abufletcher

Yeah, mine's big too. Time for me to head over to RCSB.

gjmjoe017

My Feedback: (1)

Well,I'm all bummed out now and I guess I'll throw the Bulldog II in the trash!!He He
I just have to give Stickbuilder a little crap everynow and then.
Joe

Stickbuilder

Why not? Everyone else seems to like doin' it too.

Bill, Waco Brother #1

gjmjoe017

My Feedback: (1)

The day we stop having a little crap thrown at us,it's all over!!!Send some damn warm weather up here so I can go out and fly my damn ARF!!!!!

Dai Phan

My Feedback: (2)

Yup,

Send me some warm dry weather this way too Mr. Sandman. I am damn tired of getting stuck down here in my garage building my scale ARF! DP

LDM

My Feedback: (15)

The older I get all my non scale ARfs get very scale , its called squint scale , I have to squint to see them and they look better all the time !!!!! [X(]see no anger on my part , I have a plan, build opps oh my I mean assemble my arfs , then I keep buying classic kits on ebay for my builds over the next few years . The more I promote arfs , the better the kit prices on ebay lol !!!!!. I wish !!! , really try getting a classic Platt kit on ebay even a Red Box totally not scale P39 are going for over $200 , the Gold editions ones go for close to $300 .
Not a bad market considering people supposedly doont build much anymore.
I picked up a Platt 1/6 DwD9 , it will need more work to make it somewhat scale then any arf i have ever owned and on the box it says" winner of some scale contest way back when "
can you imagine RC universer back then -
it would go like this
Hey Dave , I got your kit , you know the FWd9 , well its nice buddy , but no split flaps , no build up rudder or any for a matter of fact any flying surfaces outside the tail -whats with that ??? as a result I cant allow it in the kit scale forum , have a nice day

I think Platt said correct me if I am wrong , "sometimes its better if it look right vs being right "
As a kid I got to see him release his Zero kit at the Valley Fordge signal seekers meeting as a guest of one of the elderly members . I was a pesky wide eyed kid in awe of this builder and his new kit -The plane was fantastic , Dave was not a great flyer , but he could handle his planes and mannnnn as we all know , can he build or what !!!!!!

Stickbuilder

It was 40 here this morning, and they are talking 35 tonight. It got up to 68 today, so will the next one leaving Michigan please shut the door on your way out?

Bill, Waco Brother #1

DP, there is no such thing.

allanflowers

Just a related question here: how does one get a 3 view "certified" for use as reference in a competition?
Is it more trouble than it's worth and should one just go with an already certified drawing that is not of the exact plane or maybe has errors because it is so old?

warbirdmustang

My Feedback: (21)

I have some arf's, and while I am still a builder and believe that arf's have no place in scale competition except in Fun Scale( as it does now), there are some very nice scale arf's out there that can qualify for consideration as a scale bird. I don't know how to best seperate them as far as forums go, or even if we should. After all they are scale aircraft.
Bryan

Stickbuilder

Good questions all. The three view would need to be accepted by the contest director of the event, prior to judging. If you have already built your model for a scale contest, before accumulating your documentation, you are lost in the weeds before you begin. You need to build the model to the documentation, and not the other way around.

Bill, Waco Brother #1
Bottom Feeder Brother #1 (don't ask me about this one)

R8893

My Feedback: (20)

Allan, you need to get your drawings certified by a member of the scale contest board, not the contest CD. They are listed in Model Aviation magazine. I do know of one guy who drew his own 3-views and had them certified. I have had drawings that I rearranged certifiedreally just deleted views of other versions of the plane and combined some views to simplify. I provided the originals and identified the changes. It went smoothly.

allanflowers

Thanks. I will be using whatever drawings the kit is based on for outline but the color and markings are the issue. This is a next project, maybe six months down the road at least. Sorry about the off topic question.

On the subject of ARFs in this forum, I personally see no problem as long as the scale issues are what brings them here.

warbird51

My Feedback: (12)

Good luck on the full scale Yak build. Maybe you need to redraw the 3 view once the bird is finished. That would give the builders another version to replicate. Scale models are built to replicate the full scale in most instances. I can only think of one full scale that was replicated from a model. Of course by virtue of being a Scale Masters Judge (you didn't state whether your expertise was static, or flight), you would know that you would need to get the new 3 view certified.

