Show Your Latest 1:400 Purchase

The sharklet is a minor issue for me as it is overshadowed by the wrong wing.
I'm surprised so many are about those wingtip devices yet nobody seems to have problems with a -1000 having the wings of a -900. We'll end up with wrong sharklets on a -1000 no matter which -900 wing (early or later) they use.
But hey, this is "just" an A350🙃
The old Av400 doesn't have a separate -1k wing either?
 
The old Av400 doesn't have a separate -1k wing either?
I don't know. I neither have one to check nor did I ever get an answer on this question or have seen good pics of one. OB992's pic isn't clearly showing the wing, but maybe he or someone else could snap a pic from above - maybe together with a AV400 359 - to answer this.

Edit: a google search for AV400 images suggests they don't (which is what I'd expect)
 
Last edited:
My latest arrivals
Phoenix V Australia 777-300ER VH-VOZ
GeminiJets Alliance Fokker 100 VH-UQC
GeminiJets Virgin Australia 737 MAX 8 VH-8IA
GeminiJets Qantas 767-300ER VH-ZXB (Has a few cracks on the wings and around the engines but been chasing this one for years so was willing to overlook that when I finally found one online).
View attachment 33887View attachment 33888
View attachment 33890
I have a grim suggestion. That 767 has zinc rot on the wings and soon enough, they will disintegrate. Get another 767 of the same generation of Gemini Jets model and swap it with this one. And swap the engines as well.
 
I don't know. I neither have one to check nor did I ever get an answer on this question or have seen good pics of one. OB992's pic isn't clearly showing the wing, but maybe he or someone else could snap a pic from above - maybe together with a AV400 359 - to answer this.

Edit: a google search for AV400 images suggests they don't (which is what I'd expect)
Is this the right sort of angle?

The Cathay is a recent -1000, the Qatar is an early -1000 and the Air China is an early -900. (Early and recent as in release, not irl production)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1854.jpeg
    IMG_1854.jpeg
    1.8 MB · Views: 32
  • IMG_1855.jpeg
    IMG_1855.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 31
  • IMG_1856.jpeg
    IMG_1856.jpeg
    1.8 MB · Views: 42
Last edited:
Thanks for this. So they are all resembling 900 wings as expected.
Can you elaborate on how to identify a correct -1000 wing? I read that the -1000 has a bigger area by modifications of the leading and trailing edge, the wing span is the same as the -900, however. I compared images of real -1000 and -900 wings but I couldn't identify the differences.
 
Can you elaborate on how to identify a correct -1000 wing? I read that the -1000 has a bigger area by modifications of the leading and trailing edge, the wing span is the same as the -900, however. I compared images of real -1000 and -900 wings but I couldn't identify the differences.
I try to draw something later to visualize when I get the time to.
In short, in order to increase weights for the -1000 it was needed to increase wing area. Usually you'd increase span, however both 35K and 779 are maxing out ICAO cat. E (<65m). While the 779 uses wing fold to avoid falling into F, Airbus extended the wing trailing edge on the 35K to increase area. IIRC, the 35K wing only shares roundabout 10% commonality with the -900.
The biggest visual difference (increased chord) can be spotted on the outer wing and wingtip device. The chord difference is most noticable around the ailerons.
 
I have a grim suggestion. That 767 has zinc rot on the wings and soon enough, they will disintegrate. Get another 767 of the same generation of Gemini Jets model and swap it with this one. And swap the engines as well.
Thanks for the suggestion, will have a look around. If not I’m hoping the same model in good condition will show up. 🤞
 
Thanks for the suggestion, will have a look around. If not I’m hoping the same model in good condition will show up. 🤞
You’ll be fine mate 👍 If the model hasn’t self-destructed by now that means it’s stabilised and probably won’t progress any further. If not, then I’m sure one in better nick with pop up soon enough.
 
AV400’s 789 PH-BHO recently arrived. Something about the nose seems off to me (perhaps the angle at the top of the nose?), but maybe it’s just a trick of the livery/printing. I don’t think I full inserted the front gears for the pictures, and I’m using NG’s 789 Pokemon plane as a comparison.
 

Attachments

  • 40AE696E-7A3B-4ABC-9F4E-D8CBDE1FB5F6.jpeg
    40AE696E-7A3B-4ABC-9F4E-D8CBDE1FB5F6.jpeg
    550.9 KB · Views: 26
  • 3925CD1E-A7A0-44F1-B370-C2A6B3144F53.jpeg
    3925CD1E-A7A0-44F1-B370-C2A6B3144F53.jpeg
    346.6 KB · Views: 26
  • 24E1F32F-A1E3-438A-99E9-D7781F9AFFC6.jpeg
    24E1F32F-A1E3-438A-99E9-D7781F9AFFC6.jpeg
    394.5 KB · Views: 24
Last edited:
Some new arrivals today. The TAAs finish off my Viscount collection for now, unless Aeroclassics decides to drop a MMA model out of nowhere. Unfortunately the Cathay came with chips on both wingtips which the seller failed to mention. That’d explain the insanely low price, and I’m not too upset.

IMG_1887.jpeg
 
Top