Tweet
~~I recently got my first Witty Wings Tristar which I think gives me a version in my collection of all the standard length Tristar moulds. There has been a lot of discussion about how poorly the L-1011 has been treated in 1:400 so I thought I'd investigate my moulds and produce a similar post to that which I recently did for the DC-9/MD80.
If you think this counts as nitpicking then please stop reading now!
I have 13 Tristars in my collection of which 11 are Tristar 1-250s. They are broken down by mould as follows:
7 Gemini Jets - ATA, BWIA (500), Court, Delta, Eastern, Hawaiian and PSA
3 Dragon Wings - Caledonian, Eastern, United (500)
2 Blue Box - ATA, TWA
1 Witty/AV400 - Saudia
That is also roughly the same order as the mould dates with the Gemini mould dating from at least 1999 and the Dragon 2000. For each mould I'll have a look at the nose and tail sections. Here are some examples of the real thing for comparison:
Gemini Jets (1999)
Nose - Generally this is a decent representation. The cockpit windows might be a bit large and the nose not quite round enough but it captures the Tristar's feel for me. The intake vent is too small also and unsurprisingly for an early mould the gear is simple and the attachment point not great. The seam at the wing joint is a bit much though. Still it's pretty good - 3.5/5
Gemini Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail - Early Geminis are plagued by seams and the Tristar mould is no different with two at the rear. The shape of the tail seems ok but the sculpting around the middle engine at the front sides doesn't look curvy enough to me. The exhaust is the worst part. It is clearly missing a bit and doesn't look like its fits the mould well plus the shape of what is there is wrong - 2/5.
Gemini Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
Dragon Wings (1999/2000)
Nose: Ok though not as good as the Gemini. The nosecone is too short and pointy and the grill by the nosegear too large. The gear themselves is a bit simplistic and doesn't fit well (though I admit in the photo it appears to be the wrong way round 0) On my Caledonian they've printed the cockpit windows too low too - 3/5
Dragon Wings Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail: No seams on such an early mould is commendable and generally the tail unit is great. The curves around no2 engine work well and the exhaust is fully complete (though the ends aren't quite right) - 4/5
Dragon Wings Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
Blue Box
Nose - A bit of a mess. The nosecone is clearly too short and blunt and it often looks like the cockpit windows are sliding down to meet it. It does have the best gear so far but that's to be expected given the age of the mould and the nosegear doors are still the wrong shape - 2/5
Blue Box Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail: Oh dear the no2 engine is slab sided almost and the mould has a weird tail/fuselage join line not present in the real thing. The exhaust is better and has a correct flat end above it but it doesn't quite fit to the nozzle properly - 2/5
Blue Box Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
Witty Wings / Aviation 400
Nose: Looks great to me though there is perhaps a bit of a forehead not helped by the nose wheel being slightly too small (a la Aeroclassics). Missing the scallop intake and the gear doors appear wrong again but overall commendable - 4/5
Witty Wings Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail: Graceful curves reproduce the real look very well. The exhaust looks good too though there isn't a flat end as there ought to be. - 4/5
Witty Wings Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
So in conclusion for me the recent Witty mould is a worthy contender and almost but not totally removes the need for Aeroclassics to enter the fray. Or at least it would if they used it a bit more than they have!
I am very happy with my Saudia L-1011 with my only other criticism of it being that perhaps the main gear is a fraction too short.
If you think this counts as nitpicking then please stop reading now!
I have 13 Tristars in my collection of which 11 are Tristar 1-250s. They are broken down by mould as follows:
7 Gemini Jets - ATA, BWIA (500), Court, Delta, Eastern, Hawaiian and PSA
3 Dragon Wings - Caledonian, Eastern, United (500)
2 Blue Box - ATA, TWA
1 Witty/AV400 - Saudia
That is also roughly the same order as the mould dates with the Gemini mould dating from at least 1999 and the Dragon 2000. For each mould I'll have a look at the nose and tail sections. Here are some examples of the real thing for comparison:
Gemini Jets (1999)
Nose - Generally this is a decent representation. The cockpit windows might be a bit large and the nose not quite round enough but it captures the Tristar's feel for me. The intake vent is too small also and unsurprisingly for an early mould the gear is simple and the attachment point not great. The seam at the wing joint is a bit much though. Still it's pretty good - 3.5/5
Gemini Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail - Early Geminis are plagued by seams and the Tristar mould is no different with two at the rear. The shape of the tail seems ok but the sculpting around the middle engine at the front sides doesn't look curvy enough to me. The exhaust is the worst part. It is clearly missing a bit and doesn't look like its fits the mould well plus the shape of what is there is wrong - 2/5.
Gemini Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
Dragon Wings (1999/2000)
Nose: Ok though not as good as the Gemini. The nosecone is too short and pointy and the grill by the nosegear too large. The gear themselves is a bit simplistic and doesn't fit well (though I admit in the photo it appears to be the wrong way round 0) On my Caledonian they've printed the cockpit windows too low too - 3/5
Dragon Wings Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail: No seams on such an early mould is commendable and generally the tail unit is great. The curves around no2 engine work well and the exhaust is fully complete (though the ends aren't quite right) - 4/5
Dragon Wings Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
Blue Box
Nose - A bit of a mess. The nosecone is clearly too short and blunt and it often looks like the cockpit windows are sliding down to meet it. It does have the best gear so far but that's to be expected given the age of the mould and the nosegear doors are still the wrong shape - 2/5
Blue Box Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail: Oh dear the no2 engine is slab sided almost and the mould has a weird tail/fuselage join line not present in the real thing. The exhaust is better and has a correct flat end above it but it doesn't quite fit to the nozzle properly - 2/5
Blue Box Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
Witty Wings / Aviation 400
Nose: Looks great to me though there is perhaps a bit of a forehead not helped by the nose wheel being slightly too small (a la Aeroclassics). Missing the scallop intake and the gear doors appear wrong again but overall commendable - 4/5
Witty Wings Mould Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Tail: Graceful curves reproduce the real look very well. The exhaust looks good too though there isn't a flat end as there ought to be. - 4/5
Witty Wings Mould Tail by rstretton, on Flickr
So in conclusion for me the recent Witty mould is a worthy contender and almost but not totally removes the need for Aeroclassics to enter the fray. Or at least it would if they used it a bit more than they have!
I am very happy with my Saudia L-1011 with my only other criticism of it being that perhaps the main gear is a fraction too short.
guys, don't forget on this forum you can like
Comment