Yu ModeL New Airbus A300 First Look

[Tropicalista]

Honestly, I think we're becoming too picky. In recent years, I've seen increasingly accurate models compared to 5–10 years ago.
Okay, they're not perfect yet... but seriously, are we talking about wheel spacing?
I can understand the front gear, which isn't so bad on my Uni-Top. But now I'm seeing people getting really hung up on minor details.

 

[Jazajia]

The only thing I'd expect Yu to make is a correct wing print which is really just a new artwork and tampo cliche.

I did bring this up to YU, and they were very receptive and seemed to understand the issue. It is not easy to convey a technical issue in a third language, though I think he got it. I doubt the Pan Am and Niuguini examples will be modified, but I am hopeful going forward.

 

[Jazajia]

I did bring this up to YU, and they were very receptive and seemed to understand the issue. It is not easy to convey a technical issue in a third language, though I think he got it. I doubt the Pan Am and Niuguini examples will be modified, but I am hopeful going forward.

Mind you, Alex, I am not sure that even the majority of A300 pilots who have flown both variants are aware of how the overwing markings change as a result of the disappearance of the outboard ailerons. I also understand - quite well, actually - that pilots are far from being the main target audience for these models. Aviation enthusiasts (who, in many cases - but not always - are extremely detail-oriented), and diorama makers are. But still, if people who are inherently familiar with these machines ignore some of these details, we have to set our expectations accordingly. The YU guy is not an Airbus engineer and clearly not an Airbus A300 history expert, just your typical guy who thinks airplanes are the coolest thing.

The overwing markings issue is serious enough, I admit, but it is by far the worst I have seen in 400 scale. Not a deal breaker. Hopefully, it is nothing more than a growing pain that will be overcome.

 

[YesterAirlines]

We're talking about this right?



Forget about pilots I would say 99.9% of aviation enthusiasts (including me) wouldn't notice or even know this difference existed and it would need to be pointed out. Even then it's not exactly upsetting in the way misprinted cockpits and other very common errors in 400 scale often are.

 

[Jazajia]

We're talking about this right?

View attachment 71830

Forget about pilots I would say 99.9% of aviation enthusiasts (including me) wouldn't notice or even know this difference existed and it would need to be pointed out. Even then it's not exactly upsetting in the way misprinted cockpits and other very common errors in 400 scale often are.

Yes. Phantom implied in an earlier comment that classics A300s had ailerons close to the wing tips. The -600s didn’t.

The issue is when -600 overwing markings are printed on the wings of classics A300s. This offense effectively covers the outboard ailerons with corogard, which is serious.

Of course, one needs to know that one variant had outboard ailerons, while the other one didn’t to recognize this as a serious mistake.

The YU guy is aware, I think.

 

[BubblesAviation]

I think this model looks great. Other than the downward angle, none of these issues would be noticeable if you guys didn’t bring it up. I don’t want to make any more argument, but just enjoy the models!

 

[Phantom]

Do you have any photo of the wider truck? Since I cannot recall seeing one having photographed over 100 of A300.

Sorry for the delay, finally back home with a few minutes to look for some reference pics.

As the bogie dimensions can be confusing due to different tire sizes (46" vs 49") an other way to identify is by looking at the gearbay doors.

The original door of the A300B2 was clean as its 46" wheel bogie fit in flush. See here for example.

The standard bogie (for everything B2K till -600..) needed protrutions to make room for the larger wheels.
The large bogie needed even bigger protrutions.
Below are screens of what I found on alamy. The standard bogie/door to the left, the larger to the right:


If you look for an American Airlines -600R you'll very likely find the larger bogie with 49" wheels while many other -600s usually had the standard bogie.

 

[LeoMuse747]

Sorry for the delay, finally back home with a few minutes to look for some reference pics.

As the bogie dimensions can be confusing due to different tire sizes (46" vs 49") an other way to identify is by looking at the gearbay doors.

The original door of the A300B2 was clean as its 46" wheel bogie fit in flush. See here for example.

The standard bogie (for everything B2K till -600..) needed protrutions to make room for the larger wheels.
The large bogie needed even bigger protrutions.
Below are screens of what I found on alamy. The standard bogie/door to the left, the larger to the right:
View attachment 71878

If you look for an American Airlines -600R you'll very likely find the larger bogie with 49" wheels while many other -600s usually had the standard bogie.

Sorry if this is a bit off-topic but hey Phantom, do you know what is that "B2K" variant of the A300?
I understand there's the early version A300B2, but I always thought the B2 had the B2-100, B2-200 and B2-320 subtypes. I've seen "B2K" mentioned from time to time and I don't really know what that K variant is.