JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll

tmanthegreat · Post by **tmanthegreat** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 1:28 pm

There has been a lot of conversation back an forth regarding various quality control (QC) issues with the JSI F-14, but no real indication of how widespread it is. TKO211 has claimed that about 25% of the planes he received for repaints had significant QC issues and there have been a number of reports throughtout the various F-14 threads of members with their own.

The purpose of this poll is to gague the numbers of defective JSI F-14s versus good ones within our own collecting community The poll has three choices:
>> No Serious QC Issues - your plane has no serious issues
>> Minor QC Issues - your plane has some minor issues, but nothing that really detracts from the overall model.
>> Serious QC Issues - your plane has major issues like snapped landing gear, broken parts, etc.

Note on Terminology:
I am concerned about actual defects with the F-14, not its standard paintjob. Do not to let the spots influence your vote

fightin · Post by **fightin** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:17 pm

tmanthegreat wrote:Do not to let the spots influence your vote

I think it really was necessary to say that

pcoughran · Post by **pcoughran** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:28 pm

fightin wrote:
tmanthegreat wrote:Do not to let the spots influence your vote
I think it really was necessary to say that

To deny that the paint job itself is a MAJOR QC deficiency is ludicrous. It should have never left the factory like that. JSI and Merit both recieved complaints about it the minute "during production" photos were released and they promised "it won't look like that when it's finished - there are many more steps to the painting process yet to come."

Thus, all production models have a major QC deficiency. Ignoring the elephant in the room makes no sense.

fightin · Post by **fightin** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:34 pm

Yes, I agree with you. But somehow, the failed wheathering doesn't annoy me THAT much. Of course, it could/should have been done better, but I am happy with that huge turkey as it is.

Sabrefan · Post by **Sabrefan** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:46 pm

I feel the main landing gear is a HUGE screw up on this model. Not only is it way under scale, it is to fragile for such a heavy model. This is not a quality control issue, just a bad design.

tmanthegreat · Post by **tmanthegreat** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 3:55 pm

fightin wrote:Yes, I agree with you. But somehow, the failed wheathering doesn't annoy me THAT much. Of course, it could/should have been done better, but I am happy with that huge turkey as it is.

I agree with fightin regarding the weathering. Yes, it should never have happened, but it didn't ruin the integrity of the model itself. The spots are ultimately something that can be fixed without worrying about the plane getting destroyed. The stuck/broken landing gear, radars, etc. are much more serious problems that cannot be easily fixed. That's why I put up the spot disclaimer. Anyhow, vote the way you wish

pcoughran · Post by **pcoughran** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:46 pm

I wasn't just complaining about the paint. I was unfortunate enough to get mine with the broken radome antenna and all the gear are broken from just setting it gently on the gear to display.
It turns out some of the gear are suppossed to have a a metal rod in them and got overlooked in QC. One of mine had it the other didn't. The one without broke causing the other gear to break from the strain. They should have packed the radome canopy section differently as well as the radome is too fragile to leave exposed like it was in the packaging.

planenut · Post by **planenut** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:11 pm

my 2 cents is my 2 birds,the lighted version has a noise whell gear that wont move and a bumb main gear door

the other 14 came through with a right main snaped

go figure

jon

fightin · Post by **fightin** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:26 am

Well, I have just figured out that my Tomcat doesn't have a tow bar. Seems like it is MIA.

tmanthegreat · Post by **tmanthegreat** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:47 am

Well, the Serious QC issues has more than double the votes than the No Serious QC issues. My plane falls into the minor issues area (there were some small broken parts) but the landing gear have not failed me yet.

Sabrefan · Post by **Sabrefan** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:01 pm

Just don't move your F-14 Tristan, and you should be ok...

tmanthegreat · Post by **tmanthegreat** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 1:47 pm

Sabrefan wrote:Just don't move your F-14 Tristan, and you should be ok...

Thats the best idea. My F-14 spends most of its time sitting on its gear on my display table. The plane really is too big and awkward to lug around, though I've picked it up and set it down (on its gears) at various places in my house including the bed, the ottoman in the family room, the workbench in the garage and back to the display table without incident. I have not rolled the plane on its wheels any more than a few inches nor have I done any simulated carrier landings with it

DropTank · Post by **DropTank** » Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:33 am

Got 4 with the intent to custom 2 to VF-41 and 1 to fantasy Blue Angel anyway, so spots were not a big issue. Out of all 4, only had 1 with any issue and it was very minor.(Loose radar) Had no glue issues with any of the gear and intend to hang so the gear breakage will not be an issue. I have no beef with JSI on this release, besides it's much, much better than my Dauntless, Hartman or El Diablo.

deankleines · Post by **deankleines** » Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:09 am

DropTank wrote:Got 4 with the intent to custom 2 to VF-41 and 1 to fantasy Blue Angel anyway, so spots were not a big issue. Out of all 4, only had 1 with any issue and it was very minor.(Loose radar) Had no glue issues with any of the gear and intend to hang so the gear breakage will not be an issue. I have no beef with JSI on this release, besides it's much, much better than my Dauntless, Hartman or El Diablo.

