Видео

@claudioliegeois4861 I don't know. I've read that JC wings doesn't do very well with their F-14s, but I've never owned one so I can't really speak on it.

​@@rpgiv3175OK, thank you 👍

I bought it from Grayland Station in Chicago, IL. I don't know if it's in-stock anymore.

@@rpgiv3175 oh ok

It's an obscure topic, I didn't expect it to be too popular either. Thanks for watching!

The link is in the description

@@804dallasmd good for you! It's a decent model

@@rpgiv3175 thanks!! 🙏

@@mrgeebers Yep, STS-109 and 107 were the only missions that Columbia flew after OMDP-2

@@luriakhsimahk4506 That one is bureau number 165667! It's going to be a while before HM releases it though

The left main gear looked fine to me. Might have been the wheel positioning

@@rpgiv3175 Definitely looks tilted at 8:13 , very nice model though. What do you think about the tires on the nose wheel being so far apart

@@samgt4 Good catch! I'm pretty sure that's a result of the rolling wheels though. They can sometimes get tilted like that. But the strut does look slightly angled. With regards to the nose tire spacing, I agree, they are somewhat far apart. They are not as bad as other 1/400 A320 family moulds though (don't get me started on how bad it is on the Gemini/JC wings mould. For me personally, given the size of these models, I can accept the spread on this model

@@rpgiv3175 Fair enough, still a nice model, enjoying the vids mate :)

I'm picking that one up too!

@jaimeaquino6088 I never would have thought of that, that makes sense now! Thank you!

@@nikolettwilson-ce2lj I've shown my face in quite a few of my videos already...

@@Mo_Aviation only danger here is the danger to my wallet!

@@rpgiv3175 Jc wings is heading to danger zone with the amount of qc issues

Considering your review, which model would you recommend, JC Wings or Hobby master?

@@manuelsb7086 Hobby master. It's much better than the JC wings version. I did a review on the hobby master version in November last year

@@rpgiv3175 oh thanks! I was waiting for JC wings because the hobbymaster has not the "Pit Mitchell" decal, for me it is a very big fail

@brendonnashca might have been a different model, these haven't been shipped out to retailers or distributors

@@AussieGunzel Collectors like you are exactly who I want to speak for in this video. It's a shame that the model was canceled. May those you knew rest in peace. We will never forget, nor will we stop looking.

@@aldricyong None of the 2 examples of this model I recieced had a pilot figure

@@rpgiv3175 alright thank you. Just recirved mine also without a pilot. But the instructions says it does come with a pilot 🤣

@@aldricyong I know, it's really stupid how they didn't include it. They usually do

@@sch1232011 yep, I got mine already. It's awful

@@rpgiv3175 where can i buy a 1/72 pilot figure? there is no pilot inside

@@sch1232011 Your best bet would be with Calibre Wings. They sell a set of Goose & Maverick pilot figures in 1/72 scale. Don't risk it though, I ordered a set a few months ago and never received my order. I know there are other pilot figures from different companies as well.

Tiny is an old brand that I have ever bought.. they focus on local Hong Kong vehicles such as Taxis, Buses, Trucks, and even shops. Maybe JC Wings wants to expand the factory using Tiny so that they can reduce the cost even cheaper, just like the Mini GT diecast car brand once experimented with making it in Bangladesh but failed

All is well though, the model stands tall and proud now!

I don't understand why it's a big deal the blades don't spin, I mean it's a static display model 🤷

Please forgive me for valuing the hard-earned money that I spend on the models that are advertised as "superior quality" and "highly collectible." I should tolerate any and all issues with the models I buy. That's basically what you're saying here. I understand where you're coming from though. Hobby Master and JC wings make excellent models (I own HM as well), but when it's obvious that there was little to no effort on ensuring "superior quality," something has to be done. Pointing out imperfections and inaccuracies (however small they may be) is what I do on this channel. I don't do it for the purpose of complaining. I do it to inform others about the products they buy. With all its issues and imperfections, JC wings did a decent job on this model. I don't say this often (or do anything to show it) but even with their imperfections, I am extremely grateful for every model in my collection, including this one. With regards to this model specifically, the gear issues I can fix no problem. I've done it before and like you said, sticky tack and super glue is my go-to. I know JC wings and most other manufacturers don't sell stands with their models. The reason I was surprised about this one is because all of the other 1/72 diecast models I own came with stands (HM and GeminiAces). Again, not a huge deal, I can and probably will buy a stand separately. I must say you have some nerve saying that this is a perfectly good model though. Either you didn't watch the video or you ignored most of it, but one issue I did find was that one of the flap hinges was the incorrect part (bottom of the wings, I covered it towards the end of the video). You can't really say that's not an issue, using the wrong part for something like that shows negligent QC. A few parts were broken as well (bent dorsal antenna, broken ELGTRs, broken sidewinder on another piece I own). If I'm paying $120+ usd for a scale model, it better be top quality as advertised. Simple as that (for me at least). Edit: extended the list of notable issues with the model

@@rpgiv3175 Forgive me I might have been a little too harsh, I come from having nothing and these diecast models are like owning gold to me so i see it as perfectly good, i understand some of the things you point out, I guess its a collecters thing, I know with mine its not cheap nor is it a cheap hobby but i value each of my models like they were gold no matter there imperfections so forgive me.