Tango Juliet

That's it! Reg and Abu, you guys provided just the meat and potatoes I was looking for. Thank you so much. I guess now I need to figure out just what it is I want to model and start gathering the documentation. I'll need to start simple and plan for the "Open Class" of USSMA since this will be my first real attempt at "true" scale. I only live an hour from the NAS Pensacola Naval Aviation Museum. Anyone care to offer suggestions on a good starter airframe to model? I was initially thinking WWI, but maybe something from a later era in the type of trainers or observation platforms.

rcmiket

Great link. Notice how its very easy to follow. Not over information just enough to support his subject. Mike

Tango Juliet

Yeah, very nice. And on Mr. Hayes, who needs color chips when you can just take the wrapper with drips off the paint can .

abufletcher

Man, I gotta spend more time over on RCSB! Those guys are doing stuff that doesn't even get mentioned here on RCU. Sad but true.

Reg Hinnant

My Feedback: (9)

Hi TJ,
You have a wealth of information at your fingertips with the Naval museum being so close. You can choose a plane that there already kits for Hanriot, N-28, etc or scratch build something thats unique. (how bout a 1/4th scale NC-4!)
Good luck and enjoy the research.

abufletcher

In my opinion the most important thing is to pick an aircraft that you really love (or can learn to love) so that you won't mind spending the next year or so obsessing about every rivet, bolt, stitch, and smudge.


Also be honest about your current skill set. For example, I don't have any of the skills required to do a WWII heavy-metal warbird but I've build up a good collection of WWI skills.

bokuda

My Feedback: (7)

Which is probably part of the reason WWI models rarely win scale contests.

Tango Juliet

I went to the Naval Museum website today and started a short list of possibilities. Due to work space limitations (second bedroom of an apartment) I'd rather stick to a kit. Now to find a kit that's relatively accurate to begin with as far as scale outline. I'm wanting something IMAA legal as well, so monoplane minimum is 80", I'm not sure what biplane mins. are though. 60"? SNJ-5/AT-6 might be a good starter .

RedTwilight

Thanks David for sharing examples of what the judges are looking for!  Nice to see a note in there from my uncle as well!  lol

rcmiket

60 inch or true 1/4 scale on a bipe that's for IMAA. Mike

caribefoto

My Feedback: (2)

The very reason for thenew "Blue Max" early (1903-1918) scale event which is scheduled for it's inaugural next spring (12-13 Mar 2010) at the fabulous Fantasy of Flight Museum in central Florida. Go to: thebluemaxevent.com where the home page is up, more to follow. There is a thread on this contest on the RCSB forum under "coming events"...................John

rcmiket

Amazing isn't it? There are several builds there that just blow me away. Mike

Reg Hinnant

My Feedback: (9)

TJ, You would be hard pressed to do any better than a Hanroit HD-1 kit from Glen Torrance.

http://www.flygtm.com/web/pages/kit-hanriot.htm

or a Neuport 28 or Jenny JN-4D from Proctor Enterprises
All excellent kits!

There are several build threads on them. Do a search.

Tango Juliet

Anyone know anything about the Ziroli Beech Staggerwing? The threads on RCSB seem a little old for that one. Or the Yellow Aircraft SNJ-5/AT-6?

Tango Juliet

Reg - Your post didn't appear before my response/question. I'll look into the Glenn Torrence line. I believe I've looked at the site in the past. I was at Joe Nall last week and photographed some beautiful WWI birds (all BUSA, I think) and that really got me to thinking about Scale. I looked at Dave Platt's site also and really liked the T-28. (BTW, I just got off the phone with Mr.Platt himself when I called to order his three DVD set for Building and Finishing) So now I'm torn with a decision to make.

jetmech43

My Feedback: (9)

no matter what you decide to build get all your documentation together first, it will make life more simple

Reg Hinnant

My Feedback: (9)

As Jetmech43 says......that will keep you on track for color scheme and details as your building.
Nothing worse than changing your mind and picking a different A/C for color scheme only to find out there are a thousand things different from your 1st choice.
It takes dedication & focus. A little preserveriance would not hurt either.....
See also Mick Reeves offerings. Very accurate outlines. It is easy to order from him & get delivery in a reasonable time frame even though you are ordering from England.
http://www.mickreevesmodels.co.uk/~m...es/p2bipe.html

abufletcher

Your very first task, before you glue together a single stick, will be to critically compare the plans (outlines and structure) with a trusted set of 3-views or technical drawings. The discrepancies can be shocking. Sometimes, this is the result of "modifying the design" for the sake of ease of construction or supposedly better flying characteristics. But just as often, I'm convinced, that it's just a lack of research on the part of the designer. Just like different modelers have different levels of interest and awareness of the scale accuracy of structures and detail, different designers also differ in terms of their awareness or commitment to scale.