Amen DropTank!!!! Thank You JSI!!!

[/quote]

exether_mega · Post by **exether_mega** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 6:18 am

Got mine today. A was a bit scared about what I could find inside the box but all seems OK. No finger prints, all decals are there, nothing is missing, landing gear open and close without problem and no glue issue. And maybe I am realy lucky but canopy stay open at will.

phil

scobot · Post by **scobot** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 4:48 pm

Only issue with mine was a broken radar , I could hear the little support for it rattling around inside the cockpit section but that was it , oh and that mystery square piece loose in the box had me worried for a couple of days until i read a post here where a few people had found the same piece

dragon53 · Post by **dragon53** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:46 pm

I'm still curious as to what the broken T-shaped piece is...I'm keeping mine in case it turns out to be important---like the magical key that is inserted into the F-14 which removes the spots.

tmanthegreat · Post by **tmanthegreat** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 6:02 pm

I had that little t-shaped or square piece as well, but have now misplaced it. My thought is that it came from somewhere inside the plane, but nothing that I can see is amiss...

dogbongo · Post by **dogbongo** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:14 pm

I lucked out. Nothing broken or missing, no serious QC issues (besides, you know, spots).

Thanks to you guys, I knew about the landing gear issues & kept mine off its feet.

Step glued shut like everyone else's, left it that way. Floppy Radar Disorder (FRD), got that too.

All said, love this plane.

I had the little broken T-tabs as well. WTH are those things?

coreystinson · Post by **coreystinson** » Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:05 am

tmanthegreat wrote: Thats the best idea. My F-14 spends most of its time sitting on its gear on my display table. The plane really is too big and awkward to lug around, though I've picked it up and set it down (on its gears) at various places in my house including the bed, the ottoman in the family room, the workbench in the garage and back to the display table without incident. I have not rolled the plane on its wheels any more than a few inches nor have I done any simulated carrier landings with it

I have also had a similar experience. I had no problem with the gear, but I also recognized up front that it was fragile and handled with with extreme care. I also opted not to roll the aircraft around on the gear because the obvious result of that will be eventual breakage due to the weight of the model.

The problem that JSI is dealing with is that they are building models that people will treat like toys. No one would hand-assemble a large-scale aircraft model with glue, hand paint it, etc. then subject it to the kind of treatment that these will receive. It's a challenge for sure. Admittedly, BBI seems to have done a better job but then again their models were not quite this large.

pcoughran · Post by **pcoughran** » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:46 am

I hate to say it again - but my gear broke just from setting the plane on its gear - no rolling, no playing, no nothing.
I made sure two of us were looking at it as I gently lay it down and watched both springs compress equally all the way down. All connections were correct too. A couple hours later, the gear failed (the one without the metal rod which should have had a metal rod in it). Once it failed the pressure on the remaining gear caused them to fail as well.
I believe these are failing because they are poorly designed and QC is terrible, not because people are doing "carrier landings" with them. Sure a few people probably rolled theirs a bit at first. But after all the warnings originally, many like me were overly cautious with the gear, just wanting to display the bird on its gear, and still had failure.
I don't think many who bought this are treating it like a toy, maybe a small handful who first received theirs, but not the majority.

tmanthegreat · Post by **tmanthegreat** » Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:57 am

Interesting results with this poll so far. Of those who have voted so far, there are 26 with either none or minor QC issues and 23 with serious issues. Nearly half-and-half. There don't seem to be many truly perfect ones with 13 out of 49. (I would be curious to see how these F-14 figures hold up to some of the 21c releases).

Spots aside, if I had to postulate a reason for the QC issues, it would be a result of the model's complex design versus the capabilities of the JSI factory staff to produce the aircraft in bulk. This same thing happened with 21c,. When they are pushing these items down an assembly line against a tight deadline with each person performing the same assembly task hundreds of times, some are bound to be made correctly and others not.

For their part, JSI needs to evaluate the production process, looking for where the most errors are occuring and fix it. They need to tighten their control over the production process. A nearly 50% defect rate on what is supposed to be a high-end collectable is not very good...

USCGSARdog · Post by **USCGSARdog** » Sat Jan 23, 2010 8:51 am

Chalk one for no issues here... my 'Cat arrived in pristine condition. Minus the spots, of course.

I absolutely love this model. Looking forward to JSI's future releases, for sure.

-Rob

Small Scale Military Headquarters

JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll

What was the level of QC issues on your JSI F-14?

JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll

Re: JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll

Re: JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll