Just had an email from IGUK saying my order has been despatchedOriginally Posted by Dom S
Just had an email from IGUK saying my order has been despatched
Planes at my home today. Looking good and thanks Keith.
Kewl, so there's a chance they may be at Salute. How are the wings on the DVIII, do they look OK, the edges and the thickness?
Which unit is the DVIII with the number on it? Is that a second MFJ Jasta?
Nice one.Just had an email from IGUK saying my order has been despatched
Looking forward to ordering from you when it does.....................!Nice one.
To me they look fine. The disturbing thing about mine is that on two of them they were assembled rather shoddily, so there is a gap between the engine cowl/guns and the fuselage.
Ta very much.
Give a shout when it does Dom, I got an order for you when they doNice one.
Roger wilco.
Thanks. I've come to expect gaps here and there. Funny how some things bother me, like the wings, and another aspect I can totally overlook.
Woohoo, mine have just arrived.
Ton of printing to do this afternoon, so I'll get them up on the website tonight and make sure I find the time for a post office run tomorrow. Details are better than I expected actually - the MGs on the Nieuport look great. On the wing thickness issue, it's definitely a step back from previous releases, but I strongly suspect it's only the way the wings are decalled that really makes it visible at any distance - touch up the edges so that they're in the topside colours not the underside one, and I think the issue will disappear at any distance. Hmm, I guess I'll be trying to figure out Vallejo colour matches next time I have the brushes out....
Dom, pretty pleased all in all.
Dom,
Thanks that's good to know. It's really just the DVIII that I want from this release and possibly only one of them. I was going to repaint the wing camo anyway. If it really bothers me that much I have a solution up my sleeve. I was going to add a flight of Nieuports but with the wing issue I've decided not to.
Got my flying boats and Halberstadts through the post today
Absolutely bloody marvellous looking planes, well done Ares and thanks to Keith for getting them across the pond so quickly.
Now for some Italian front fun!!!!
Well, having had a chance to get my site updated, and then have a quick play around with one of the Nieuports, the model is definitely growing on me.... Yes, the wing thickness is a minor issue, but having had a good look at it now, I think my earlier diagnosis looks sound. Once the wing edges are in camouflage colours rather than tan, I think they'll more than look the part. There should be a few stockists at Salute, so I'd say take a look yourself Tim, especially if you can get your hands on one out of the box.
Personally, I'm sold on that one, although I guess that's one more item for this weekend's to-do list - try to find half an hour to dig out the paint chips and come up with decent matches for the camouflage colours. Should come in handy further down the line for repaints too.
Just put in an order for a Maachi and a Hanover, need to have a look at the Razor and Neiuport, will have a gander at Triples in a couple of weeks then decide if to partake of these
Order placed!
Thanks chaps - will be making a post office run shortly.
Dom,Well, having had a chance to get my site updated, and then have a quick play around with one of the Nieuports, the model is definitely growing on me.... Yes, the wing thickness is a minor issue, but having had a good look at it now, I think my earlier diagnosis looks sound. Once the wing edges are in camouflage colours rather than tan, I think they'll more than look the part. There should be a few stockists at Salute, so I'd say take a look yourself Tim, especially if you can get your hands on one out of the box.
Personally, I'm sold on that one, although I guess that's one more item for this weekend's to-do list - try to find half an hour to dig out the paint chips and come up with decent matches for the camouflage colours. Should come in handy further down the line for repaints too.
Thanks, I see if I can get sight of one. I don't know why I'm so bothered as the view point is invariably one of looking down on the models which is the aspect that always works with these models and it's the side on view that is the least satisfying and not only because of wing thickness. The Fokker DVIII did have a thick wing and I'd want to repaint it anyway and I don't think ARES have the camo right so that might resolve one issue, except the tailplane looks even worse. We'll see it's not as if I haven't got enough to play with already. It's perhaps one of those things like painting the lozenges over the wing edges on the Fokker DVII models made so much difference and similarly painting in these wing edges will be enough.
Received my Series 8 planes yesterday, and I have some questions regarding both he Fokker EV/DIII's color schemes and one of the Nieuports.
Now I understand the controversy regarding the wing coloration with the DVIII's and the ARES 'modelers' seem to be aware of it, however...
What or who makes the determination for the models in general?
