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.

kronk wrote:

 pretre wrote:


First and third are FW. Second is from WD.
Cockpit looks different.

1. Your order is incorrect. 1 is WD, 2 and 3 are FW.
.

Snrub wrote:
Pretre, Don't you mean 1st is wd 2nd is fw?

You both pass the test.

Test. Sure...

 Pox Apostle wrote:
The cockpit does look different. Damn, if they actually release a plastic Thunderhawk I'll have to jump back into getting my vanilla marines in a playable state again... Ugh, between my Death Guard, re-vamping my Tau, and now this I'm so going to be broke this year.

I don't see how the cockpit looks different? Even the rivets are in the same place.

I'm with Just Dave. Until I buy one at my FLGS and tuck it safely in my Unicorn's saddle bags for my ride home to Wonderland, I won't believe it.

 pretre wrote:




1 is WD, 2 and 3 are FW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cockpit looks different.

The barrels appear to be different to me, maybe a difference of armaments IE one is a Thunderhawk Battle-Cannon and the other is a Turbo Laser Destructor? The WD has protruding edges along the outside of the barrel, while the FW was notches along the exit of the barrel itself.

If they do make plastic Thunderhawks, I'll be likely picking up two, I'd be hard pressed not to paint up my main marine force due to these things.

 Garuss Acine wrote:
The barrels appear to be different to me, maybe a difference of armaments IE one is a Thunderhawk Battle-Cannon and the other is a Turbo Laser Destructor? The WD has protruding edges along the outside of the barrel, while the FW was notches along the exit of the barrel itself.

If they do make plastic Thunderhawks, I'll be likely picking up two, I'd be hard pressed not to paint up my main marine force due to these things.

If you look at the forgeworld thunderhawk (in spoiler); the gun appears to be very similar. The barrel opening on the GW picture appears larger, but otherwise they look the same IMHO, although it's hard to make out. You can see the same 'ridge'/cylinder on the top-left of the cannon, and the same square-shaped indent to the top left of the barrel, too.
So yeah, different armament to the Space Wolf 'hawk, same as the FW catalogue one.

Uuh, perhaps an aeronautica/epic scaled thunderhawk doesn't make for the best comparison pic?

 Bolognesus wrote:
Uuh, perhaps an aeronautica/epic scaled thunderhawk doesn't make for the best comparison pic?

Good point!

IMO there are only two things that look like they may be possibly different between the fw and the wd models.

The white dwarf model looks like the cockpit is at a sharper angle, this could be due to the angle of the picture.

The engines on the wings also look to be closer t the fuselage of the craft in the white dwarf picture.

Both of these could purely be because of the angles of the pictures given

Here a Thunderhawk with less decoration by Dakka member Gareth:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/482565.page


It is absolute identical to the one shown. And the last page isn't used as an announcement page anymore, just to hide true releases (GW's anti-marketing to keep sales artificially low). Otherwise we would already have a White Scars Codex

That one looks reaaaaally similar. Thanks, KH!

Well there goes my hope for a plastic thunderhawk and GW's money...

 kronk wrote:
I'm with Just Dave. Until I buy one at my FLGS and tuck it safely in my Unicorn's saddle bags for my ride home to Wonderland, I won't believe it.

Sadly, even at the Wonderland GW store this plastic model will set you back at least $150

You're optimistic aren't you Manchu?

I'm think at least 180 maybe 200 hunge for a thawk.

 Snrub wrote:
You're optimistic aren't you Manchu?

I'm think at least 180 maybe 200 hunge for a thawk.

Swoosh, right over your head.

He was being silly. (Replying to someone talking about Unicorns and he referenced the 'Wonderland' GW store.)

 Commander Cain wrote:
Well there goes my hope for a plastic thunderhawk and GW's money...

I dunno.

I had a resin Valkyrie, and if you did not know what precisely to look for--you'd think it was the same as the plastic kit.
Well, unless the owner did a shoddy job assembling it. Then you'd be able to spot it really easily.

 Manchu wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I'm with Just Dave. Until I buy one at my FLGS and tuck it safely in my Unicorn's saddle bags for my ride home to Wonderland, I won't believe it.

Sadly, even at the Wonderland GW store this plastic model will set you back at least $150

I would pay $150 USD for a Plastic Thunderhawk!

I have that in the other saddle bag!

 dienekes96 wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
Wow... my sympathy goes out to all you Eldar players. I don't understand why marines would be bumped in front of Eldar, the Space Marine codex is still perfectly playable. What a shame.

SInce RT it's been established the Eldar are a dying race, their power spent. Frankly it's time to fold them into the Tau codex as another also ran like the Vespids and Kroot.

Awesome troll. Loved it!

I know I feel guilty about it...

Looks exactly like my FW Thunderhawk except they have blacked out the canopy.

Daston wrote:
Looks exactly like my FW Thunderhawk except they have blacked out the canopy.

Out of curiosity, could you take a picture of a 3/4 view? I think I actually noticed something with the engines. It's probably just me being optimistic though.

Maybe I missed it, but one of the biggest differences I see that no-one is pointed it are the engines. On the FW model, the are a lot closer to the fuselage compared to the one in the WD photo.

Is it just blurriness, or are there less rivets around the cockpit on the WD pic?

 Firehead158 wrote:
Maybe I missed it, but one of the biggest differences I see that no-one is pointed it are the engines. On the FW model, the are a lot closer to the fuselage compared to the one in the WD photo.

Actually, I said there's something different with the engines right above you.

 Smitty wrote:

 Firehead158 wrote:
Maybe I missed it, but one of the biggest differences I see that no-one is pointed it are the engines. On the FW model, the are a lot closer to the fuselage compared to the one in the WD photo.

Actually, I said there's something different with the engines right above you.

Yup, I see it now

 Firehead158 wrote:
Maybe I missed it, but one of the biggest differences I see that no-one is pointed it are the engines. On the FW model, the are a lot closer to the fuselage compared to the one in the WD photo.

I think it just the angle of the picture.

Sadly cant get any new shots as its in a box ready for the house move next week.

Here are a lot of build shots though. The engines are not that close the fuselarge its just a trick of the camera I fear.

Bitchin' Thunderhawk, man! thanks for the pictures!

Maybe they are making the plastic thunderhawk for the Sisters

(After all they did make various crap looking new Marine flyers with no absolutely basis in fluff - in fact quite the opposite)

Hmm, last month pic on bakc was Nids, everyone thought ooo new nids.

This month, pic is of a thunderhawk, everyone thinks next month PLASTIC thunderhawk. Hmm, does anyone think that there WON'T be a new plastic thunderhawk, and if there was I would expect around the Baneblade price range, or even a bit more around £80-100.

When one does come out - I do think one will come out eventually, I just don't think that picture is it - I'd take a guess they'll price it at the same point as the Wall of Martyrs set. That sold out in days, yet was frikking expensive.