Jump to content

Chief Snake

Manufacturers
  • Content Count

    870
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chief Snake

  • Rank
    Step away from the computer!
  • Birthday 10/26/1955

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    scorpion851
  • Website URL
    http://www.cobracompany.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Maryland

Recent Profile Visitors

7,883 profile views
  1. There are some other things on there I have previously seen on USAF MV-22"s. The stuff scabbed along the lower part of the sponson just in front of the rear landing gear is new to me. Chris M
  2. I'm gonna go out on a limb here but a photo of this aircraft was floating around back when the RAH-66 was being developed. My memory of it was it's not a flyable prototype but a trial fit of proposed parts. A mock up. The line that comes up and across the nose suggests those are fasteners that just hold a nose cap in place. If this was a manufactured for flight change, I believe the nose would appear as a solid unit. The photo might have been in the Army Aviation Digest. Since Boeing and Sikorsky were paired on the Comanche project it seems a likely idea from Sikorsky. Chris M
  3. No, the UH-1D artwork is on the KittyHawk sheet. Chris M
  4. The unit is the same. The design was transferred from one of the aircraft to another. I seem to recall it was on the D first and when that aircraft was damaged the PI moved over to the guns section. The was a risque component in the first depiction, in order to satisfy some issues with it the art was altered by adding panties to the depiction of the girl. The second picture is in more than one book, I have a color photo of it from the crewchief in the picture.
  5. I rotated it to a better position using the alignment of the control tubes as a guide. The damper arm links needed modification as well as the PC links. I also discovered that the stabilizer bar does not have proper mounts and the oil reservoirs for the blade grips are not there. Chris M
  6. I'll try soon. My wife passed away suddenly September 18th and I am in deep work dealing with legal stuff. Chris M
  7. I built one recently and I deleted the little pin on the top of the mast and turned the whole mast clockwise. Couple of little fiddly things to adjust and even though the scissors and drive links are incorrect the control tubes line up without that exaggerated tilt. Looks ok, someone who did not know about it would not realize it. Chris M
  8. I think kitty Hawk got it wrong largely because the CAD designers did not understand what it was they were looking at. And I do not think the CAD designers are as fully capable as they could be. They designed the scissors and drive links and while parts are right, they are mirrored and no one caught that. The locator pin at the top of the mast and it's dimple in the head are placed improperly. While what they did would have worked it simply was not aligned with everything below it in the proper way. Some of the other things, like the overhead detail that was missing and the failure to put a lo
  9. I believe they are available on disc, you might find them on ebay. Chris M
  10. I have a set from 1989. If you want to see something specific I could go through the books and find it. Descriptive illustrations of each model contain multiple pages of parts breakdown. Chris M
  11. Yes, the Kitty Hawk kit is wrong. There are incorrect presentations of both hardware and relative location of hardware. Chris M
  12. Yeah, that's pretty exaggerated for the tubes. Look at pictures of B,C and M and that angle isn't as prominent. Must be something peculiar to the E with a 540 head. Chris M
  13. Don't quite get what else you may be referring to but that head is a 540. That control positioning is correct for that install, not for a D or H. Kitty Hawk kit as intended is wrong but I found the mast locator pin was a part of the o'clock issue and the drive links/scissors were backwards. If you had the opportunity to revue the maintenance books for this series of helicopters you would be surprised at the difference that exist between models. The 540 on UH series was a blend of the UH-1 and AH-1 controls. Chris M
  14. The Cobra Company set didn't get the blades corrected because I had a lot of trouble with mold creep and resin droop. Even if I had corrected the chord of the blades the problems remained. And yes, I tried putting brass rods in the molds and poured resin in them. Something of that nature is bound to fail early and the brass rods would show quickly. The set didn't sell well enough to explore more options which certainly would have affected the price. For myself, I take the blades out the Dragon Huey kit and shorten them and rework the rotor head of the Seminar kit. Takes some inventiveness
×
×
  • Create New...