Jump to content

slide

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1553

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by slide

  1. slide
    Yea it does! I challenge ANYONE to pull-off a cape like Billy D. Williams did!!
  2. slide
    That is curious about Enterprise... probably all the Whovians that didn't exist yet during it's run... I didn't say "Series", I said "Season"... a Series being made up of multiple Seasons... I seem to have made an error in assuming this was the Season 2 or 3 Premier, when it was the "Broadcast Premier" ... or to be even more precise: this was the re-broadcast of the series opener that not only aired already, but has been available (to anyone who actively wanted to seek it out) digitally for what, 3 years now? [Do I have that right?] Which makes the Nielsen numbers even more pointless, but makes them look even worse! Lets run the numbers: the Actual premier of the Series opener back in 2017(?) got 9.5 million viewers [I can't find the actual rating this would've earned them on that day]. This broadcast [Re-broadcast?] got 1.7 million, for a rating of 0.2% Assuming the same total audience size [and frankly, given our current social state, I would expect the total TV viewership to be up rather than down], that would give the 1st airing of 9.5 million 1.11% of total viewership... which I'm taking as the bottom-end of the possible number. That places it as the worst rated Trek ever... again, IF my number is actually close... Even if we put the broadcasts together, we're still sitting well below where Enterprise ended it's run, let alone where it started. What do the Nielsen ratings really mean? Less in the current age than ever before, certainly! However they're our only confirmable data-point for viewership numbers until CBS opens their books about it. My misinterpretation aside, the fact that CBS is not raving about their digital viewership numbers [in public anyway] doesn't imply they're good... it in fact implies the opposite, but if a refutation on that front is forthcoming, we'll have to wait until Monday at the earliest to read about it in the funnypapers. Anyhow, we could all have never had to even know about STD if CBS had just let Axanar do their thing, or made the better call and just hired them.
  3. slide
    There's no need to put a ceiling at 300 units, but one could use that as the "floor" for something like: "We're not able/willing to produce it unless/until we have XXX many pre-orders." etc. Why put an upward limit on potential profit?? I'd be in for at least one F203 Dragon II and one MiM-31 Karyovin... more cool paint-schemes would equal more of my money!!
  4. slide
    The expectational framing of a season premier of the current Star Trek series to reruns of the old better ones says everything right there, doesn't it?
  5. slide
    In what way? Because of digital distribution? Those numbers suck too... or they'd be incessantly touting them to shoot-down all the "your Star Trek ratings sucked" articles.
  6. slide
    Unarmed? Um... Isn't he a head in a jar wired directly into his mobile fortress, and therefore it's armament? And screw him anyway! He ruined our planet for nothing!
  7. slide
    At 1:4000 the ARMD class should be 4.23" [10.74cm] The top option will be close, if you can tweak the size of the file, it won't take much fiddling to get it in scale... at least by the math. Whether it looks correct may take more fiddling
  8. slide
    HEY NOW!! Don't sic them on my wallet like that!!
  9. slide
    He looks like he should be sauntering into a 1990's WWF wrestling ring...
  10. slide

    Hi-Metal R

    slide replied to joppewo's topic in Toys

    yes it does, one of the ultra-small TV pilots that Bandai seems to think are scale or something...
  11. slide
    holy S.... the '89 Batwing is THICCC: what a GREAT SFX shot... funny, I had always pictured/remembered it as more sleek in my memory... If you can find the plans for that one you have pictured there @Chronocidal, I'd like a copy (or to know where I can get one) please, it's great!
  12. slide
    Past-time, methinks... but their front-liners are rocking mostly boring grey-tones too, aren't they?
  13. slide
    "threat representative" and Don't seem to mesh... I've never liked the "Wraith" scheme... I mean: Who is the supposed "threat"? Hollywood? ...Tony Scott's production team in particular?! Dr. Disrespect?? ... COBRA?????? Joking aside: To me, that article reads a lot like some nerd like me asked the question, and the answer was an enthusiastic "We want to, and we all know the squadron will try it the first chance they get regardless, but we're trying to figure out the whole paint thing through official channels between the eggheads over at LM and the brass... but we really really want to fly the cool camo'd-up F-35's!" again, to my previous point... Is it to intimidate the nuggets? because that actually might be a good enough reason... can anyone think of another good reason to do it, other than "it looks neat"?
  14. slide
    the old ones are the best ones!
  15. slide
    With my collection of toys, Small Soldiers seems to be more appropriate
  16. slide
    And here, I thought it was a recruitment ad for the Scientology Navy?
  17. slide
    The glass is neither half-full, nor half-empty. The glass is twice as big as it needs to be! I'll show myself out
  18. slide
    Not that I'm aware of... That's quite the build. Congrats!
  19. slide
    Yea... No... the entire concept is hurting my brain... why would you paint an F-35 like that? who in their right mind thinks the F-35 can handle like a Su-57?? [a visual-range dogfight being the only time you'd even see the other guy, let alone his camo-scheme] If you're just doing BVR training that way, why would you [potentialy] ruin the Anti-Radar paintjob on your F-35? Did any of the Su-57 demonstrators [and that's exactly what they were, let's not kid ourselves] produced actually get their anti-radar coatings?
  20. slide
    This is a full-build of the D version, but the builder highlights the same issues:
  21. slide
  22. slide
    ALL I WANT IS HOLLYWOOD&WOLFMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! apparently it's just too much to ask of the universe...
  23. slide
    and you say you're NOT Canadian... eh?
  24. slide
    Agreed! For the money, consider it a decal sheet purchase that comes with either a free "Test Your Might(and patience)!" build, or junker to try out new things on. as someone whose slowly rebuilding my skillset, it's very handy to have some actual aircraft to try out new paints or techniques on instead of spoons or plastic sheets/strips... the F-14 kit assembles alright, but it's very dated, has raised panel lines, and compared to the Fujimi Tomcats [which I consider to be the bar for acceptable 1/72 'Cats] is just not worth it IMO... but ~$18CDN for quality new decals? deal! also, this is one of the few kits where the instructions actually show you how to paint an on-deployment Tomcat! the MiG-29 is the same story. decent, but very dated. Going to use one to try making one of these before I try it on an expensive kit: That's from the opening of the final battle in episode 5 of Macross Zero. The canards seem to be roughly the same shape as the SV-51's
  25. slide
×
×
  • Create New...