# Moebius Viper Mk. VII error?



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

I'm curious about the cockpit part on the Viper MK.VII

I got to see a test shot a few months ago and noticed that the control panel was off center to the left and the controls were missing on the left side as well.

I was assuming that all of this was going to be corrected for production.
However, aside from filling in a gap, nothing was corrected.

I was wondering if anyone else noticed this or is my info faulty?


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

No - your info is not faulty.

Shameless self-promotion: the ParaGrafix PE set corrects this.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Error? Error? Examine please.... You are faulty and imperfect! Jackson Roy Kirk, you mistook me for him.... You made one error! You didn't discover your mistake: You made two errors! You didn't correct by sterilization. You made three errors! Carry Out Your Primary Function!

Captain your logic was impeccable. We are in grave danger....

Faulty?!!!! Must exterminate imperfection.....


----------



## ryoga (Oct 6, 2009)

I wouldn't use the term "faulty" as that was the initial design done for the kit. The cockpit tub is indeed done that way, simplified and easy so anyone who wish to build her can do so (remember, not everyone are pros with scale modeling). 

Of course if you feel up to the advance level, I say go for Paragrafix's cockpit PE set. I got mine and they are FANTASTIC. Details galore and I do believe very accurate. Painting the control panels .. HA, that's the challenge


----------



## RedHeadKevin (May 1, 2009)

There's also an error on the wings. If you look at the box art, the upper surface of the wings appears to have slits or vents along the "step" of the wing surface. Moebius added some weird structure here. IT's not a tough fix with a Dremel, and the vents look great opened up!


----------



## miniature sun (May 1, 2005)

ryoga said:


> I wouldn't use the term "faulty" as that was the initial design done for the kit. The cockpit tub is indeed done that way, simplified and easy so anyone who wish to build her can do so (remember, not everyone are pros with scale modeling)


I'd agree. What you get with most kits is a basic accurate shape with enough detail that it looks right to most people.
The biggest kick for me is having the kit in the first place so that I can then add detail to suit myself.
Describing missing detail as errors is misleading. Remember that it's not that long ago that manufacturers were giving us kits with no cockpits and solid plastic windows.
I think Moebius and the other new companies should be congratulated on simply getting the products out.
It's up to us to go nuts with the finer details.


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

I checked on this -- apparently, the hole is there on purpose to accomodate the "inflexible" pilot. Basically so you can get the pilot in and out. The pilot is styrene, and rigid, so it would cause a problem...

And it's easy enough to make the LH "armrest" gauge-wall from strip styrene if you want one, but it might be kind of tight getting the pilot back out again!

--Henry


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

miniature sun said:


> I'd agree. What you get with most kits is a basic accurate shape with enough detail that it looks right to most people.
> The biggest kick for me is having the kit in the first place so that I can then add detail to suit myself.
> Describing missing detail as errors is misleading. Remember that it's not that long ago that manufacturers were giving us kits with no cockpits and solid plastic windows.
> I think Moebius and the other new companies should be congratulated on simply getting the products out.
> It's up to us to go nuts with the finer details.


At the risk of getting flamed or having my post deleted, I have to say that I couldn't disagree with this more. As mentioned in previous posts, the cockpit is completely wrong as are the plate-like structures on the wing tops. There's actually quite a bit wrong with this kit: 
a) the frame for the canopy is molded into the fuselage and is not properly shaped, requiring major surgery if you want to show it opened/correct.
b) the pilot's seat is incorrect, especially the headrest. 
c) the cannon housings molded on the wings are wrong, too wide with incorrect details. 
d) the decals, while giving you a choice of pilot names, doesn't include the aircraft id numbers to go with them.
e) instructions fail to mention which of the pilot names go with the (2) aircraft id numbers given.
f) the attachment of the lower fuselage/wing to the upper fuselage/wing creates a seam that cuts through the panel lines, requiring some serious putty work.
g) the grill for the bottom fuselage intake has no detail, it should be a grill, like the front fuselage intake part.
h) the pilot is not nearly as well detailed as the resin one that comes with the Mk II.
There might be other errors I missed, but you get the point. While some people like the "challenge" of fixing kit errors, I don't, and I'm willing to bet I'm not alone in this. You say that we should be happy with the cockpit given since "it's not that long ago that manufacturers were giving us kits with no cockpits and solid plastic windows". When was this, 30 years ago? Any modern kit of an aircraft/space plane comes with cockpits/clear canopies and buyers expect this. They also expect a certain level of accuracy. Heck, the photos on the box clearly show how the ship should look, too bad no one at Moebius bothered to check. I'm not content with Moebius "simply getting the products out", I've seen them to better and expect each of their kits to be better then the next. Seems like their going backwards as the Mk II kit was better all around. Also tired of this, "We'll just give them basic details (i.e. cockpit) and let the aftermarket pick up the slack." attitude. Sorry, but some of us can't afford to plunk down another $30 for aftermarket photoetch since we just spent the same amount on the kit. While the Mk II kit had a few issues, at least it didn't require aftermarket parts or major scratch-building to fix.
I understand that some of you like to "go nuts with the finer details", but a lot of us don't. And there is no excuse for the kinds of errors/omissions in a modern day kit like the Mk VII. I assume that Moebius is trying to save money and keep the kit at a certain price point, but in doing so, they've produced a kit that, while nice in many ways, falls short of what it could have been.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

the canopy isn't a separate piece? That's....odd. In this day and age, that design choice seems very much a throwback.

I can't speak to the rest of the 'rivet counter' errors. If any of them are actually differences between 'real' prop detail and the CGI models, who can say which is correct?