Bill, Waco Brother #1
[/quote]


Hi Bill, Thanks for the good wishes on the full size Yak-3. It's not a scratch build, but a restoration. We should have it ready to fly in about a week. I haven't got time to draw new three view's to match the restoration. I don't think the owner plans on entering it in a scale contest anyway. I have another Yak I'm also restoring that has a ways to go before she's done. And the Wildcat needs new oil lines before our first airshow in May. Luckily I'm retired. My Scale Masters certification is in static judging, not flight.

Several people seem to be confused about about what this post is all about. The question you posted is "whether ARF's should be in the scale forum". Not whether Arf's should be able to enter a scale contest. I think the scale rules are pretty well spelled out about what can be entered in which class at a contest. Of course, if the CD wants to modify the rules, it is his contest.

Whatcha building now?

warbird51

My Feedback: (12)

You got that right Bill, I don't know how many modelers have come up to me about locating documentation for their scale model AFTER they've built it. The first time I entered an R/C scale contest was in 1978 with a Ryan PT-20. The best three views I could find at the time were incorrect, but published. So I built the model to match the documentation. When judging a contest, I was amused when guys would bring a model that did not match their documentation to a contest. Then they would get mad at me when they didn't get a high score. I would tell them "read the rules"

In your sign off you have "Waco Brother #1". Does that have any meaning other then you like Waco's?

abufletcher

One more reason, I'll probably never compete. This sounds like completely bassakward bureaucracy. For me. in my building, it will always be the historical accuracy of the model that counts and with WWI aircraft this often requires working from multiple sources.

Stickbuilder

Warbird,

There is an organization called the Waco Brotherhood. We are over in the Vintage and Antique section, and most any other thread concerning Waco's. Have a look in the V&A Forum in the Thread called of all things Waco YMF. It's only 326 pages long, so you can get through it in a couple of evenings.

As to what ABU said about the guy that built to the incorrect 3 view; you must understand that in a scale contest, you are not in competition against any other builder, but against yourself. It's all about how closely you built to your documentation. I can't speak with too much authority, since I'm only a Scale Outline Judge for Top Gun, but if you don't build to the documentation that you provide, then why provide any documentation in the first place? You might as well enter the Pro-Am class where all you have to do to get your 25 points is to provide a photo of the airplane, and you get your points, with no static judging at all. I did a series of columns on this very subject last year in RC Report magazine, and it appeared to be well received.

Bill, Waco Brother #1

abufletcher

All I'm saying is that I would NEVER build to an 3-view that I knew to be incorrect. If I knew that something was "wrong" I'd want to fix that on my model. Here's one example. On the Nieto technical drawings of the DrI (in the MAN, Scale Drawings Vol.1 book) the notch in the bottom of the steel tube fuselage that accepts the lower wing spar is rectangular. However, careful research (carried out by full-scale aviation historians building full scale replicas) has found this to be inaccurate. There was actually a slight taper to this notch. Well, when I build the fuse for my DrI model back in November, I followed the Nieto drawings. Then in December (following a talk with a full-scale replica builder in the Netherlands), I heard about this little fact and now it bugs the heck out of me and I have a strong desire to fix it on my model. But then I remind myself that I made the fuse out of glued-together bamboo and not welded (hollow) steel tubing so I shouldn't let "scale insanity" completely take over.

In other words, there is a higher standard of accuracy than "scale judging."

Stickbuilder

One thing that is routinely done in Scale competition at the upper levels, is to take the page from the publication that you are using to correct the inaccuracies of the drawings in your documentation, and then bring them to the attention of the Chief Judge, and when you come to the judging table, present your documentation to the Scale Outline, and Craftsmanship judges. Make sure at that time to call out the exception to these judges, and they will disregard the incorrect information, and will then use your exception to judge your model. This would also apply to the Color and Marking Judge, if the exception were in that area. We are accustomed to having photographic evidence that is contrary to what you have as printed documentation. We are willing to work with you to ensure that you receive a fair and honest score. Very few models are constructed of the same type of materials as was the full scale. What you are attempting to do is to complete the, "Illusion", that the model is constructed as was the original. Case in point; Last year at Top Gun, there was a P-47 that had the ammunition bays opened, and the linked scale .50 ammuniton was very visible, and appeared to be correct, and that they would fire when fed into the chambers of the Browning machine guns. Now we all know that these Scale Brownings, and the accompanying ammunition was not capable of firing, but the Illusion was complete, and correct.

