Gavin-1212362

Morning Steve. Thanks for the message. I'll be sure to get in touch with Chris shortly. Been a good chat this, everyone, thank you.

Morning Steve. That was a fast response from Chris. Thank you. It was good to acknowledge the ball was dropped with the Helldiver article. There's some thoughts there I don't agree with, but it's not a bun fight. And there's very good reasons he's the editor and not me :-) It was interesting for me to read that new moulds are built OOB and then re-releases get aftermarket - nice approach. Ultimately people will vote with their feet, in or out. Despite what I think are flaws, I'll continue to subscribe for the foreseeable future. It's not perfect, but what is? Generally I look forward to it every month. Thanks for your input. Have a good week.

That must be why I don't know too! :-)

It's not, Adrian. I've never noticed - is Tamiya magazine dedicated?

Interesting Ratch. Maybe too much for every build, so everything's duplicated? What about that for anytime Airfix release a new mould that's featured, or if there isn't one then just one build in the magazine? Then at least there's something for everyone in each issue?

I think we all started there Adrian........I know I did! I think a good finish has to be shown so that people want to replicate that. Not shading, weathering etc. - just a well presented model in terms of base coats so that it looks like what's presented on the box or rolling out a factory. This would be 'Basic'. Any other skills can be gained going forward and then the ambiguity starts as the modeller starts to transition to intermediate. You make a good point about the difference between mouldings of the same subject in the same scale by the same manufacturer re fitting. I guess this has to be kept in mind by the contributor and assessed honestly to where his build is going to fit on the spectrum.

Hi Steve. I think a start and end point in Basic and Advanced are reasonably straightforward. At the moment I think AMW do a good enough job with content that's Advanced, or could even be moved from Basic or Intermediate to Advanced. In my opinion Basic should be Series 1/2/3/4 (for example, I've not given it much thought), out of the box, brush painted or airbrushed with simple techniques. When I say OOB I mean no purchased aftermarket - so this could mean refining detail in some way or adding DIY refinement like stretched sprue etc. What I have in mind is something like the content from the Airfix Magazine Guide books of the 1970's. Seeing as I've mentioned those I can't recommend them highly enough to beginners - a lot of the methods and information are dated now, but a beginner will still get tonnes more from them now than they will opening an issue of AMW. (side question - is that the kind of thing I could expect to read from the Airfix Club magazine if I joined that?). I understand that kind of build wont be of much interest to a seasoned modeller, but at the same time many of the existing content isn't of much interest to a lot of modellers either - Ratch has mentioned this and I can't disagree with him. There are other magazines which have their place for more advanced content, but I think AMW should be including more of the content I've described. Rightly or wrongly Airfix is regarded as a gateway to the hobby and a magazine with that branding on it's cover should reflect this more than it currently does. So between what I've suggested and the already Advanced builds you would have everything else and all the ambiguity between the lines around Intermediate. But then I think there would be truly something for everybody. Advanced is already aspirational for most people, but what I call Basic would still be an achievable aspiration for beginners - therefore giving them something to aim for without disheartening anybody. As you say, somebody reading an article has to think they can achieve that too, but I think that needs some context and an acknowledgement that people are at different stages in their hobby, or maybe even regressing due to health or eyesight reasons. So achievability has to be kept relevant for different aptitudes. Just some thoughts, in response to you querying some firm bullet points. Gavin.

Hi Ratch. This is something I've noticed online too. Whether forums or YouTube. You rarely see anyone giving a sub par review on a review from the box. Everything is 'despite that little flaw it should build into a nice model'. Nobody calls a spade a spade and says if I was buying this type I'd swerve this one and go for one from a different manufacturer. I've came to the conclusion you're just best picking up something you fancy and doing the best job you can 😁 for the reasons you mention! Have a good weekend mate.

Nice post Tim. In my last post I mentioned AMW not quite being all thing to all modellers. This is a good example. I don't think there's a good balance between builds brush painted and those airbrushed. Going back to my person taking home their first Airfix kit, via a newsagent to pick up the magazine because they're keen and throwing themselves into the hobby - probably every build in that issue will be airbrushed. All of a sudden our newcomer is thinking do I need an extractor booth, compressor and H&S airbrush. That's not just valid for newcomers. Lots of seasoned modellers love brush painting too. Just an observation you reminded me of. Have a good weekend Tim.

That would be interesting Steve, thank you. It often makes me think how a beginner opening the magazine for the first time and seeing a 1/32 Helldiver with aftermarket (or similar) branded as basic would react to that. A lot of people (most maybe? Certainly in this country) come to the hobby via Airfix. Those of us in the hobby know AMW is unrelated to the hobby brand, but others don't. The kit manufacturer does a great job catering for newcomers. But these same budding modellers lifting the magazine, thinking there might be something in it for them (as they've just got a great kit from the company with their name on the front of the magazine), find quite a daunting list of builds, some of which they're being told are basic 😁 Airfix do a good job of being all things to all modellers. I don't think AMW do though. I still think it's a great magazine. And I'll continue to subscribe. I think it's good value and I always take something from each issue. I just wish that their basic builds could be.........a little more basic. Have a good weekend.

Yes Adrian. That's what I touched on initially - scale doesn't define the challenge. There's a difference between an OOB 1/24 Spitfire and one in 1/72 👍

My hat goes off to you scratch builders, Patrick. Don't know how you guys do it 😎 Yeah, I think that's a good definition of us modellers. You'd think the articles would define the subject, not the modeller though 🤔 Who knows. Have a good weekend.

I think it's a good magazine, just that aspect puzzles me 😝

I understand that and I've got no inclination to raise it with the magazine. I just thought I'd ask other people's views, here on this general discussion forum - I thought maybe I was missing something with AMW. I don't seem to be - as you agree :-) I wonder how they categorise these things, as we don't seem to know.

I often wonder how AMW define what are to be Basic, Intermediate, or Advanced builds. This month's (February) is a good example. The Helldiver on p.22 is defined as Basic. Yet to begin with its a 1/32 - scale alone doesn't define difficulty, but usually larger models are a bit more of a challenge. Secondly, there's quite a bit of aftermarket involved - not something I'd associate with a Basic build. Lastly, it provided the contributor with several challenges - and I'm presuming Peter is a very competent modeller or he wouldn't be appearing in this magazine! In fact, in his summary he says its a kit for the experienced. Anybody got any thoughts on this?