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

Well, you know what they say. You can't please everyone every time. If they had spent more money making a more accurate cockpit, would you have been so willing to pay, say, ten dollars more for the kit? And even if you were, would everyone else?

I think you get a decent kit for the price. That's what matters, especially in this economy. 

Obviously, you're not happy. I would suggest that in the future, you wait to purchase your kits to see photos and read comments about a kit before you shell out your cash. Make your purchasing decisions at that point after you have had an opportunity to hear other opinions and see some photos. Sitting here complaining and nitpicking about a 3/4" cockpit won't do a thing for anyone. 

If you really expect perfection, the price would be too high to justify mass-production. I think in the long run, you're going to either have to settle for what is available or pass on it. The bulk of the people out there would not want to pay more for this kit than they have to.

Personally, I think the kit is very excellent, the hull is nicer than what you got on the MK II, it goes together VERY well, it's affordable, and it generally looks very much like what I saw on TV. And that's what the goal is! What's not to like?

--Henry


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

Steve H said:


> the canopy isn't a separate piece? That's....odd. In this day and age, that design choice seems very much a throwback.
> 
> I can't speak to the rest of the 'rivet counter' errors. If any of them are actually differences between 'real' prop detail and the CGI models, who can say which is correct?


The canopy is a separate piece. There just is no way to stick it in the "open" position. 

--Henry


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

g_xii said:


> The canopy is a separate piece. There just is no way to stick it in the "open" position.
> 
> --Henry


I stand corrected. I'm just not a nu-BSG fan so the different Vipers get all jumbled. 

The Mk. VII has the full bubble like a F-16, right? So the issue is that the lower part, the frame, the interface is molded to the body, not a separate piece?

That still seems odd for an 'aircraft' kit in this day and age. I mean, snap kits for the kids, small scale aircraft, sure, you're lucky to get a clear canopy. 

Ah well. I'm an 'old' Viper guy at heart I guess, even given how rough THAT kit is...


----------



## ryoga (Oct 6, 2009)

Interesting observation there Spock62. I'll need to check the kit again against the reference materials I have to see those discrepancies. And I do believe MiniatureSun was refering to the fact that it is better to have a plastic model kit of the MKVII in that basic form cause then one can always modify/upgrade/accurate her in any way they deem fit. The potential are endless.

I myself am quite happy with the kit though I hear you abt getting a kit that is accurate to the tee. It has always been my believe that this is what separates the scale modelers from the builders.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

To clarify: the canopy itself is a separate piece, but the frame is molded into the fuselage. This means that without cutting the frame from the fuselage there is no way to *accurately* display the canopy open.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Spock - perfectly valid criticisms. I'm disappointed with the cockpit too.
I'm just going to pretend the fuselage separation joint on the wing undersides IS a panel line :lol:.

g_xii - too harsh, man. Dissenting viewpoints and consrtuctive criticism should be welcomed, not squelched. We've all bought models we were excited about until we opened the box. Moebius' 2001 Orion comes to mind as well. Discussion boards are for discussion, not just praise.


----------



## miniature sun (May 1, 2005)

I concur that we should be discussing these points and am happy to agree to disagree.
From my end I think Moebius have done their best to deliver a reasonably detailed kit at a reasonable price (for the US market at least).
In any kit you will have compromises to make it economically viable to produce. Sure, aircraft modellers have got used to opening canopies and ultrafine details but the fact is that a single kit of an F14 or Me109 will probably sell in bigger numbers than all of Moebius's inventory combined. These big numbers are used to offset the cost of the tooling. Also most SF subjects are a one shot deal whereas an F14 can be reissued in multiple versions.
Just to put the price into perspective, Megahobby are selling the MkVII for $23.69 which translates to £14.43, however we in the UK are being charged £32.95 which is $54.00.
The Galactica itself is even worse...Megahobby $35.54 = £21.64....UK price £51.95 = $85.25!
Needless to say I buy most of my kits from the states, but from the point of view of their domestic market I'd say that Moebius are delivering good quality kits at a reasonable price.
Canopy aside, to the other specific points raised about the details on the kit:

I think the kit seat could be easily made to look more like the actual one with very little effort.

The cannons look good enough to my eyes compared to the ones I've seen and remember there may be variations between the full size prop and the CGI references that I assume were used to design the kit.

I can't comment on the decals as my sample came without them.

I agree that the underwing seam cuts across panel lines and ideally this might have been better done however, given the fact that the rest of the parting lines are so well hidden, I wonder if this was done for technical reasons due to moulding limitations. Besides, with care it really isn't that difficult to disguise and there will be many many builders out there who won't be bothered by the seam anyway.

I don't understand the issue with the grille as the one on the test shot _was_ detailed...

I thought the pilot was fine and a lot easier to work than the resin one, especially the options of gender and also the positionable head.

Finally, if you take into account where we are now (regular releases of highly detailed genre kits, aftermarket parts for those that want them, a vibrant SF model scene) as opposed to where we were maybe fifteen years ago (poorly moulded toy-like kits limited to current movie tie-ins, no aftermarket, market dominated by expensive limited-run resin) then I don't think there's a lot to complain about.


----------



## ryoga (Oct 6, 2009)

Paulbo said:


> To clarify: the canopy itself is a separate piece, but the frame is molded into the fuselage. This means that without cutting the frame from the fuselage there is no way to *accurately* display the canopy open.


Hmmmm ... do I sense a PE set II for this kit is on its way?  Put me down for 5 units please


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

John P said:


> g_xii - too harsh, man. Dissenting viewpoints and consrtuctive criticism should be welcomed, not squelched. We've all bought models we were excited about until we opened the box. Moebius' 2001 Orion comes to mind as well. Discussion boards are for discussion, not just praise.