I would not expect to see a fuselage on a scale model to be constructed from 4130 Chromemoly seamless tubing with a wall thickness appropriate for the scale. But I would expect to see a tubular member to be appearant if it were visible on the full scale as well as on the model. Take a look sometime at either Ed Newman's Feisler Storch, or on Octavio's L-4. These models appeared not to be model airplanes, but rather a full scale that had been washed in water hot enough to shrink them to the scale size. They were on the money. So are most of the models that come to the top levels of competition. Often there is less than 1/100th of a point between the first and second places.

Once again, you are not competing with another modeller in the Static portion of the judging, but are being judged as to how well and faithfully you built to your documentation.

Another point is that on virtually all ARF models, the wheel wells are done with some kind of a plastic tub. The full scale, and successful scale models will show conduits, tubing, rivets, bolts and clamps, along with the trunions, brake lines and assorted hydraulic hoses and tubes. Not a smooth plastic wheel tub. The linkages for the control surfaces may be totally hidden, or if visible on the full scale, will have the correct fairings for the linkages or cables as the case requires. No plastic pushrods will be seen. The cockpist will be fully completed, and not just a flat piece of balsa with a pilot bust attached. It goes deeper, but hopefully you are beginning to get the picture.

Bill, Waco Brother #1

Mode One

Bill, I don't think the folks responding here are having any trouble understanding what it is YOU feel makes a scale airplane. I also agree with you; what you describe is most likely going to be scratch or kit built from the ground up, as a hard-core scale-endeavor. You are describing the top of the line in scale competition: Top Gun and Scale Masters. 99.99% of us out here aren't/won't be involved in scale competition to this degree, we lack the abilities and/or interest to take our airplanes to this level.

From a personal standpoint,I would not post an ARF build here at the RC Scale Aircraft Forum. I feel the proper place for me to post this type of information would be at the ARF & RTF Forum. This makes the most sense to me as I would be amongst people interested in ARFs and they might be interested in what I do to make the ARF more scale like.

jet60

"99.99%" ?
so you are saying that all the guys here except .01% are just average builders?
sorry but i find that to be one of the rudess statements i have ever seen here.

abufletcher

No. He's saying that no more than 1 in 10,000 RC modelers compete (or build) at a TopGun scale level. I'd say he's being generous.

Mode One

Jet60, Do you compete at the Top Gun level? That is what I am talking about. I did not intend to be rude what-so-ever and you have missinterpreted what I have stated! Not unlike other posts where you've appeared to be so angry with me!

deothoric

I reckon this will still call for straining gnats. I don't believe there's ever been an exact scale prop rc airplane to 1/3 scale or less. The props won't be efficient enough, the revs will be too high, with a scale airfoil the flight speed will be too high. As for static scale, there's always something too thick or too thin.

Building an ARF calls for some skill. Building a kit calls for more skill. Building from a plan usually calls for even more skill. Designing a scale airframe from scratch (that's what scratch built means BTW), takes vastly more skill and courage, since until you're finished, you don't know if it'll fly worth a damn.

So if we're going to scorn someone for building an ARF because we built a kit, then we have to accept there are people miffed because we didn't scratch build and we have to accept their rightful, by our definition, scorn. Glass houses!

deothoric

In case nobody answered, just go to

http://www.rcsb.com

and you'll see the for sale sign

deothoric

In fact I'm advocating keeping anything scale in here. Different strokes keep the hobby (and those flying fields) alive. I just wanted to make the point that drawing lines in the sand will just give us an infinite number of forum groups with one person in each.

In case anybody cares, I have two projects on the go. The first is based on the VQ .40 Hurricane for which I've vacuum molded a new canopy and replaced the wing with a more accurate flat center section, recovered and almost ready to go. I may end up stripping the fuse and rounding off the lower rear underbelly at some point.

On the board I have a 1/5 plan from the 70's for a Fiat CR42 Falco. It's a semi scale plan which I intend to tart up before building. According to the accompanying build article, it had some really nasty flight tendencies when flown by the designer, so you could say I like a challenge.

Does that make me a scale builder, or just somebody messing around?