JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll
-
- Officer - Brigadier General
- Posts: 11238
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:38 pm
- Location: Central California
JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll
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
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
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail."
-
- Officer - 2nd Lieutenant
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:05 am
- Location: near Vienna, Austria
Re: JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll
I think it really was necessary to say thattmanthegreat wrote:Do not to let the spots influence your vote
We still need more new 1/18 aircraft!
-
- Officer - 1st Lieutenant
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:58 am
- Location: 1, USA, MO, St. Louis
Re: JSI F-14 Quality Control Poll
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."fightin wrote:I think it really was necessary to say thattmanthegreat wrote:Do not to let the spots influence your vote
Thus, all production models have a major QC deficiency. Ignoring the elephant in the room makes no sense.
"Where's dat waskily wabbit?"
____________________________________________
Good Trades: Ostketten, Pickelhaube, Cornbreadfred, Sledgehammer, Pizzaguy, caesarbc3,jwcarpenter
____________________________________________
Good Trades: Ostketten, Pickelhaube, Cornbreadfred, Sledgehammer, Pizzaguy, caesarbc3,jwcarpenter
-
- Officer - Brigadier General
- Posts: 11238
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:38 pm
- Location: Central California
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 wishfightin 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.
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail."
-
- Officer - 1st Lieutenant
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:58 am
- Location: 1, USA, MO, St. Louis
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.
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.
"Where's dat waskily wabbit?"
____________________________________________
Good Trades: Ostketten, Pickelhaube, Cornbreadfred, Sledgehammer, Pizzaguy, caesarbc3,jwcarpenter
____________________________________________
Good Trades: Ostketten, Pickelhaube, Cornbreadfred, Sledgehammer, Pizzaguy, caesarbc3,jwcarpenter
-
- Officer - Brigadier General
- Posts: 11238
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:38 pm
- Location: Central California
-
- Officer - Brigadier General
- Posts: 11238
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:38 pm
- Location: Central California
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 itSabrefan wrote:Just don't move your F-14 Tristan, and you should be ok...
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail."
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.
FLY NAVY
-
- Corporal
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:22 pm
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.
[/quote]Amen DropTank!!!! Thank You JSI!!!
-
- Officer - Colonel
- Posts: 1312
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 10:35 am
- Location: Belgium
- Contact:
-
- Officer - Brigadier General
- Posts: 11238
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:38 pm
- Location: Central California
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?
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?
"... be man enough to sign your name to it, not hide in annonimity. And use spell check." ~ onWu
-
- Officer - 1st Lieutenant
- Posts: 543
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:06 am
- Location: St. Charles, MO
- Contact:
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.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
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.
Corey Stinson
http://smalljoes.com
http://smalljoes.com
-
- Officer - 1st Lieutenant
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:58 am
- Location: 1, USA, MO, St. Louis
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.
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.
"Where's dat waskily wabbit?"
____________________________________________
Good Trades: Ostketten, Pickelhaube, Cornbreadfred, Sledgehammer, Pizzaguy, caesarbc3,jwcarpenter
____________________________________________
Good Trades: Ostketten, Pickelhaube, Cornbreadfred, Sledgehammer, Pizzaguy, caesarbc3,jwcarpenter
-
- Officer - Brigadier General
- Posts: 11238
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:38 pm
- Location: Central California
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...
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...
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail."
-
- Officer - 1st Lieutenant
- Posts: 619
- Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 6:42 pm
- Location: Richmond, VA