As I understand it Andrea makes reasoned historical suggestions and then ARES ignore it and much of the published reference that is so easy to access. ARES make an approximation to his suggestions or sometimes they ignore his advice altogether. Since we keep buying there is no onus on them to improve and so we keep getting glaring mistakes in every series. What makes me mad is that many posters here could tell ARES where their suggested schemes are at fault and when we have, it's been ignored. Equally quality is patchy, the reprints of the Fokker DVII were classic – so well done that I forgive the error on the yellow MFJ model. The reprint of Series one was woeful. I'll give a two examples:
MvR – probably never flew a triplane marked as the main WoW/WoG release. It's possible but evidence is tenuous. Odd when they could have chosen two all red schemes that he did definitely fly.
Voss – wing camo colours wrong and white stripes missing
It's a shame really but all my models are for repainting, sometimes just to correct production errors, sometimes to add detail but always to give me schemes that I can't buy. However, in spite of those harsh words I still love the hobby of repainting these models and the fact that this game has made a niche wargame period into such a successful game world wide. With a little extra care it could be even better. I don't buy all the models only those that I like or are useful for repaints.
Thanks. In researching various planes, and comparing with the miniatures, I have often found evidence to support ARES choices, [as we all know definitive documentation, is almost impossible]. So, I am willing to give ARES the benefit of doubt, unless proven in error.
I think you have a far better attitude than I do!
As I am aging, a lot of what I used to "know" has been proven in error with recent releases of previously classified material [WW2!] and other things, as well. And as time goes on, new general research has changed things, as well. Just today I learned that previously unknown photographs of MvR were found, in an old car's trunk (boot). You just never know. Even "facts" seem to have a shelf life.
Very interesting on the MvR pictures. I seem to recall a similar story here in the UK a year or two ago except that in this case all the pictures were copies and the images had already been published and were reasonably well known. I was reading the other day that apparently the crosses on the underwings of Dr 1 425, in which MvR lost his life, hadn't been converted to the new format. Where that snippet came from I've no idea. Interesting to consider though.
Much of what we replicate with our models is conjecture – I've made a good few guesses when I've been working on JGII (1918). It's slightly frustrating knowing that better quality images with more precise tonal values exist that would answer one or two questions.
The various sources that I have consulted indicate that MvR had a stable of aircraft that he would fly (like many Aces did). And often, they would swap out planes to friends/squadron mates. In addition, some planes were 'back-ups' that were available when mechanical problems would ground their usual steed. That means there is a remarkable bubble of credibility to consider as 'possible, but not/poorly documented', to consider.
Also, in my old scale modeling days, I remember one paint manufacturer came out with a line of paints, specifically formulated for 1/72 scale model planes. Apparently, they determined that the eye sees the appearance of 1/72 scale models differently that the 'official' colors. In short, I think the colors were lighter in hue. I think that idea made for "softer" and less appealing models, and was short-lived. IIRC, some modelers simply used an overspray of a 'semi-transparent' coat over their 'factory spec' colors.
With 1/144 scale planes, who knows?
I personally like the present color mix: Black is black, etc. The real appeal of the miniatures is for the "eye candy" they provide for the game.
If I was going for 'realism in modeling', I would have to dirty them up a lot---oil/exhaust stains, UV fading, repaired damage, mud, etc.
One can become too obsessed with detail. For example, with dated photographs, one can come up with various transitional schemes that are almost day by day updates!
I agree with all you write.
Order from IGUK arrived yesterdayJust had an email from IGUK saying my order has been despatched
I'm still of two minds about picking up the full series. I just don't see myself using the macchi
I thought Andrea WAS Ares... didn't they break off from the old "Nexus" company when it went belly up and made their own, so wouldn't they have total control over what's made or not?
As I understand it Andrea is a consultant who advises but he doesn't make the final decisions on what gets produced. Or at least that is what I believe I have read. Perhaps that was back in the days of Nexus, if so can somebody explain the current chain of decision makers?
Me neither, but they are soooooo pretty that I'll have them as part of my collection as well. They actually make me want to play the Italian front some... and it's never been even on my radar before.
Andrea is the game designer and is not involved directly with the production or business end of Ares. He works with a couple (one main) aviation historians on getting the details about the plane's stats correct.
Ares has to balance production costs and production times with detail accuracy. They also have to error on the side of stronger game pieces and not scale models when it comes to wing thickness and such (though they could do better on the wing profiles... like they used to).
I came to this conclusion with the last series (Aviatiks & Hanriots).
Just by one of each kind...
Combined with Watchdog's A-H Scenarios from Prague 2012 I developed a sympathy for A-H/Italian front planes and bought them all.
