Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Alpharius wrote:
This is the P&M forum.

This is, ostensibly, a thread about someone's Xiphon Interceptor?

Perhaps the other topics should go in their own thread, somewhere else, now?

Agreed. I'm out of this one - please PM me if you'd like to continue the discussion.

Ok, well regardless of all that other stuff I think it looks pretty good.

I'm not sure how the top fin is attached, but if I were building it I'd consider turning that around too. It would match the wings and give it a sleeker look.

 privateer4hire wrote:
Looks cool. Starbuck and Apollo would be proud

This. But snap off the tail fin and flip it around to match

I think that looks pretty ace! (p.s. I can tell it isn't forgeworld because it isn't all warped and defective)

Honestly, it doesn't even look good. The control surfaces on the wings are now at the front and you haven't done anything about it, so it just looks like a model with some parts glued on incorrectly. Perhaps if you did some conversion work to make the wings look right and painted your model (after all, how can you call it "finished" when you haven't even attempted to paint it?) it would look better, but as-is it needs some work.

 Scott-S6 wrote:
It also doesn't hurt to make it clear to anyone seeing this thread that any FW models for sale that are that colour are obvious and blatant recasts.

(For those that don't know, FW models are all grey except for the scenery tiles which are black. Any cream, beige, etc. FW models are 100% recast.)

This is false. I have bought models directly from FW that were cream coloured. I don't know how often they use cream coloured models because I don't buy a huge amount of FW, but absolutely positively I've got some cream coloured FW models.

Good way to destroy someone's PM thread. The wings look great backwards, and it looks like a decent kit.

Thanks Alpharius for trying to steer the ship right, this guy probably won't even comment on his own thread now due to this backlash. Also, Peregrine, I'd PM you but, the mod already did the warning and we're DCMs. We're supposed to be better members of dakka than this. (That's not to say I support recasts or am against your stance but, at this point we know better dude, c'mon.)

 Peregrine wrote:
Honestly, it doesn't even look good. The control surfaces on the wings are now at the front and you haven't done anything about it, so it just looks like a model with some parts glued on incorrectly. Perhaps if you did some conversion work to make the wings look right and painted your model (after all, how can you call it "finished" when you haven't even attempted to paint it?) it would look better, but as-is it needs some work.

It's not unusual for the leading edge to be a separate singular panel like that, basically just need to shave off the hinges and it's fine.

I think 40k aircraft can get away without conventional control surfaces gives, ya know, they get away without aerodynamic wings.

Many aircraft actually DO have control surfaces on the leading edge of the wings - called slats (but they generally also have the major surfaces on the trailing edge).

I'd ADD a second lot of hinges to the trailing edge and maybe scribe out some panel lines for those surfaces - but overall, it's not a bad mistake to make. It's not like 40k aircraft stay up because of aerodynamic forces, anyway.

There's a bunch of really ugly aircraft in FW's catalogue - but this with some work doesn't have to be one of them. Painting it will also help.

I was going to mention leading edge slats but decided not to because they're usually not "control surfaces" in the sense they themselves aren't providing the force to give control, rather they work in concert with the flaps and ailerons to stop the wing stalling at high angle of attack.

One of my favourite aircraft that utilises LE slats is the Bf109, they deployed automatically when pulling a tight turn so that ailerons wouldn't stall and the pilot still had good roll control even at very large pitch rates.

But really it's no big deal not to have control surfaces at all on a 40k aircraft. Just remove the hinges and it'll look like the LE is made from a large separate panel (which is often how you design a wing anyway).

Hinges like on 40k aircraft are silly anyway, you always avoid having exposed hinges on a wing especially the ugly box type hinges that you see on 40k aircraft. Usually if you see exposed stuff on a control surface it's a mass counter balance rather than the hinge itself.

Just thinking on the idea of trailing edge control surfaces, if you have some plasticard in a decent thickness, there's an extension at the root and the tip of the wing, you could simply fit in the extra and set it so it blends and shows a control surface.

That said, it's a real nice piece of work. Looking forward to seeing the paint on it.

 Scott-S6 wrote:
It also doesn't hurt to make it clear to anyone seeing this thread that any FW models for sale that are that colour are obvious and blatant recasts.

(For those that don't know, FW models are all grey except for the scenery tiles which are black. Any cream, beige, etc. FW models are 100% recast.)

Not exactly.
Pre 2013, some legit kits have cream or white coloured parts, such as vehicle canopies, the body of the bio titan, and small high detail items.

If the entire kit isn't grey, then yes it's most likely fake.

Just saying for future ref so people don't freak out buying an OOP model with cream parts.

Thanks for all the tips and feedback everyone! I think I'll keep them on this way and do a few fixes as suggested.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
Honestly, it doesn't even look good. The control surfaces on the wings are now at the front and you haven't done anything about it, so it just looks like a model with some parts glued on incorrectly. Perhaps if you did some conversion work to make the wings look right and painted your model (after all, how can you call it "finished" when you haven't even attempted to paint it?) it would look better, but as-is it needs some work.

When I said finished, I meant finished building. I thought that would be quite obvious due to it not even being primed yet and me talking about glueing parts on backwards =P After all, this the painting & MODELLING section right? I wouldn't start painting a model if I was thinking about re-glueing or converting it in some way. Thanks for the feedback though (even if a bit negative).

Noctem wrote:
Thanks for all the tips and feedback everyone! I think I'll keep them on this way and do a few fixes as suggested.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
Honestly, it doesn't even look good. The control surfaces on the wings are now at the front and you haven't done anything about it, so it just looks like a model with some parts glued on incorrectly. Perhaps if you did some conversion work to make the wings look right and painted your model (after all, how can you call it "finished" when you haven't even attempted to paint it?) it would look better, but as-is it needs some work.

When I said finished, I meant finished building. I thought that would be quite obvious due to it not even being primed yet and me talking about glueing parts on backwards =P After all, this the painting & MODELLING section right? I wouldn't start painting a model if I was thinking about re-glueing or converting it in some way. Thanks for the feedback though (even if a bit negative).

If it was finished, it'd go into a different damn section of the forums anyways so you are fine sir, so the argument is moot anyways from that stance. Update us when you paint it.