Re: Mach 2 German armoured train

Whoa!!!

That's one fast train....

;)

Whaa? Say what you want about the Mach 2 kits, pro or con- They are NOT suitable for after school 10 year olds. Surely you can get much better, much cheaper models for the youngsters? Kim M

PS- For the most part, they are the only game in town, and at least the plastic is thick for serious sanding. Kim M

There's really two sides to this. First, as someone who has gone the distance with a Mach 2 kit and gotten a halfway decent result for my pains, I'm of the opinion that a Mach 2 kit not otherwise reviewed as complete trash (and there are some that are not) is worth trying to build if the subject matter is really important to the builder. It takes a lot of hours to beat one of these into submission; I base that on my own experiences as well as that of another modeler I know. The other side of the coin is that, at best, these kits exhibit not only the sort of problems you expect with many short-run products, but also problems that can only be attributed to bad engineering or quality-control sloppiness. Since my experience with the 1/72 Do 26, I have purchased only one other Mach 2 kit, the PBM Mariner. It appears to be worth trying to build, with the only obvious deficiency being the transparencies, some of which are not. I cannot vouch for or against any of the others, though I have heard horror stories about the Caravelle and the C-123. Caveat emptor, and don't buy anything you can get from another manufacturer.

Mark Schynert

Here's what my brother Fabio did with it, spending almost a month working each night at it:

I'm still waiting one half wing missing in my Delta Dart. To while away I am resculpting a new canopy for the ugly C-123 kit and another for the Caravelle.

-- Luca Beato -

Are you kidding? :-) If you measure the value of a kit with the ratio between its price and the hours spent building it, you will be really satisfied with any Mach2 kit, but did you ever considering scratchbuilding as a cheaper, easier and painless solution?

Not with that crap of models. Thank you. I build aircraft models, not boxcars. Don't mix up a negative feedback with sterile complaining. I just regret that any kit issued in this injected form is a "burnt" one for a serious manufacturer, since it will fall to the end of every subjects priority list.

-- Luca Beato -

Here's what my brother Fabio did with it, spending almost a month working each night at it:

I'm still waiting for one half wing missing in my Sea Dart. To while away I am resculpting a new canopy for that ugly and disfigured C-123 and another for the Caravelle, not to mention the new greenhouses vacuformed for the S.51, the HUP-2 and the Huskie.

-- Luca Beato -

Are you kidding? :-) If you measure the value of a kit with the ratio between its price and the hours spent building it, you will be really satisfied with any Mach2 kit, but did you ever considered scratchbuilding as a cheaper, easier and painless solution?

If I can choose, not with that crap of models. Please don't feel offended but I build aircraft models, not boxcars. Compound curves, surface panels, transparent canopies, fuselage wall thickness and many other details are an issue, for me. Don't mix up a negative feedback with sterile complaining. I just regret that any new kit issued by Mach2 is a "burnt" one for all serious manufacturers, since it is in injected form so it will fall to the end of every subjects priority list. The Revell Atlantic case, I repeat, has astounded everybody concerned. Believe me.

-- Luca Beato -

serious manufacturer, since it will fall to the end of every subjects priority list.

Welcome to r.m.s., master of humor. Why is it that russians and italians so often make pricelless statements when they write in english! Egad, wonderful!

often make pricelless statements when they write in english! Egad, wonderful!

I succeed in perceiving the depth of your thought, but my limited knowledge of English doesn't allow me to appreciate it in its most interesting shades. Could you kindly develop a plain explanation for a simpleton like me? ;-) Was it because of the "did you ever considering scratchbuilding" grammar mistake? Is this an English examination or a modellers' newsgroup? First, translate your remark in correct Italian, Russian and, while you are there, in Latin. Then, but only then, feel free to dispense such remarks. OK?

Happy new year.

-- Luca Beato -

night at it:

resculpting a new canopy for that ugly and disfigured C-123 and another for the Caravelle, not to mention the new greenhouses vacuformed for the S.51, the HUP-2 and the Huskie.

Please pass along to your brother my admiration for such a fine piece of work. I've never seen the kit in its raw state but that's excellent.

Bill Banaszak, MFE

often make pricelless statements when they write in english! Egad, wonderful!

English doesn't allow me to appreciate it in its most interesting shades.

there, in Latin. Then, but only then, feel free to dispense such remarks. OK?

No, no no! Now you completely misunderstood!! Happy New Year :-) I mean, your remarks are perfect, and very humorous. No mistake. I have several friends from Russia, and a few from Italy, who teach me sometimes sayings from their language, and they are hilarious. I never heard such good remarks in english to describe such situations. So I think probably your ability to make fitting statements as I commented on comes from Italian custom, and greatly adds to our english expressions. Well done, and please don't misconstrue my heartfelt compliment for sarcasm :-(

BTW, I enjoyed greatly your relative's Do 26 photos.