No, John, not too harsh. Too harsh is a huge punch-list about how NOT perfect a $30 kit is. If anyone is going to be this nit-picky about perfection, then of course the most sensible thing to do would be to wait until the model is out and they have had an opportunity to check photos, reviews, comments, etc. Reviews on model kits come pretty quickly after the kit's release, and if it save you money or keeps you from having an online fit, then by all means do this!

Dissenting viewpoints and constructive criticism are welcome here -- and you don't need to point this out to me. However, I think some folks here are just borderline vitriolic in their attempts at "constructive criticism" and there is just no need for it. Combined with the facts regarding today's economy, look what you DO get for $30 bucks. You can't even buy ten gallons of gas for that price anymore!

I've seen your builds -- and you almost never build anything "right out of the box" but rather look for the challenges and various different ways you can make your buildup unique, thus inspiring other builders to do this as well. I try to look at ALL model kits this way, although nothing I ever build is likely to inspire anyone! That said, I have to also say that I just get tired of EVERY TIME A KIT COMES OUT, somebody has to nit-pick it to death. If I was Moebius, I'd just start making model cars or something that would be low risk and would SELL (and SELL WELL!). Moebius takes a big financial risk every time they let a kit like the MK VII out of the starting gate, as I'm sure you already know.

The sad thing is, last night before reading all this on Hobbytalk I was actually looking at the kit, thinking what a nice job Moebius did, and what I was going to do to it when I got around to building it. Then I get on here, and find some whining posts and I gotta tell you, it just kills my enthusiasm. Should the people that whine and complain actually sink some of their OWN cash in a venture like this, I'd have a little more respect for them. But as a consumer, on a consumer level, going online, bravely and anonymously hiding behind a keyboard with an "assumed name" and berating even a half decent kit is just absurd. No, it's worse than absurd. It's a joke. Tell me -- Why do you think all the manufactures have abandoned us here? I'll tell you: THEY GOT TIRED OF THE WHINING. Can you really blame them?

And you know what? I don't want to read it anymore, either. I'm tired of it. Either look at it, figure out the challenges, and work around it (like a REAL model builder / craftsman does) or go tell your mom. I mean, at some point in time, someone had to actually design and scratch build all of these subjects that eventually end up being consumer-grade model kits. The industry pays these people thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not more!) to build them up. What we get is a CONSUMER LEVEL PRODUCT. It does not come with lights, laser beams, or any of the other stuff. It can function as a starting point for the advanced modeler, or it can function as an all-inclusive package for the beginner. What's hard to see about that? More importantly, it seems like a very fair thing to do.

Now, if you're dealing with Jim Keys or Simon Mercs, and paying $100,000.00 and up for a model prop, then you are much more entitled to perfection. But don't expect perfection from a $30 model kit! The whole idea is absurd. Either one of the above mentioned guys would laugh in your faces.

Let's all try to be a bit more adult, realistic and understanding here. If we can't, I'm going to talk to Hank about a "no whining" rule that I would really, really like having around. It would save me hours of typing ...

--Henry


----------



## Just Plain Al (Sep 7, 1999)

Well Henry, since it's your forum, you can have a no whining rule if you want. It'll be awful quiet in here though


----------



## sunburn800 (Nov 24, 2006)

Tell me this is a joke, I thought this was a discussion board not a do it my way or i'm going to change the rules.


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

Just Plain Al said:


> Well Henry, since it's your forum, you can have a no whining rule if you want. It'll be awful quiet in here though


Funny guy!


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

sunburn800 said:


> Tell me this is a joke, I thought this was a discussion board not a do it my way or i'm going to change the rules.


What rules are you referring to?

--Henry


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

The "no whining rule" you're planning, herr kommandant!


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

John P said:


> The "no whining rule" you're planning, herr kommandant!


Oh... I really should have posted about that in the WISH LIST / SUGGESTIONS section. Very inappropriate of me, Sir.

Sorry....

--H


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

IIRC the actual CGI files were used to base the kit masters with. Some detail which appears missing (slot vents and grills) might have been applied as texture maps instead of actually modelled into the mesh. It is also possible the simplified cockpit was what the CGI model used- minimal modelled to keep the data low and the rest with texture maps.
Not positive, but I do remember soemthing like that when the Viper Mk2 was produced and was missing some details like the position thrusters...


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

First, I appreciate those of you that have taken my criticisms for what they are, a critique of the kit, nothing more, nothing less. I do think, overall, that the kit looks "the part" and I'm happy that a styrene kit is finally available. But, the fact is, whither you want to admit it or not, the Mk VII kit is flawed. There is no excuse for not providing a complete, accurate cockpit, for getting obvious details wrong or for incomplete decals and decal placement instructions. Maybe we excepted this back in the '60's - '80's, but not in 2011. Now to answer some specific comments:

miniature sun:
First, a correction, the grille piece I mentioned (part #31), DOES have grill detail on it. Blame my poor vision for not noticing this, the piece is fine, my bad! Anyway, I really don't want to get into a discussion about the cost of producing kits since I know nothing of this. I do understand that cost is a factor, having mentioned so in my original post. Yes, overall the kits Moebius produces are of good quality and the prices are reasonable given the companies size, subjects being modeled, etc.. But it doesn't explain why, with their Mk II kit, they were able to give you some of what the Mk VII kit lacks (reasonably accurate cockpit, accurate overall details, complete decals) for the same price. Have costs gone up that much, that Moebius had to "dumb down" some aspects of this kit compared to the Mk II? Maybe, but I'm not convinced. As for making the included parts look more like the original, that's fine for those that are into that sort of thing, I'm not and it's not really the point. We should except a kit, produced in 2011 from CGI files, to be accurate. This one is not in some major areas. And being appreciative of how far this genre of kits and the supporting aftermarket has come, is not an excuse to give companies a "pass" when they produce kits that have errors/omissions. I understand that EVERY kit has flaws, some flaws can be overlooked, others can not. In other words, having only (2) aircraft i.d. numbers instead of the (6) required is something, that while annoying, I can live with. On the other hand, a cockpit that has a skewed to the left IP, missing left hand console, no side wall details/decals, seat that is totally wrong and serves as little more then a place to put the pilot figure is something I can't live with. 

