TomCrump

Thanks, David and abufletcher !

Viewing these pics is what I needed. I learn best, with visual aids. This fits the bill.

rcmiket

John, as always you amaze me. I've seen these before and everytime I read them it still makes me laugh. You every finish that Stafford B-24 thatyou were electrifying? Mike

John Redman

My Feedback: (8)

I haven't even started the B-24 yet. Seems work always gets in the way. Currently working on my BVM Rafale and coaching baseball!!

rcmiket

Busy guy. I saw the Parkzone P-51 was received well by most. Any truth to the rumor of another release this summer?
Mike

Thrushdust

Well I guess I did have a slight advantage there. I also maintained and loaded that and other aircraft as a FAA licensed A&P from 1980-1993 when I was working for the owner of the full-scale Thrush, Fred Whitfield (Red Twilight's uncle). We rebuilt that one and returned it to service after a takeoff "incident" that basically totaled the aircraft. That kind of information is tough to put in the documentation package and it can become a double edge sword too. Knowing how the full scale aircraft are built and maintained can be helpful working through some problems but can cause other dilemmas by knowing all the things that aren't not quite right or that you have to compromise on a model. I would love to be able to have a full working cockpit in my Thrush, like Dave Johnson's FAI quality models, but it just isn't practical because of the relation to the CG and the fact that I'm already pushing the limit for weight for the power that I have available at ~30lbs at takeoff. Each ounce I add to the cockpit area is two more in the front and the lead filled dummy engine already weighs close to 7 pounds.
Anyway the main thing is make sure your plane matches the documentation that is presented to the judges, and try to make your material easy for them to navigate through. Give them the information they need but don't try to baffle them with BS, they don't usually don't buy that! You will notice in the first photo with my documentation book that there is a rather large stack of photos that is not included, very helpful when building a model but they can be disastrous to a static score, so pick your information carefully. Building a model of an aircraft that no longer exists and there is no hard evidence of colors or materials can be especially challenging but do your research and provide it to the judges in an informative way and they should reward you appropriately. The judges should grade your model to the documentation presented regardless of their own perception of how it should be.
BTW, I didn't build that model until several years after I worked for Fred a couple of years after he had retired from spraying so the airplane was long gone from the area. I was clever enough though to employ "Platt's scarfology principle" by taking pictures knowing that someday I may want to build a model or two.
David Hayes

RedTwilight

How would you produce a model of a plane that has not flown in severalyears and is in severe weathered  and unflyable condition?  My cousin(Fred Whitfield's nephew) has a couple of Cessna 188 Agwagon\/truckthat I would like to replicate.  Though I probably will not compete inany scale competitions anytime soon,  I would still like to haveeverything necessary to compete just in case.  Both have not flown inseveral years and one has been disassembled.  One may be restored in the future. 
Would these be replicated in the condition when they where flyable? New? Or otherwise?  The only pics I have are in the current condition. No pics from when they flew unless I can get some from my cousin.

Thanks

Thrushdust

You can provide photos of an aircraft in the "as is" condition that prove the size, shape, type and position of markings, lettering, stripes or color changes. Then include color chips or other information for the "correct" colors. In your case I would try to find an inspection panel or other painted piece of material from the subject, with one or more of the primary colors on it, to include in your information packet. The judges can compare that to your photos too and "interpilate" the other colors. That works, I did it with the my smaller Thrush that I flew from 1988~1992. You an also include items like OEM factory stickers for things like the "Cessna Ag leaf" that was on the vertical of most of the most 188 series aircraft (that would also make a good notebook cover decoration). Those along with a good 3 view should be enough to satisfy most judges' requirements WHEN you decide to compete with it.
The model can be finished in whatever condition you want to present it in. Whether you want to do a "factory new", "hanger queen", "museum finish" or maybe a "working aircraft" (my choice), "war weary" or other version the choice is yours. Even if it is different from the condition it is shown in your documentation. Just let the static judges know when you present your documentation to them.
One other thing you may consider is if Bobby does get around to restoring his plane, try out a new scheme for him on your model and then if he likes it he can work in reverse and make his match yours.
DH