And already the dedicated group of whiners, complainers, et al are complaining about the nose being wrong. Considering the object in the image is nothing more than a prototype at this point it amazes me at how quickly these tools start the b1tching and whining based on little to no information.
<...>
Okay, so when is the time to start complaining? The sooner they get these comments, the better. If it's just a rapid prototyping "print-out", there's still hope to get the it fixed. Had this been at the stage of a test-shot, with the steel moulds already being cut, fixing these issues would be FAR more costly.
What more information do you need? There's just that one picture, granted, and the aircraft in it does look like a Twogar, but with some rather hefty problems. Was there anything factually wrong with the comments made on ARC (assuming your talking about that thread)? That the nose is too long, the canopy and rear canopy to fuselage transition look off, that the intake area looks kinda squashed, that the whole fuselage looks kinda squashed (making the fuselage look too thin)?
Yeah, it's just a prototype at this point, but the list of wonky production kits following wonky prototypes is pretty long. The list of decent kits following wonky prototypes is, on the other hand, rather short.