Henry:
I understand that you moderate this board and that you also make aftermarket products for Moebius (and other companies). Doesn't that last part make you a bit biased towards Moebius? You obviously don't want to, and don't want others to, say anything negative about the company, right? After all, isn't that like biting the hand that feeds you? So, in light of this, are your opinions regarding the Mk VII kit, or any Moebius kit for that matter, valid? Think about it. 
But, to answer your post: 
a) who's to say the cost of the kit would have increased if an accurate cockpit had been included. Like I mentioned, the Mk II has a good cockpit and it costs the same as the Mk VII kit.
b) Yes, I think, overall, the kit is decent. But it could have been great.
c) Actually, I had known about the cockpit/wing seam issue due to past posts on this board. But, I couldn't tell that the IP was skewed to the left from the photos I saw, and hadn't heard that, or the other issues, mentioned. I figured that maybe I could fix up the cockpit with sheet plastic, didn't realize till after I saw the kit how difficult that would be. The photo etch cockpit is the way to go, if you got/are willing to spend the cash. As for "complaining and nitpicking", well, how do other modelers find out the good and the bad of a kit if people like me don't comment on it? So, according to you, I should wait for others to make comments on the kit, good and bad, before buying it, but I shouldn't make comments on the kit, good and bad, since that "won't do a thing for anyone". This makes no sense.
d) You say that "perfection" in a kit (there is no such thing), would put the cost too high and that we "either have to settle for what is available or pass on it". And that is the problem, isn't it? Too many of you are willing to settle, just to get a kit of a favorite subject. Instead, how about holding Moebius accountable for the errors/omissions they make, not in a nasty, negative-to-be-negative way, but in a positive, constructive way. Maybe, we'll all get better kits from them.
Take this for example, when the Mk II kit came out, there were a couple of aspects of the kit that people didn't like. First, there were no boxed in landing gear wells, second, the thrust vector ports were represented by decals as opposed to being molded in. Well, Moebius apparently took those criticisms to heart and corrected both for the Mk VII kit. My point is being critical of a kit's short comings, if done with respect, often lead to better models from a company. Having met Frank, he strikes me as the kind of guy who does care and wants to do better with each kit, that's why it's disappointing to me to see them (Moebius) taking a 2 steps forward and one step back with this kit.

I had hoped that my comments would do (2) things, a) inform other potential buyers of this kit of it's shortcomings and b) that Frank and company would take notice and make better kits for all of us. I'll praise the company when they deserve it, but I'm not going to kiss their collective butts just for the sake of doing so.

Well, just as I finished typing this, I saw Henry's latest post. Don't want to beat this issue to death, but I feel I have to respond to the following:

a) You posted: "But as a consumer, on a consumer level, going online, bravely and anonymously hiding behind a keyboard with an "assumed name" and berating even a half decent kit is just absurd. No, it's worse than absurd. It's a joke." 

While I am anonymous to you, Henry, and others on this board, I am not to Frank. As I stated, I met him and in fact worked for him, helping unload/load cartons of kits for an afternoon. He knows me and my real name. I'm not hiding anything. Of course, not everyone here has met him and there are very valid reasons for using an "assumed name", especially in this age of computer hacking/personal info theft. You shouldn't berate anyone for that.

b) I'm not suggesting that Moebius kit's should come with lights and laser beams or be as accurate as models costing hundreds, thousands more. But, I don't think it's too much to ask for Moebius to give us a kit that doesn't have the errors/omissions that I listed. Most are minor and I don't believe doing it right in the first place would have added cost to the kit. For instance, I wouldn't think showing the blaster wing housing correctly would cost anymore then showing them incorrectly. Including info in the instruction sheet that tells you which aircraft I.D. number goes with which pilot name shouldn't break the bank, right? And, like I previously stated, the Mk II has a mostly accurate cockpit, why not the Mk VII?

c) So, I've killed your enthusiasm to build the kit? Funny, but even though I think the kit is not all it should be, I'm still looking forward to building it a displaying it next to my Mk II. My opinion wasn't meant to "kill" your desire to build the kit nor anyone else's. You seem to like to demonize anyone that is critical (or as you say, whines) about a Moebius kit. 

Finally, it seems that you, Henry, don't like to hear criticism (or as you call it, whining) of any sort towards Moebius kits. But, like I've said in the beginning of this post, it's easy to understand your reaction (see beginning of post under Henry), it's just that I don't agree with it. And while you may be tired of people who post a criticism of a Moebius kit, I am more then tired of people like you who fell they have the right to ripe apart someone like myself, just because we say a negative comment about a kit. This from a moderator of the board. That, sir, is a joke.


----------



## ryoga (Oct 6, 2009)

Guys, may I remind everyone that its just a model kit? Its really not a big issue whether the kit is accurate or has a lot of discrepancies, afterall, a lot of us are already grateful there is even a plastic kit in 1/32 scale, as seen from the sales record. 

Its just not worth getting all steamed up over.

Spock62, thanks for highlighting some of these. Going to be fun for a few of us trying to figure out how to correct them. Sad to say, almost 98% of what's produced out there isn't accurate but even if they're build out of the box, they still look great. 

So .. peace everyone?


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

They seem to have forgotten to include cockpit instrument decal placement instructions .


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

Spock62 --

No, I'm not biased. And most of the products I produce are merely enhancements for what is already there. So if the kit is "near perfect" to "kinda close" it makes no difference whatsoever to me.

My issue is with people that get brave when they are online using an assumed name -- they tend to feel "invisible" and do not tend to be as responsible for their actions as people that use their real names are. It is not a complaint against the use of screen names, but the fact that using them seems to up the "immaturity level" of some users. I'm not talking about you, just in general. I was in no way implying that no one knows who you are.

People also tend to get a bit too caught up in things here, and that never bodes well. Your list, for instance, was over the top, and that I did have a problem with. I think you really HAVE to take costs into consideration. The MK II came out some time ago, and I can tell you prices in China have risen in the meantime because of the shrinking value of the US dollar. I think Frank is giving us the best he can with the money he feels comfortable investing in a given project. Again, with a little thought on your part I'm sure you would have come to this conclusion by yourself.

Additionally, unless you have personally gone through the grueling process of getting something (anything!) manufactured in China, spent the better part of a year circumventing the language and cultural barriers, merely trying to get your point across, then I submit you have no idea what you are talking about when you say things like "Instead, how about holding Moebius accountable for the errors/omissions they make, not in a nasty, negative-to-be-negative way, but in a positive, constructive way. Maybe, we'll all get better kits from them." That's a nice way of putting it. However, you did not put it that way in your first post. Pretty much all you did was complain. The only way to make better kits is to charge a LOT more money for them. I don't think Moebius is going to do that and lose the business they have with consumers now to satisfy a very small minority of people.

However, what we've lost here with the internet and these forums, is simple courtesy. You an I are beating a dead horse here between each other, and a lot of folks already flogged Polar Lights and Moebius so often and so thoroughly that they pretty much no longer contribute to the message board. I'm not so much as sticking up for them, but calling for a higher level of tolerance and a little bit of respect from the users of THIS forum. 

Now, if a kit has REAL problems, please tell everyone. Frankenstein's left hand issue type of stuff. But complaing about little details is just not going to do a thing, and will only serve to make the manufacturers feel pretty much unappreciated. If they feel their work is unappreciated, they will be concerned that it will not sell, which means we ALL LOSE OUT.

Your comments did not kill my enthusiasm for the model kit, just kind of soured it for the evening. 

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on these opinions and move on. It would serve you well, though, to give your posts a bit more thought before you hit "submit reply" in the future. 

--Henry


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

John P said:


> They seem to have forgotten to include cockpit instrument decal placement instructions .


Do you think you can figure it out or do you need some help with it? 

--Henry


----------



## miniature sun (May 1, 2005)

g_xii said:


> The only way to make better kits is to charge a LOT more money for them.


An example of this would be the FineMolds Y-Wing, a 1/72 kit that is near perfect but costs three times more than the new Viper. And bear in mind that FineMolds cut all their own tooling and, as far as I'm aware, run their own injection plant too which must significantly reduce their overheads.


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

miniature sun said:


> An example of this would be the FineMolds Y-Wing, a 1/72 kit that is near perfect but costs three times more than the new Viper. And bear in mind that FineMolds cut all their own tooling and, as far as I'm aware, run their own injection plant too which must significantly reduce their overheads.


Sounds about right....!!!

--H


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

I, personally, am glad to see a discussion like this that isn't devolving into a flame war as has happened recently on a different HT board and over at SSM.

To the point at hand - I agree with Richard that the cockpit was likely based on the CG model. For a static, unlit model that will be sitting on a shelf it should still be FnD for most modelers who won't be jamming their magnifiers up to the canopy.

Ryoga - are you trying to give me a heart attack?  I'll give it a look-see, but my guess is that I won't be doing a canopy frame. (Of course I thought that about many other projects that eventually came to pass.)


----------



## kenlee (Feb 11, 2010)

A simple solution to the seam on the underside of the model is to use either .010 or .015 square evergreen strip styrene glued into the seam. you can cut the strips to leave a gap where the panel lines cross. After it dries a day or so, sand down the strip and most of the seam line is gone. Then a minimum of putty work is needed to make the line disappear.


----------



## miniature sun (May 1, 2005)

I can't see a brass canopy frame being anything other than a nightmare to attach to the transparency.
I think a vacform/resin replacement might be the best solution.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

I've tried to give this post some more thought, so hopefully I don't piss anyone off. Look, I'm not going to continually rehash what was or was not said, how it came across or wither or not I addressed all points other people made or if people addressed all of mine. All of you can judge that for yourselves. What I will say is that my issues can be broken down into 2 points:

a) This kit (Viper Mk VII) has errors that I feel should have been addressed. Why they weren't (cost, communication problems w/China, etc.) is all conjecture, the fact is they weren't. Some are small errors, some aren't. A cockpit that looks almost nothing like either the full size prop or the CGI (you do see part of the cockpit in some photos, like on the box cover, and they seem to conform to the full size prop), is a big one, especially since you can see a lot of it through the canopy. You shouldn't have to hack/saw/buy aftermarket products to fix a newly released kit, IMHO. Frank and company can and has done better, hopefully they take these criticisms for what they are and produce better products. Wither they do or don't, for whatever reason, is up to them, it's their company after all. While it's great that aftermarket sets do exist, it would be nice if the kit didn't require them.

b) Seems that as long as you praise Moebius your welcomed with open arms here. If you dare to criticize them, watch out. Personally, I disagree with people who post comments along the line of "the kit has some accuracy problems, but so what, be grateful Moebius produced it at all". While some errors can be lived with, others aren't. But, as long as the majority gives the company a pass, they will have little incentive to better themselves, since they largely compete with themselves (who else makes styrene New Series Galactica kits). That's not saying Frank and company aren't trying to improve their products, just that the majority of their customers (if the some of the posts on this board are to be believed) don't seem to care one way or the other, they'll take whatever they can get. In the end, the majority get what they want, good or bad. 

