit windows. The reality is that NG's 747 cockpit windows on any of its variants are neither shaped properly nor correctly placed. It is too tall at the midline (especially on the 748). The entirely of the cockpit window should sit above the crease where the nose protrudes from the cockpit area (the attached KLM photo really illustrates this.) The superior margin should be a completely flat horizontal line.
Getting into the weeds here, a big issue also lies in the way that the cockpit windows interact with the nuances of the shape of the nose. The lateral cockpit windows lie on a completely flat plane before it meets the curvature of the center two windows. The entire upper lateral nose section is actually quite geometric, although one can really only appreciate this on video when seeing the surface interaction with light (but I've attached a few photos of the LH 747 to illustrate my point.) This is an issue considering the 747sp/748 nose tooling are so different, and neither have really captured these nuances (but I am assuming they are using the same cockpit window printing.)
Attachments
Last edited:
