Witold Jaworski

Well, I am not making plastic kits, so I cannot answer directly your question. However, if they are based on the modelers' drawings that were published so far, then all contain minor or major errors. At this moment I am using the original documentation to identify errors that I made in my own 3D model. You will see below, that there are many of them, in spite of my previous five-year research! I am afraid that the plastic kits are no better. During nearest weeks I will post here some tips about this issue - then you can decide, which manufacturer builds the model that is the most close to the

Several years ago I analyzed the SBD photos and concluded that SBD-5 (and -6) engines were mounted a few inches forward than in the previous Dauntless versions (SBD-1..-4). In this post I estimated this difference in length as 4 inches. Now I found the proof of this observation in the SBD-4 and SBD-5 engine mount dimensions (drawings 5055954 and 5159336): The explicit dimension of SBD-4 engine mount (dwg no 5055954) specifies its length (distance from the firewall to the back faces of the engine mounting lugs) as 34.1875 (I switched original fractional dimensions to decimals). Simil

(continuation of the previous post) I chose about 1000 frames (mostly assembly drawings) from this microfilm set, and organized them into a tree-like structure as in figure below: To preserve disk space, I placed in these folders shortcuts to files located in the original directories (These original directories correspond to microfilm reels: “A”, “B”, …, “XB”). I practiced that when I click such a link, it opens the image in Photo Viewer, as if it was the original file. I think that Douglas did not use any sophistical drawing numeration (at least in this project). T

In general, the set of 7 SBD/A-24 reels from NASM contains 3308 unique microfilm frames, belonging to 3022 drawings. On reels “XA” and “XB” you can usually find updated copies of the previous reels (“A”, “B”,.. “F”). However, 350 frames from “XA” and “XB” are unique – most probably this is a part of the missing roll “C”. Duplicates from these “X*” reels are also useful, when a drawing from one of the previous reels is unreadable. (continued in the next post - this site system went crazy and does not allow me for writing this post in one piece!)

(continuation of previous post) It took me about 100 hours of work, but here it is: Click here to download the index (*.xlsx file, 303kB). Frankly speaking, for my purposes I do not need the details from roll A, which took about 25% of the total work time. But I decided to index all the rolls, just to provide a complete list for eventual other users. Below you can see how this list looks like: For each microfilm frame I note in this table not only the drawing number, but also the name copied interim from the drawing title block. (I preserved in these texts

Major Walt - thank you! Below more on this subject: _________________________ In June 2019 I followed C. West suggestion and ordered a set of Douglas SBD original technical documentation from U.S. National Air and Space Museum. Technically these blueprints are stored on several microfilm rolls. In that time all what I knew about this package (NASM id: “Mcfilm-000000408”) was the information printed on the order form: As you can see, this set has no index, which I could order earlier to examine its contents. When I finally received these microfilms in November 2019, I also

(continuation of the previous post....) What about the possible performance of the YP-37/R-2600 fighter? Could it be significantly better than the YP-37, or its direct predecessor, the P-36? Well, we can estimate the answer basing on other aircraft designs in which similar inline engine was replaced by a similar two-row radial. For example – such a thing happened to the Soviet LaGG-3 fighter which used 12-cylinder M-105P inline engine (improved version of the Hispano-Suiza) rated at 1100hp on takeoff. In 1942 it was replaced by 14-cylinder, two-row radial M-82 engine (which closely r

I am still busy with my daily business, but I managed to write an article about unknown Curtiss project: the YP-37 with the R-2600 radial engine: ________________________ Reviewing the original P-36/YP-37/P-40 blueprints published by AirCorps Library, I also browsed the “uncategorized drawings” category. In general, many Curtiss drawings from this microfilm set are unreadable, especially these “uncategorized” images. Often all what you can see is just a blank microfilm frame with barely visible remains of the title block. However, in this “junk” category you can find interesting sketche

Last month I was busy with my daily business, so in this post I would like to share just single detail, which I encountered in the P-36/YP-37/P-40 documentation. This finding is related to the “long tail” P-40 variants. In August 1942 Curtiss decided to definitely resolve the directional problems of the “short-nose” P-40s. They extended their tail, adding an additional segment after station 16. It shifted the original “P-36 – like” fin and rudder back by about 20 inches. This modification was introduced to the Allison-powered P-40K-10, and to the Merlin-powered P-40F-20. (These two versio

This post in on a partially off-topic subject, so I just place a brief description: In October I wrote two tutorials on fitting a 3D model into a photo. (You can then use such a photo like a precise reference. Of course, such a "real-world" reference is always better than any scale drawings). As I mentioned in previous posts, I am going to use this method to make final checks on the P-40B engine cowling shape, that I deduced from the XP-40 (late) sketches from 1939. In this tutorial I used my old P-40B model, which I finished in 2011. It was based on the scale plans and a few low-res bl

Finally (after 5 months) I received the Douglas SBD microfilms from NSAM (7 rolls). I have already contacted a local service provider, who scans microfilms for museums. They promised me to scan them in the beginning of December. (I have no any microfilm viewer, and do not want to spoil these films in a slide projector. At this moment I just checked that the title page of these microfilms says that this is the Douglas SBD/ A-24, and that it contains blueprint pictures). I will keep you informed on the progress.

In my models I recreate most of the panel lines using bump textures (aka normal maps). In following posts I described how I prepared these textures for my SBD Dauntless: part 1, part 2, part 3. If they are too general, in 2015 I also wrote a book, where I described all details of my methods. It uses Blender 2.7, but the general workflow remains the same also in Blender 2.8 (just the details are changing - reference images as empty objects, more readable collections instead of layers, etc.). In the appendices to this book you will also find introduction to sub

In the previous post I finally identified Curtiss layout sketch L-10202 as description of the XP-40 geometry, as it was in February 1940. In that time Curtiss was finishing preparations for serial production of the P-40. (The first P-40 from this batch was accepted by USAAC in April 1940). This final variant of the XP-40 close resembled the serial P-40-cu, except the tail wheel cover and rear glass frames, “inherited” from the P-36. However, the archival photos revealed minor differences between engine cowlings of these aircraft: the serial P-40 had longer spinner and deeper radiator cover.

Well, usually I am making the fuselage as an assembly of two or three separate parts, following the original technological divisions and the capabilities of the subdivision surfaces (i.e. required mesh topology). In general, I would start just from a single bulkhead contour, smoothed by the subdivision modifier, with carefully planned vertex locations (they are the longeron roots). In the classic aircraft this first bulkhead is the firewall. Then I will extrude it to the next key bulkhead (for example - at the beginning of the tail). After checking the shapes of these two and their longeron ed

Thank you very much! Some of these pictures are the higher resolution versions of photos that I already know (so they are useful), but the others are absolutely new for me. I quickly reviewed these photos, and I would especially thank for this fragment of Rudy Arnold's photo from September 26th, 1940: This picture clearly shows that the gun covers were made from a separate piece of sheet metal, flush-riveted to the engine cowling panel. (I always wondered, how they made such a "bulge" from a single sheet metal: it should tear off. Now this picture resolves this "tec

Generally speaking, the early P-40s (-cu, B, C) were “P-36 airframes with inline engines”. Thus, the only unique first-order assembly in these P-40 variants was their engine compartment. So far it seemed that the documentation of this area was lost, and the restoration teams had to rely on archival photos and other restored P-40B/C. (A P-40B restoration team from New Zealand mentioned this in their interview). In my post from August 2019 (Fig. 98-13 and Fig. 98-14) I described a previously unnoticed layout sketch, that I found among the “uncategorized” P-36/P-40 drawings in the AirCorps "

As I mentioned in the previous post, I had to check if the “keel” under the wing that I draw according the P-40E blueprints and the “keel” in the P-40B were identical. I was forced to use the P-40E documentation, because the drawings of the earlier P-40 versions (B, C) are extremely rare and often dispersed among less important blueprints (like sketches or design proposals). Thus, to check the assumption that the P-40 “keel” was identical in the “short nose” and “long nose” Hawks, I had to use available photos. The aircraft picture on most of the photos is deformed by the perspective dist

This post is first of the four dedicated to composing a side view of the P-40B from the original blueprints. As I already wrote in this thread, it is impossible to find a complete documentation of the early P-40 variants (so-called “long nose Hawks”: P-40cu, P-40B and P-40C). I collected all what is currently available from the Internet portals: blueprints of their direct predecessor (P-36) and drawings of the later variants (the “short nose” P-40D … P-40N). Using these scanned microfilm frames, archival photos and technical descriptions you can recreate the wings, empennage, tail and mid-fuse

Before you organize the original blueprints of an aircraft, collect as many reference photos as possible, and familiarize yourself with the aircraft shape, main assemblies and – especially – their joints. You will need all this knowledge to quickly recognize the drawings you need. About 60% of the original blueprints depict various small, internal details (tubes, brackets, plates, etc.) which are necessary only when you would like to build a real, flying airplane. To select a useful subset of these blueprints, I had to review all the drawings in the microfilm set, and copy some of them in

Thank you! From my experience (I was "on both sides": thirty years ago I traced some scale plans for the modelers, built many traditional scale models "from scratch" and then some computer models): the cross sections are the least precise elements of the scale plans. They accumulate all the eventual errors made by their author in the side view and the top/bottom views, and some additional random mistakes. If I have to "trust" any scale plan, I would rate its views (from the most precise to the least): 1. side view (left or right - does not matter) 2. top view

Important update about this SBD project: thanks to C West help, I identified a microfilm roll set of the original Douglas documentation for the SBD/A-24. In June I ordered its copy from NASM and now I am waiting for these materials. When I got them, they will be scanned by a local service company which scans various museum archives. This is not cheap, because the only possibility is to scan all microfilm frames (and pay for each frame, of course - I estimate that this set of seven microfilm rolls contain about 5500-6000 frames). Then I will organize these scans for quick use as the reference m

Recreating geometry of a historical aircraft is usually a painstaking, iterative process. You can see this in my work on the SBD Dauntless. During the long hours of studying the photos and trying to figure out the precise shape of this plane I often wished to have its source blueprints! For many years the access to the original documentation was “the Holy Grail” of the advanced modelers. (Everybody wished to have this ultimate resource, but only few saw it. And even those, who saw these drawings, often did not know what they are seeing). For example - below you can see the original so-called "

A small off-topic note: this winter I was busy with my daily business and took a break from the SBD model. However, in February and March I spent few Sundays helping in another project: recreating the Fokker D.V biplane, used in 1917 as an “advanced trainer” by German Air Corps: My part was recreating the geometry of this aircraft, especially its fuselage frame made of steel tubes. All what we had was a dozen of various archival photos, a poor general drawing, and the landing gear dimensions. In this case I had to turn the available photos into the precise reference,

Major Walt, thank you for following! 🙂 This winter I am busy with my daily business project, so you will see the further progress in this model in the spring 2019. However, I have just found a little unpublished tutorial that I made in November, so I decided to publish during this break: _____________________________________________ This post is dedicated to a minor feature, which I have found surprisingly demanding: modeling the grooves pressed in the curved surfaces of the aircraft panels. In the SBD you can see some of such reinforcements on the inner cowling, behind the cyl

This time just about some minor details: After “mounting” the R-1820 engines into my SBD models, I decided to recreate some details of the inner cowling (the cowling panels placed behind the cylinder row). In this post I will form the missing parts of the carburetor air ducts, hidden under the NACA ring. There are significant differences in this area between various SBD versions, which never appeared in any scale plans, or in any popular monograph of this aircraft. I think that the pictures presented below highlight these differences. They can be useful for all those scale modelers who are