...and those planes make games with the Caproni Ca.3 much more attractive.
Time to lay my greedy hands on the incoming series 8 now.
Voilŕ le soleil d'Austerlitz!
Part of the problem on colors is, at least for WWII, all they're willing to look at is the Pantone color catalog, and at least for US-built aircraft the paints are in what's now called the Federal Standard color system, with almost no direct crossover between the two. I've repeatedly encouraged them to at least get *one* FS595 (the catalog itself) sample set, to no avail--this is why Memphis Belle looks "Not Quite Right"--the shade they used is closer to an Interior Green than an Olive Drab.
I'm seriously having nightmares about how I'm going to keep the nose art and accurize MB...
I bought my series 8 models from my local games shop yesterday. I like them and the shop owner was impressed by them also.
This is it exactly – there is an issue with colour that I don't understand since the means is available to resolve this. Voss is a great example, the wings on the model were in two greys and venetian red rather than two greens and the 'red'. (Some state that the plane had olive and purple camo not the three colour version.)
Schaffer was another where the fuselage is a more violet shade rather than tending towards blue.
They also could get their lozenge fabric colours more accurate – I've got a book that lists some of these lozenge design using Federal Standard colour so why haven't ARES got this same source and why aren't they using it and insisting on accuracy from the factory?
I think your answer lies in DB's post just above yours...
The type of printing used in manufacturing is all Pantone work. If there is no conversion chart for the two systems, it would be very hard and expensive to have the factory try and custom match a Pantone color to a FS one and then approve or reject each attempt. And think of the time delay that would cause as well.
It might be possible for them to purchase a FS and Pantone chip book and visually compare and find the closest match, but would that really get them any closer to getting an accurate color?
I ran into similar issues when working on decal sets to have printed up for the AA store. Using the standard Pantone colors I could get pretty close and the product price would be at the top of the reasonable range. If I had custom colors mixed up so that the decals were as accurate as possible with the available references, the end price went up a couple of bucks per sheetSo a decal sheet I'd want to sell at $9.99 would need to be sold closer to $15. My production numbers were much smaller so it would not be that exaggerated for Ares (I don't think), but then again, their production numbers are much smaller then we all think (especially compared to other games being produced).
All that said, they could do a better job on some of the planes. The B-17 is close enough for me, but the Schaffer blue and red bugs me still today
Sometimes I wonder what forumers expect from a prepainted, assembled, 9,99 $ scout miniature with base, altitude pegs and movement deck in such a quality like Ares Games delivers.
Maybe I see some used words in a wrong way as a non -native speaker, but "annoying, shame, productions errors,..." does not fit to them.
The feedback for the new series 8 ist completely positive. Most of forumers speak abut beauties that looks orginal much better then in picturese here.
Voilŕ le soleil d'Austerlitz!
What they expect is it doing right. The daft thing is the number of "complaints" that could be fixed at no cost whatsoever, especially the repeated schoolboy errors over colour schemes. I'm not talking about "that shade's not quite right, but it's tricky to match" but glaring errors like the Rickenbacker SPAD with its entirely wrong grey-based camouflage, even when commissioning a new model many years after it was first pointed out (and after they did a fairly decent approximation of the actual colours on the Luke SPAD....), or the fanciful pink on Stark's Fokker when every source agrees on lilac. It just gets frustrating after a while....
As Dom says the level of basic errors can be frustrating and consider in the UK we are paying the equivalent of around $18 for a scout and typically say $25 for a two seater. I have the Pantone charts and swatches for my work and I could choose better matches. Honestly, so could any of us here. Pantones are just an ink set but you can replace Pantone inks for custom inks, as I have done on occasion with my work. OK that adds expense but in some instances it might be justified especially with the volume runs they are doing. I've had a printer order inks to match two exact greys I needed for a job. I gave samples and ink manufacturer matched it without any problem. That was on a job worth Ł22K in total including my fees. I bet a production run of these models costs rather more. For example, a B17 here in the UK is touching Ł30. At that price it would have to be spot on to be worth that. What irks me is that for the sake of an Osprey book and a set of Pantone swatches any of us on this forum could have chosen a better colour for Schafer than that which was used. There are lots of more appropriate blues in the Pantone Matching System (PMS).
I don't have Memphis Belle model but looking at the PMS book again it's got a very good range of olive greens to pick from.
