When I look at a model the most important part for me is the nose and cockpit window printing. I just received my American MD80 which uses Gemini's new mould. It has been criticised for several aspects of detail including the nose gear location. Sadly on inspection of mine I have to agree with this criticism and there is more wrong with it than just the nosewheel.
But - how does it fair in comparison to other DC-9s? There have been four MD-80 moulds (Dragon Wings, Phoenix, New Jet-X and this Gemini). I only have the Dragon and this Gemini so I'll reserve comparison to these but I do have a total of 52 DC-9 / MD80s and they all share effectively the same nose so that adds 6 further moulds into the comparison pool.
First here is what the nose should look like:
Now onto the models. For each I will give a score out of 1-5 for the nose section and look at its details. We'll start with the newest.
Gemini Jets MD-80 (2013 Mould):
![]()
Gemini Jets MD80 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
The more I look at the model the less I like it. Overall the rest of the moulds is pretty good but the nose is not so great. There is an obvious pinching in at the bottom by the front door. This looks weird and almost like two moulds have been cut and shut. This could also be the reason the mould is too low at the front. It makes the fuselage look fat! As others have mentioned the nose gear is too far back by at least half its width which makes the nose look too long. The overall effect from the side looks pretty bad. I can't give this anymore than 2/5.
Dragon Wings MD-80 (2001):
![]()
Dragon Wings MD-80 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
I can't fault the shape of the nose with this mould. The only issues I really see are that the nosegear is too high probably because the nosegear doors are too big. Also the strake above them looks a bit big. Still its a good mould and better than the Gemini - 4/5.
SMA DC-9-30/50 (2003):
![]()
SMA DC-9-50 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
This mould has fallen prey to what I call the snoopy effect. The nose is too big and chunky and the area for the cockpit windows is too small. It looks odd but at least the bottom of the fuselage is straight! - 2/5.
Phoenix DC-9-30 (2003):
![]()
Phoenix DC-9-30 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
This mould also exhibits the snoopy effect but not as badly as the SMA. The front undercarriage also doesn't look great and is too high (a problem also with the maingear). Still its ok - 3/5.
Gemini Jets DC-9-30 (2004):
This mould is very similar to the Phoenix mould and may be the same. It has all the same failings.
Aeroclassics DC-9-10 (2001):
![]()
Aeroclassics DC-9-10 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
One of ACs earliest moulds. Some have simpler stalk like nosegear which looks dreadful. There is too much curve on the underside but generally the shape isn't bad. Examples like this TWA with the improved gear get 3/5 and others with the simple gear 2/5.
Jet-X DC-9-10 (2006):
![]()
Jet-X DC-9-10 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
The nose on this mould is too slanted downwards but at least the nose gear looks good. They have only used this mould 9 times and several have awfully misplaced cockpits however its good to have a modern DC-9-10 mould even if not perfect - 3/5.
Jet-X DC-9-30 (2008):
![]()
Jet-X DC-9-30 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
I only have one of the 21 releases of this but its hard to fault nosewise. Everything is in the right place and has the right shape. A great mould - the rest is pretty good too - 5/5
Aeroclassics DC-9-30/50 (2006):
![]()
Aeroclassics DC-9-30 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Like the Jet-X mould this is hard to fault and forms the basis of my DC-9 fleet - 5/5.
As for the other 2 MD-80 moulds both look like they have nose issues from the photos I've seen - the Phoenix is too chunky and the Jet-X too long. Regardless it is clear to me that the new Gemini mould fares poorly at the nose end at least. I am amazed that soo many of the manufacturers have failed to get the nose correct and can't think of any other types where so many moulds exist with such basic issues. I feel almost relieved that Gemini won't produce much on their new mould and wish Aeroclassics would get in on the game.
Here are my 2 MD-80s at the gate. Which do you think is better?
![]()
AA MD80 @ the Gate by rstretton, on Flickr
![]()
US MD80 @ the Gate by rstretton, on Flickr
But - how does it fair in comparison to other DC-9s? There have been four MD-80 moulds (Dragon Wings, Phoenix, New Jet-X and this Gemini). I only have the Dragon and this Gemini so I'll reserve comparison to these but I do have a total of 52 DC-9 / MD80s and they all share effectively the same nose so that adds 6 further moulds into the comparison pool.
First here is what the nose should look like:
Now onto the models. For each I will give a score out of 1-5 for the nose section and look at its details. We'll start with the newest.
Gemini Jets MD-80 (2013 Mould):
Gemini Jets MD80 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
The more I look at the model the less I like it. Overall the rest of the moulds is pretty good but the nose is not so great. There is an obvious pinching in at the bottom by the front door. This looks weird and almost like two moulds have been cut and shut. This could also be the reason the mould is too low at the front. It makes the fuselage look fat! As others have mentioned the nose gear is too far back by at least half its width which makes the nose look too long. The overall effect from the side looks pretty bad. I can't give this anymore than 2/5.
Dragon Wings MD-80 (2001):
Dragon Wings MD-80 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
I can't fault the shape of the nose with this mould. The only issues I really see are that the nosegear is too high probably because the nosegear doors are too big. Also the strake above them looks a bit big. Still its a good mould and better than the Gemini - 4/5.
SMA DC-9-30/50 (2003):
SMA DC-9-50 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
This mould has fallen prey to what I call the snoopy effect. The nose is too big and chunky and the area for the cockpit windows is too small. It looks odd but at least the bottom of the fuselage is straight! - 2/5.
Phoenix DC-9-30 (2003):
Phoenix DC-9-30 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
This mould also exhibits the snoopy effect but not as badly as the SMA. The front undercarriage also doesn't look great and is too high (a problem also with the maingear). Still its ok - 3/5.
Gemini Jets DC-9-30 (2004):
This mould is very similar to the Phoenix mould and may be the same. It has all the same failings.
Aeroclassics DC-9-10 (2001):
Aeroclassics DC-9-10 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
One of ACs earliest moulds. Some have simpler stalk like nosegear which looks dreadful. There is too much curve on the underside but generally the shape isn't bad. Examples like this TWA with the improved gear get 3/5 and others with the simple gear 2/5.
Jet-X DC-9-10 (2006):
Jet-X DC-9-10 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
The nose on this mould is too slanted downwards but at least the nose gear looks good. They have only used this mould 9 times and several have awfully misplaced cockpits however its good to have a modern DC-9-10 mould even if not perfect - 3/5.
Jet-X DC-9-30 (2008):
Jet-X DC-9-30 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
I only have one of the 21 releases of this but its hard to fault nosewise. Everything is in the right place and has the right shape. A great mould - the rest is pretty good too - 5/5
Aeroclassics DC-9-30/50 (2006):
Aeroclassics DC-9-30 Nose by rstretton, on Flickr
Like the Jet-X mould this is hard to fault and forms the basis of my DC-9 fleet - 5/5.
As for the other 2 MD-80 moulds both look like they have nose issues from the photos I've seen - the Phoenix is too chunky and the Jet-X too long. Regardless it is clear to me that the new Gemini mould fares poorly at the nose end at least. I am amazed that soo many of the manufacturers have failed to get the nose correct and can't think of any other types where so many moulds exist with such basic issues. I feel almost relieved that Gemini won't produce much on their new mould and wish Aeroclassics would get in on the game.
Here are my 2 MD-80s at the gate. Which do you think is better?
AA MD80 @ the Gate by rstretton, on Flickr
US MD80 @ the Gate by rstretton, on Flickr