As far as opinions expressed by me or others, I really feel that to suppress peoples opinions of Moebius kits, if said opinions are not "glowing", as long as they're not nasty or hurtful, is not the direction this forum should go. So, agree to disagree, sure, fine, whatever, time to move on....

Also, for what it's worth, I agree a vacuform canopy w/frame is a good choice. Would also love to see someone do a resin seat replacement. And Henry, differences aside, your decals are really well done (I own a couple of sets), would you consider doing a sheet for the Mk VII that contains cockpit view screens/warning labels, other aircraft I.D. #'s, etc.? I'm sure there'd be a market for something like this.


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

I'm working on cockpit decals right now, and will have them ready towards the end of the week. I did not even see the Moebius decals until this past week, and agree that we need some inexpensive supplemental decals for this particular kit.

I'm going to have to take some liberties with the decals as the actual shapes do not really conform, but they will be an improvement.

--Henry


----------



## miniature sun (May 1, 2005)

spock62 said:


> That's not saying Frank and company aren't trying to improve their products, just that the majority of their customers (if the some of the posts on this board are to be believed) don't seem to care one way or the other, they'll take whatever they can get.


I don't actually believe that the posts on here even relate to the majority of their customers.
I'm not sure what the initial production run of this kit is but I'd be surprised if much more than 10% of them sold to the likes of you and me. By far the majority will be sold to people who see the kit, buy it and build it without any real thought or care as to how accurate it is and are happy to have a model from their favourite TV show


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

g_xii said:


> I'm working on cockpit decals right now, and will have them ready towards the end of the week. I did not even see the Moebius decals until this past week, and agree that we need some inexpensive supplemental decals for this particular kit.
> 
> I'm going to have to take some liberties with the decals as the actual shapes do not really conform, but they will be an improvement.
> 
> --Henry


Sounds good, let us know when their ready.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

miniature sun said:


> I don't actually believe that the posts on here even relate to the majority of their customers.
> I'm not sure what the initial production run of this kit is but I'd be surprised if much more than 10% of them sold to the likes of you and me. By far the majority will be sold to people who see the kit, buy it and build it without any real thought or care as to how accurate it is and are happy to have a model from their favourite TV show


You have a point here. Moebius and other companies have to balance between the two types of customers, the casual, and the "I want every nut and bolt shown" guys. Just wish the IP wasn't skewed to the left, would have made things a bit easier to fix. Maybe I'll just save my pennies and invest in the photo etch set. Hmmm, looks like I might be spending more cash on aftermarket goodies afterall. That sound you hear...is my bank account crying...


----------



## RedHeadKevin (May 1, 2009)

> g) the grill for the bottom fuselage intake has no detail, it should be a grill, like the front fuselage intake part.


Mine does... not sure what part you're looking at. 

One thing we have to remember when criticizing these kits is that there can be VAST differences between the CGI models and the Full-Size prop ships. 
For example, the main landing gear on the Viper Mk VII:
On the CGI model...








...And on the FSP.








You can see VASTLY different shapes, and on the full-size ones, there aren't even any bays for them. The landing gear legs just stick out the sides of the ship. 
There are other differences as well, that's just the first one I thought of. Does this kit have some problems? sure. I'm not crazy about the seams, or the way the engines are mounted (so that you can't really install them after painting the gray,) or the off-center, under detailed cockpit (there's really no excuse for this one,) but I know that I'd much rather HAVE a Viper MkVII sitting on my shelf than either waiting 10 years for the "perfect" kit to come out and then paying $250 for it. Plus, I actually enjoy solving some issues with a model. I scratchbuilt a new seat. That was FUN for me. I'll be using the PGMS cockpit, and detailing it out. I'm replacing all the "springs" on the landing gear legs with something better. I'll probably add some greeblies to the engines. I like doing that kind of thing. 

Honestly, I'd like to see Moebius (and many other model companies) spend the time and money to update their kits (Kinda like Monogram did with their Viper model.) I'd love to see new-tooled parts for the Mk.II with holes for the RCS vents and a better-looking seat. I'd love to see a retooled cockpit for the MkVII. I'd love to see Hasegawa retool their F-22 to not have giant panels. I'd love to see Revell tool updated parts for their B-1b kits. But the fact is, it probably ain't gonna happen.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

g_xii said:


> Do you think you can figure it out or do you need some help with it?
> 
> --Henry


I diagram would be nice, like every other model kit ever produced that comes with cockpit decals.


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

John P said:


> I diagram would be nice, like every other model kit ever produced that comes with cockpit decals.


Here you go!

--Henry


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

RedHeadKevin:

The part I was refering to is #31. But, as I posted a few posts before you, it was a mistake on my part as you can see. My eyesight ain't what it used to be!

