ORIGINAL: FliteMetal

Dag:

Your experience and confidence in truss building techniques provides the basis for what could be a scale D project. I know you stated your intention was not to finish it out, however in most cases when someone completes a project of this size and failed to illustrate the details on the surface it ends up looking like a natural gas tank car. Eye candy at the size of your D is what draws the viewer closer, and closer, and closer. Ironically, details do not have to contribute to excess weight nor fragility.

With the baseline structure as strong as it is...your dependence on tension and compression of a skin is reduced to no more than to maintain surface continutity. All too often when larger projects are assembled the surface does not maintain a uniform appearance. It can be rippled in some sections because the skin is not adhered in the same manner as it was on other sections. Ziroli DC-3's are an example as you sight down the backbone and along the side of the fuselage or wing. Utilizing thin and light weight phenolic sheet will go a long way to prevent that and instantly provide additional tension and compression relieving the internal truss during flight transitions of landing and wig wag effects during taxi out and back.

At 1/10.7% this is quite an impressive project. If you utilize .010 phenolic sheet you could easily achieve excellent exterior uniformity at the same time as reducing the weight compared to traditional wood sheeting. Heaven forbid you would surrender fabric and paint VS a hard surface ready for minimum paint as an excellent alternative capable of providing not only durability but "the look of the real thing"...up close and personal ; )

I am sure you have accumulated tons of documentation by this point. In reading your previous post relative to reworking the nacelles to accommodate the gear train vs direct drive. May I ask a question...Do you have any experience with hot wire and extruded Styrene foam to create scale "surface sections" which otherwise would result in considerable weight if it were replicated in a traditional manner? Your considerable CAD experience provides you 99% of that solution at no additional expense of time nor money. This could provide you the solution to what by now must be considered additional work to consider detailed exterior of the model.

On the other hand...to have invested so much time and energy to achieve what you have seems a shame if in the end it results in less than an equal testiment to your engineering and building craftsmanship achieved in areas hidden from view...and under appreciated by others observing the visual aspect of the end result's ROI, return on investment. Yeah, I know the value of self satisfaction in achieving a goal. However, with just a wee bit of effort, this not only becomes an engineering achievement for you...it beomes a replica and not a model...though a large one ; )