In some cases the discrepancies are so extreme that you would need to extensively redesign major elements of the model to make them accurate in terms of outline and/or structure. You may end up entirely scratch-building parts of the model. With other kits, such as the classics from Proctor, GTM, and Mick Reeves, you'll only need to tweak the kit in minor ways to have a competition-level model.

So if you build from either a kit or plans, choose carefully. Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to find out before you buy a given plan or kit the degree to which it is a faithful representation of the original aircraft.

John Redman

My Feedback: (8)

Hey Tango Juliet,

I'll tell you what. The last time I was at Top Gun was in 2005. I would be happy to send you my documentation book for the F-100 we had there that year. We scored a 95.5 in static I believe. Once you get it, call me up and we can talk for an hour or two and I will explain where we got hit, and what we expected. Might help. I just checked and we idd forth that year. Have had a few 1st, 2nd, and 3rd's, over the years. Don't compete much any more, coach little league baseball right now. Maybe again in the future, who knows.

There are some serious keys to winning in scale competition. They are not hard, just routinely not what the so called "field experts" will tell you. PM me your address and I will send it out if interested.

John Redman

My Feedback: (8)

Platt's Laws

of Scale Modeling

 

The following laws have been compiled from observations made over a lifetime of building competition scale models. It will be noticed that, like "Murphy's Law", while formulated for amusement, they are nevertheless true.

Dave Platt

 

1. All of the best information on a subject arrives the day the model is completed, and proves conclusively that what you have done is wrong.

2. You never finish a scale model. You just stop working on it.

3. Those subjects requiring the greatest number of working channels have the least room for radio gear.

4. How right it looks matters more than how right it is.

5. Competitive scale modeling is about replication, not authentication.

6. Given a choice, judges will believe wrong information over right.

7. Live by the principle of scarfology. Things disappear from the marketplace, so scarf them up while the scarfing is good.

8. Experience has demonstrated that the worst 3-views of any subject are the ones that came form the factory. The best were done by some careful modeler who wanted an accurate model and made his 3-view a labor of love.

9. Never, ever, use color photos in documentation.

10. The weak link in the RC Scale reliability chain is still - the engine.

11.  A fair model with a good docs-book will outscore an excellent model with a poor docs-book.

12. Scale RC is a very relaxing hobby – if you can stand the pace.

13. Big models fly; small models flit.

14. First, it’s got to fly.

15. No amount of flying will improve your static score.

16. It’s a mistake to take a scale model out to fly while you still like it.

17. Whenever a manufacturer improves his product, the old one is much better than the new one.

Believe these. They are the gods honest truth!!

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

Couple of simple points.

1) Ask however makes the kit what three view they used. Most will gladly tell you. There are huge discrepencies between different three views.

2) Pick a color scheme and establish how you will match it. For WW1, try Dan San Abbott of WW1 Documentation Sevices. He can provide marking location drawings and color chips for an amazing array of aircraft. Get a Meuthwen(sic) book of colors and match the numbers from a source such as Wind Sock Data Files.

3) Decide what you want from the aircraft, AMA, FAI, ect. Document appropriate to the class.

4) If discrepencies exist between the aircraft you want to model and your three view, Mark the discrepencies and number them with photos which show the true story.

5) ONLY SHOW PICTURES WHICH FLATTER YOUR MODEL!!!!!!!! If  you are providing much more than a couple of photos (plus some detail), you are loading the judges for bear to tear up your plane.

6) Once started building, close the books so you don't confuse yourself with irelevany details.

I build my models to FAI spec but provide very different, appropriate info for the class I am entered. Hope this helps.

DJ

abufletcher

Love it! Most of these I've heard here or there before but I hadn't seen the "full set of commandments" before. Truer tongue-in-cheek words were never spoken.

abufletcher

I'm curious about this. Dan San Abbott has a huge reputation as a WWI historian and I personally would trust his opinions on most things. But how would judges look at documentation from him? Also I'm not sure what is meant by a color chip from a now non-existent WWI aircraft.

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

Abu, an exxcellant question. One strategy I employ is to bring his books and journals such as Over The Front and WW1 Aero with his articles on color and markings. This establishes him as an expert. This has been succesful in both AMA and FAI contest. As to his chips, he matches as best he as he can to his belief based upon his research. In reality, if you work to his materials isn't that the real game? It isn't just a WW1 problem but any model. Who is to ever say whether or not any chip to ant era is correct. How many unrepainted WW2 birds exist? Even if they did, unless you went up and scrapped the paint off, you are still relying on someones interpetation. Color photos are meaningless. How many differant colors do you want from the same negative? At some point, you pick something and go with it.

DJ

TFF

Besides the NAM, which I got back from  my by-annual visit, the Army Aviation musieum In Enterprise, AL has a bunch of WW1 replicas and I think the N28 is an original.  Kind of forgotten that The Army had the airplanes into WW2 but Dayton gets the credit.