Not sure what reference Moebius used, but I'm willing to bet it was the CGI model and not the full size prop. What they used for the cockpit is anyones guess as the CGI model seems to follow the full size prop:


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

Well, I'm still looking forward to the Orion kit, but I'm least I'm forewarned about some of what I might find to be issues. That said, I'm excited about the kits Moebius has produced, even if I don't agree with all the design decisions that have been made.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

g_xii said:


> Well, you know what they say. You can't please everyone every time. If they had spent more money making a more accurate cockpit, would you have been so willing to pay, say, ten dollars more for the kit? And even if you were, would everyone else?
> 
> I think you get a decent kit for the price. That's what matters, especially in this economy.
> 
> ...


If your referring to me, I wouldn't describe myself as 'unhappy' and I'm not suggesting they make a cockpit that is uber-detailed to raise the price $10.00.
I think you read too much into what I brought up.

I'm well aware, that almost every aircraft kit has a aftermarket kit to spruce it up a bit.

What I'm referring to is the fact that a whole arm rest panel on the left side is missing and that the center console is offset to the left as well.

So the basic shape isn't even there.

So, IMHO, it kinda looks like this was overlooked when they were in the test shot phase.
I'm really more curious simply as to what happened.

Don't get me wrong, I am grateful to Moebius and R2 for what they are doing.

And like every aircraft kit, fortunately, we have a after market kit to spruce it up. So thanks are also in order to Paul at Paragrafix for the fine work he is doing.


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

ClubTepes said:


> If your referring to me, I wouldn't describe myself as 'unhappy' and I'm not suggesting they make a cockpit that is uber-detailed to raise the price $10.00.
> I think you read too much into what I brought up.
> 
> I'm well aware, that almost every aircraft kit has a aftermarket kit to spruce it up a bit.
> ...


I don't believe I was referring to you. Some of that was just in general. I heard from Frank this evening, and he basically said they do the best they can with the funds they have available. They have to stop making changes at some point, as each change costs not only time but thousands of dollars as well. Their goal is to make as many people happy as possible, and there are aftermarket products that pick up any little bit of slack for the folks that want to spend the additional cash.

I think we need to remember that Moebius is not designing kits for the few folks here at hobbytalk who perhaps have higher standards than the casual Moebius Models customer. The "impulse buyer" so to speak. And we can't expect them to do more. There are always going to be compromises, and we're just going to either have to live with them, work around them, or simply not purchase the kit and spend the money on something else.

Sitting here complaining and whining will not do a thing to make things better, and it just keeps Frank and Dave from visiting any more. I don't blame them a bit. All of you "armchair business experts" (and you know who you are) have chased them away with the bickering and whining.

And it sucks to have a Moebius forum that is no longer visited by anyone representing Moebius Models.

--Henry


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

g_xii said:


> Here you go!
> 
> --Henry


:lol:

Okay, I can see I was arguing without having looked CLOSELY at the instructions, and I thought by a quick look at the decal sheet that there were more than one instrument (assuming it was like the MkII).

Never mind. :lol:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

g_xii said:


> Sitting here complaining and whining will not do a thing to make things better, and it just keeps Frank and Dave from visiting any more. I don't blame them a bit. All of you "armchair business experts" (and you know who you are) have chased them away with the bickering and whining.


Agreed, but there's a difference between whining and constructive criticism - or even just a kit review that brings up its faults and lets the rest of us know what to expect.



> And it sucks to have a Moebius forum that is no longer visited by anyone representing Moebius Models.
> 
> --Henry


Amen to _that_!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Honest Mk II review at SSM, in a similar vein:
http://www.starshipmodeler.net/talk/viewtopic.php?t=94483


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Henry, I hate to be 'that guy' but I'm a little....I don't know, uncomfortable, or maybe even borderline resentful of that line of thinking.

Yes, there are people who get all up about nonsense, and of course I'm obviously in the category of the "armchair business experts" by your lights, but ya know?

I wouldn't bother talking about any of this if I didn't care, if I didn't want Moebius to be the A#1 best and most successful company possible. I EXPECT them to excel because of the standards they usually set. The bar is high because it's the 21st Century and 'good enough' isn't good enough anymore.

It's a hard market nowadays. Cripes, I just dug up an old issue of Model Retailer from the mid '70s, and listings for stores,and distributors, and companies and the entire business, it's practically a ghost town now compared to then. Seems to me Moeibius NEEDS passionate people boosting them.

I can't be a 'shut up and like it regardless' kind of guy. I regret we don't have the regular appearance of Moebius on the board anymore but I think they have no-one but themselves to blame. They fostered an attitude of "hey, we love this stuff too! We do it because we love it! Let's be friends!" and it was all groovy until, like what happens with friends ALL the time, they get called on something, and suddenly it's us against them and 'we' are annoying and nitpicky and all the drama.

I know, for example, there was great exasperation over the constant calls for a large Spindrift kit. OK, so it's a running joke, point to a sticky post with "why we can't do this kit at this time we know you want it" and let it go. But it seems that was one of the events that was just the straw that broke the back. Really? 

I'm sorry that things are so stressful that something like that is enough to make a person angry.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

g_xii said:


> I don't believe I was referring to you. Some of that was just in general. I heard from Frank this evening, and he basically said they do the best they can with the funds they have available. They have to stop making changes at some point, as each change costs not only time but thousands of dollars as well. Their goal is to make as many people happy as possible, and there are aftermarket products that pick up any little bit of slack for the folks that want to spend the additional cash.
> 
> I think we need to remember that Moebius is not designing kits for the few folks here at hobbytalk who perhaps have higher standards than the casual Moebius Models customer. The "impulse buyer" so to speak. And we can't expect them to do more. There are always going to be compromises, and we're just going to either have to live with them, work around them, or simply not purchase the kit and spend the money on something else.
> 
> ...