Right now I've got one of my Pantone swatches out and in less than five seconds I reckon I've got a better match to standard German WW1 olive/purple camo than that which they used on Jentsch. It's all just down to poor decision making and laziness in production, nothing more. I work with colour, inks, printing etc in my professional work and have done for over twenty five years and feel kind of qualified to have a view on the matter of colour.
Take the recent RFC SPAD VII in grey why? It should be PC10. A harder colour to match with PMS since it shifted to more brown as it weathered but again less than a minute gives me a PMS colour that is closer to PC10 than the grey that was used. In other words it's really basic stuff.
Last edited by Timmo UK; 04-24-2015 at 07:15.
I'm just going with the flow. If Ares had not taken up the challenge we would have either nothing to complain about, or something to grouse about for the rest of our lives. As fat as I can see the only real glaring mistake was over the Triplanes.
Rob.
"Courage is the art of being the only one who knows you're scared to death."
My complaint is that what we get could be better with very, very little extra effort. It's as easy to get right as it is to get wrong. It's no harder than specifying PMS280 not PMS2728, that took me seconds to choose and write. Give me a few hours and I think I could get better PMS matches to everything they've done that we're not happy with. I'd do it in exchange for some planes if they commissioned me, or you, or anybody else here. The other problem of course might be that the inks that are being supplied aren't accurate but that's something the production management should pick up instantly when the test shots are done.
I guess sometimes being partially colorblind really is an advantage.
Which way Green/red or blue/orange? Ever get friendly fire problems in your games?
Green/red. I had no idea until I was taking a photogrammetry class in college, and during a slideshow the prof put up an Ishihara test slide and said, "I guess you all can see that?"
"Uh... what?"
I know things are red and things are green, but I have no idea what a full spectrum person actually sees. And while it did stop me from trying to become a fighter pilot, it didn't stop me from becoming a cartographer.
Thus, I'm more interested in getting a plane that has been well built, e.g., without cockeyed landing gear (I have that on one, but I forget which).
Amen to that Boss - they could do much better, if Nexus could do it they have no excuse really - can't bear what the did to series 1 reprints, I ditched the lot in the end ! At least we have something and we're gaming(though they could do better on the wing profiles... like they used to).
Sadly the wing issue has returned with this release. I'll have the chance to check the models out tomorrow.Amen to that Boss - they could do much better, if Nexus could do it they have no excuse really - can't bear what the did to series 1 reprints, I ditched the lot in the end ! At least we have something and we're gaming
I would be happy with "close enough for government work." as a standard, but then...which government?
I can easily accept wide variations, as that was the case in real life. We've all seen things "fresh out of the box" and the change one week later, in the elements. Granted, a lot of WWI things didn't have too much chance to weather, but if period correct, almost everything didn't have the long range stability like modern dyes, etc.
I recently saw a reproduction of a painting of Stark's DVII, for example, painted by Stark himself. That "lilac" looked pink to me. So, there ya go.
Back to the Series 8 planes, though...
I have some game questions about the new, Series 8, Hannover CLIIIa release from ARES:
1) Does it have (as I suspect) a 360 degree firing arc for the rear gun?
There is no rear arc noted on the cards, but there is one on the plastic base.
From what I have been reading and observing, the higher positioning, very low top wing, and the unusual rear control surfaces allowed a very much expanded arc within the upper hemisphere. That is, free fire 360 at above altitude targets, a narrower blind spot at the same altitude, and "normal" for targets below.
2) What are the "official" ratings both service ceiling (max altitude) and the climb rate?
Last edited by Grey; 04-24-2015 at 13:28.
I just noticed the CL.III has a rear gun arc on the base, but not on any of the cards.
Hey... were we just posting about this once Facebook?
Could be.I just noticed the CL.III has a rear gun arc on the base, but not on any of the cards.
Hey... were we just posting about this once Facebook?
My gaming club (Portland Couch Pilots) have "settled" many issues, but since this is a new case, I am preparing my position on the "Hannover Question".
I think I will be aiming for this position:
>Normal marked plastic stand firing arc for lower altitude targets
>360 degree for same level altitude, with one exception...
>>limit rear "blind spot" at same altitude only applies when conditions for "Tailing" occur
The normal rear 'blind spot" applies for lower altitudes.
or something like that.
What is the maximum altitude and Rate of climb?
I had just noticed this situation with the Hannover CL.III cards. May we please have an official ruling as to how to handle the rear gun on these planes? Something like Brian's suggestion looks reasonable.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks