What?

I am building the Revell DC-4 kit, which has a 21 page manual.  First few pages were great, but now starting to find more and more errors.  Parts shown mounted upside down, and other parts misnumbered.  Still, lovely kit!

I think the position of tech editor is a vanishing occupation.  It is really bad in computer manuals and other high tech product manuals.  It is a case of having engineers and others who are very familiar with the design of the product screw up because they are so knowledgable about it.  They do not use adequate care and rechecking.

I know- I was on the other side at one time.  I had to write manuals for the test equipment I was designing, and hated those tech writers who garbled my priceless prose.

ALWAYS check your kit and make sure everything matches and spend a long time with it and get to know the parts and make a plan so you know what you are doing. I can't say this enough.

Sometimes it makes sense to add parts before the instructions tell you to which is usually for painting purposes or ease of fit etc. You also need to actually understand the instructions and some are better than others. some very detailed instructions such as Zouke-Mura need to be read, understood for that section and the purpose and how things go together which is why dry fits and a plan with flexibility is now a must, especially with high end kits. This is one reason why my builds are starting to get longer and my posts more involved as I believe that those who do read them learn from them without realising it and so will help them in the future.

For instance, the new Jagdpanther kit from RFM I have had me a little confused last night over the 88mm mount and the upper hull and how it all fitted together. Normally this would have me getting the parts out fand off the sprue and placing them together to try and understand the aim and fit of the parts and the instructions.

Fortunatly, with 2 of the real things in my storage and workshop I spent the morning sitting inside the real thing matching the instructions to the mounts and parts and now I have a much better understanding of the aim of the instructions. I still need to go through and have a dry fit session with those sections and parts before building, painting etc happens so I know where everything is supposed to go!

I do need to play with the main big parts and figure out just how I can display the interior a bit more than a clear roof which might mean making the upper hull removeable and this means I must understand just how the main gun is mounted in this kit.

One reason why you must check and fully understand the kit parts and instructions before starting. In my day this is called, preparation! :)

James

Hi James ;

 Well, you are right there .The thing is there were two sets .One overprinted on the other ! Go Figure . I applied for a job once as a proofreader for a company that makes D.I.Y.furniture .They said with my degree I was Over-Qualified .No wonders instructions are a mess .And Unlike you I don't have the real thing in storage .It definitely wouldn't fit ! LOl. T.B.

Once upon a time when Trumpeter was new to the hobby, I bought their M60A3 tank kit. The instructions were hashed between the Tamiya and Academy kit. The model was obviously a poor knock off copy. Trumpeter molded several parts in place on the hull that the original Tamiya/Academy kit had in separate pieces. The Trumpeter instructions show placement of the parts since the instructions are a copy of the original kits' instruction.

Lindberg released a model of the BMP-1U. It was towards the end of them being in business and the kit was never truly finished. The intructions showed placement of parts that were not included in the kit. It was an odd dog.