Regards, Gernot

PS I do not indulge in criticism if at all possible, nor politics. This is strictly my hobby :-) If you are interested, I discuss often with Dott. Piergiorgio about Regia Marina ships (he and I have common interest in Italian and Japanese ships) on sci.military.naval.

Done. Thanks from him. I saw the model while under construction. He vacuformed the canopy using the kit's part as a master. IIRC the worst flaw was the smallpox-disfigured overall surface, probably not so serious for camouflaged aircraft but the Lufthansa satin silver livery asked for a flush and smooth finish. He used many coats of automotive spray filler and a lot of #800 wet sandpaper to fix it. Decals were made with an Alps printer.

-- Luca Beato -

Please have my public apologies for the misunderstanding and even more for my inopportune reaction. I didn't intend to be particularly humorous about the Mach2 kits, so I draw a wrong and biased conclusion from your brief message. I am really sorry and, I must admit, rather ashamed.

I pass you his thanks for the appreciation.

Marina ships (he and

You mean Piergiorgio D'Errico? He also attends like me to it.cultura.storia.militare. Piergiorgio is one of the most learned, informed and steady participants. I point it out, since there is plenty of samples of the sarcasm you told, there, together with flames and arguments, due to those still lined up with the two parts opposed in Italy during the second world war.

I would like to contact you off board. Is your email correct or an anti-spam trap?

-- Luca Beato -

Hi Luca,

No worries, mate, good to make friends >>If you are interested, I discuss often with Dott. Piergiorgio about Regia

Marina ships (he and

it.cultura.storia.militare.

Indeed, the same.

there, together with flames and arguments, due to those still lined up with the two parts opposed in Italy during the second world war.

I am not surprised, this problem is not likely to be gotten over easily.

Well, here it is: snipped-for-privacy@kurasc.kyoto-u.ac.jp

Today I enjoy a hatsu-gama o-cha-kai, or first opening of tea for the eyar ceremony in Kyoto. Will be back tonight. All the best,

Gernot

Interesting point. May I ask you this? Imagine you had paid your cash for an article purporting to be a car. When the showroom delivered it, the panels didn't line up, the paint was spotty, and the wheels were out of round. Would you be happy? Especially when I said "Stop whining and start driving"......? I think not. I am a practising professional photographer. If I told my clients that, yes, the photographs are out of focus, but hey, I'm doing my best, would I get paid? I think we are applying variable standards here, and to my mind this is not acceptable. I accept that we cannot expect everything up t Tamigawa standards, but they set the level to aspire to, and if you are too far below you should expect a kicking. I wouldn't dream of setting out asd, say, a landscape painter until I had achieved what I consider to be an acceptable quality. Perhaps my vision of acceptable is way different to yours, but I think you get my point. N

There are many photographers that can focus a camera well enough to get decent pictures. From the professional, one demands even more precision, as well as an understanding of composition, context and the limitations and advantages of the medium. Even so, there are, relatively speaking, many professionals or talented amateurs who will generate photographs with which even a demanding layman can be pleased. If, on the other hand, you are producing a historical book that needs to include photos of a long-extinct aircraft, you may be forced to accept substandard quality in order to adequately illustrate the work.

My point is that Mach 2 tends to provide subjects that are available by no other producer of kits, or not available in the particular mark or scale. I do not consider that a license to squirt out hideously-shaped lumps of plastic (the Merlin standard); I am very hesitant to buy Mach 2 and will only go out on a limb for a subject of great importance to me. OTOH, I will not buy Merlin at all, even where they purport to offer a subject with no available alternative (viz the DH 90 Dragonfly, for which the only alternative is a demanding and long OOP Airframe vac). As I have commented, there are defects in Mach 2 kits that transcend limited-run machinery and the other economics of small-company kit production. They have thus far been defects I find easier to work around than building the model from scratch or even from an available vacuform, though the latter can be an acceptable alternative for me. I feel justified to criticize Mach 2 by having built one of their kits and having seen the travails of others, but at least some of these kits are in fact buildable, and for the person who wants the subject in question, they may be a satisfactory choice.

Recognize too that this is a balancing of hobby needs, not an everyday life issue. No matter the mark or style, I would never consider an automobile built to the same standard as a Mach 2 kit. There is in fact a basis for the variable standard being applied. For some of us, perhaps the quality of kits is more important than the specific subject, or perhaps there is a quality minimum (Huma? Academy? MPM? Rareplanes?) below which we will not willingly descend. My advice remains the same--caveat emptor.

Mark Schynert