Thought this subject was dead, but since you've decided to keep it going....

Your right, I'm not a businessman having never owned a business. I know very, very little about the ins and outs of the model kit business. Nor am I trying to be a "armchair business expert". What I am is a customer. As a customer, I have a certain expectations as to what a new-mold, 2011 kit should be like. For a 1/32 kit to have the errors this kit has, is unacceptable. As a customer, I don't care about Moebius financial status, or who their target audience is, all I want is an accurate and complete model kit. I understand that a $30 kit will not be as detailed as a $100 kit, but I do expect it to be accurate in overall shape and details. And I definitely expect it to have a cockpit that at least has the basics, correctly shaped IP, side panels, seat, decals, etc. And the idea that I have to shell out for aftermarket products to pick up the companies slack is just wrong. I'm also on a budget, a very tight one at that. If Frank is saying that lack of funds means he can't provide a complete cockpit, while I feel he's wrong, I'll have to accept that. But if he's saying the same lack of funds is the reason for the inaccuracies on the wing, I don't buy it. To me it seems, it's just as costly to make a part accurate as it is to make it inaccurate. If Moebius's target audience is the "impulse buyer", then this kit is fine. Those type of buyers are not "rivet counters" like some of us here at Hobby Talk. But, they have to watch out that they don't ignore the hard core sci-fi modelers either. Producing kits that have obvious (to rivet counters) inaccuracies which require you to modify/buy aftermarket items to achive an accurate model is doing just that.

And please stop calling constructive and valid criticism of a kit whining. It is not. Your implying that people are complaining about nothing. If you feel that the errors I or others have pointed out about the kit are inaccurate, prove it. Also, please don't blame people like myself for driving Frank and Dave away, that was their choice. If they feel that I or others are wrong in our criticisms of their kit/s, then they have every right to post a response, but they choose not too.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

It's important to remember as we politely express our opinions that if there's a hint of frustration in the tone it's because we love too much. Moebius has done a good job of setting expectations high.


----------



## g_xii (Mar 20, 2002)

spock62 said:


> Your right, I'm not a businessman having never owned a business. I know very, very little about the ins and outs of the model kit business. Nor am I trying to be a "armchair business expert". What I am is a customer. As a customer, I have a certain expectations as to what a new-mold, 2011 kit should be like. For a 1/32 kit to have the errors this kit has, is unacceptable. As a customer, I don't care about Moebius financial status, or who their target audience is, all I want is an accurate and complete model kit. I understand that a $30 kit will not be as detailed as a $100 kit, but I do expect it to be accurate in overall shape and details. And I definitely expect it to have a cockpit that at least has the basics, correctly shaped IP, side panels, seat, decals, etc. And the idea that I have to shell out for aftermarket products to pick up the companies slack is just wrong. I'm also on a budget, a very tight one at that. If Frank is saying that lack of funds means he can't provide a complete cockpit, while I feel he's wrong, I'll have to accept that. But if he's saying the same lack of funds is the reason for the inaccuracies on the wing, I don't buy it. To me it seems, it's just as costly to make a part accurate as it is to make it inaccurate. If Moebius's target audience is the "impulse buyer", then this kit is fine. Those type of buyers are not "rivet counters" like some of us here at Hobby Talk. But, they have to watch out that they don't ignore the hard core sci-fi modelers either. Producing kits that have obvious (to rivet counters) inaccuracies which require you to modify/buy aftermarket items to achive an accurate model is doing just that.
> 
> And please stop calling constructive and valid criticism of a kit whining. It is not. Your implying that people are complaining about nothing. If you feel that the errors I or others have pointed out about the kit are inaccurate, prove it. Also, please don't blame people like myself for driving Frank and Dave away, that was their choice. If they feel that I or others are wrong in our criticisms of their kit/s, then they have every right to post a response, but they choose not too.


In your first sentence, you proclaim your ignorance: 

*Your right, I'm not a businessman having never owned a business. I know very, very little about the ins and outs of the model kit business. *

This means you have literally no authority because you can't possibly understand what goes on in the business. I can't sit here and try to explain to you the little bit of understanding I have about model kits and the manufacturing process,, either. Write Frank directly if you really want to know. If he'll even reply.

And, I'm sorry, but it _IS_ whining! Who are you to make DEMANDS on a manufacturer? They are not manufacturing for YOU, they are manufacturing for a percentage of the masses. Think about that business model for a second, ok? This is kind of like buying a "one size fits all" and getting insane because as a seven-foot two-inch basketball player, it won't fit you! Being that size, you are, by defination, in the minority. Just like you are with modeling. You have higher standards than the average consumer. But arrogantly stressing these "unacceptable" discrepancies is just plain whining. By having higher standards, you are going to have more incidences of disappointments. Seems pretty clear to me.

The fact is, they left, and are not coming back. Ever. They bust their butts to put out a kit, and someone comes along and drags them through the mud. Why should they come back? And why should they even communicate with people like that? They're not going to. Hell, you have made me tired of this whole thread. I can only imagine how they feel. 

And, who ISN'T on a tight budget these days? 

You know what? This thread has more than served it's purpose and if you take this any further, I'm going to have to do something about it, and I really don't want to do that. It's just too ugly in here and not productive. We will not have this discussion again unless you want to bitch at me via email. Go ahead with that if you want -- that way I can say what I want to really say and so can you!

Locked!

--Henry


----------

