Model jet armed, access panels opened - contest faux pas?

[loftycomfort]

I was told that military personnel are not allowed to have any access panels opened on an armed jet (at least in the US military). While I see the logic in this in the real world, would an armed jet model with open access panels get marks deducted on a contest table?

Cheers,

Terry

[Netz]

Maybe only at the National's level, but even that would depend on the knowledge of the Judges.

I think most contest judging is 1st based on the construction of the model (or should be if using IPMS rules)and most judging can be decided solely based on the build it'self.

So it doesn't matter how much stuff to hang on your model or how much after-market you stuffed into it, if it was done poorly you will suffer.

I have been Judging for 15 years now and have never seen nor made a decision based on accuracy, it never got to that point.

Curt

[kenlilly106]

I'll second what Curt said, the quality of the craftsmanship matters first and foremost.

In reality having a full weapons load and the panels opened up can count against you simply because there are more places to screw up craftsmanship-wise.

Ken

[loftycomfort]

Got it. That makes sense. Thank you, guys.

Terry

[spike7451]

I was told that military personnel are not allowed to have any access panels opened on an armed jet (at least in the US military). While I see the logic in this in the real world, would an armed jet model with open access panels get marks deducted on a contest table?

Cheers,

Terry

Not true,Well,as far as the RAF goes.The are certain panels that have to be open on jet's,Ground power & earthing for example.On the RAF Tornado,you bomb the jet up before you load/arm the gun,so you need the panels open.

Loading a AGM Brimstone missile to an RAF Tornado GR4 in Afghanistan,with refueling & ground interface open above it.

Edited May 31, 2011 by spike7451

[Darren Roberts]

Maybe only at the National's level, but even that would depend on the knowledge of the Judges.

I think most contest judging is 1st based on the construction of the model (or should be if using IPMS rules)and most judging can be decided solely based on the build it'self.

So it doesn't matter how much stuff to hang on your model or how much after-market you stuffed into it, if it was done poorly you will suffer.

I have been Judging for 15 years now and have never seen nor made a decision based on accuracy, it never got to that point.

Curt

This response should be pinned! Excellent answer.

[UK_tomcat_fan]

I think the US Airforce have a panel open for taxi out for the comms system

[Joe Hegedus]

Not true,Well,as far as the RAF goes.The are certain panels that have to be open on jet's,Ground power & earthing for example.On the RAF Tornado,you bomb the jet up before you load/arm the gun,so you need the panels open.

Seconded. It depends on the jet, and the specific panels in question. Hornets routinely have the access panel for the starboard avionics bay open, since that is where the weapons codes are entered into the jet and the crew should be verifying the correct codes as part of the walkaround.

[loftycomfort]

Not true,Well,as far as the RAF goes.The are certain panels that have to be open on jet's,Ground power & earthing for example.On the RAF Tornado,you bomb the jet up before you load/arm the gun,so you need the panels open.

Loading a AGM Brimstone missile to an RAF Tornado GR4 in Afghanistan,with refueling & ground interface open above it.

Excellent! In fact, the genesis of this question is a 1/32 Tornado I have in mind, albeit an Italian one.

Speaking of Tornados, why do the RAF birds always have the flaps lowered when unpowered? The Italians and Saudis have theirs up when the jets are unpowered.

Terry

[Bobski]

Excellent! In fact, the genesis of this question is a 1/32 Tornado I have in mind, albeit an Italian one.

Speaking of Tornados, why do the RAF birds always have the flaps lowered when unpowered? The Italians and Saudis have theirs up when the jets are unpowered.

Terry

They don't:

That's one photo but of all the Tornadoes that I've seen over the last few years, both at work and while out and about, I see more with their flaps retracted than I do with them lowered.

[spike7451]

Excellent! In fact, the genesis of this question is a 1/32 Tornado I have in mind, albeit an Italian one.

Speaking of Tornados, why do the RAF birds always have the flaps lowered when unpowered? The Italians and Saudis have theirs up when the jets are unpowered.

Terry

They don't.On all the Tornado's Ive worked on over the years,95% of them have the flaps retracted & that's still the case today.The may be local instructions that say the crew can leave them out but it causes more hassle when they do.

[Scooby]

Seconded. It depends on the jet, and the specific panels in question. Hornets routinely have the access panel for the starboard avionics bay open, since that is where the weapons codes are entered into the jet and the crew should be verifying the correct codes as part of the walkaround.

Correct and we also opended the gun door so the pilot can see status of his gun during his walkaround.

It isn't so much as a matter of panels being opened, it is work is not done on an armed jet. Only once in my career was I permitted to do maintenance on an armed jet, that was during the G8 Leaders protection in 2005.

You would never see a jet on jacks with weapons loaded. Nor would an engine be changed.

[Jennings]

Regardless of real life, faux pas, or the price of tea in China, my own view is that a model airplane with every panel flung open, engines removed, flaps dropped, etc, etc, etc that is loaded for bear with ordnance looks silly. The odd open panel, realistically depicting the way you see a real airplane on the ramp, is fine. And an airplane all torn apart in the depot for maintenance is fine. But mixing them looks silly.

I have the same reaction to otherwise historically accurate (colors, markings, etc) models hung with utterly inappropriate ordnance. A prime example is the legions of circa 1943 or early 1944 8th AF P-47D razorback models you see loaded up with bombs - and especially with bazooka tubes. Those guys weren't doing ground attack, they were escorting bombers in 1943 and '44. A little historical study would be enlightening. Doing a 9th AF Jug from late 1944 all loaded for bear - you bet.

Just a little personal thing...

[pookie]

There was a topic here not too long ago about this very issue regarding the #1 and #2 Jet models at last years IPMS.

Model #2, an F-15 loaded and panels open was considered to be a better model than #1, a more simple F-14 model.

[GForceSS]

Maybe only at the National's level, but even that would depend on the knowledge of the Judges.

I think most contest judging is 1st based on the construction of the model (or should be if using IPMS rules)and most judging can be decided solely based on the build it'self.

So it doesn't matter how much stuff to hang on your model or how much after-market you stuffed into it, if it was done poorly you will suffer.

I have been Judging for 15 years now and have never seen nor made a decision based on accuracy, it never got to that point.

Curt

Ditto! I do a pretty good amount of judging when my knees are up to it. The modeller has to display his work inside and out so open panels, fully armed is fine. How else are you going to show everything? It all in the build quality. I have never come down to accuracy as there is enough to find on just the build level and added detail. The model with the least flaws wins with me.

[thegoodsgt]

From a modeling/contest point of view, having access panels open while the aircraft is armed wouldn't matter unless the model were displayed in a diorama. And even then that consideration wouldn't come into play until well after basic construction and painting were assessed (when the category winners are identified in most cases).

[Paolo Maglio]

I think most depend on the panel you want to open.

In a F-16 crew chiefs had to open the left side panel to wire connect to the pilot for engine start.

But once I saw an almost perfect 48 sclae F-111 model, it was full of bombs and fuel tanks, open cokpit but the modeller also opened all wing panels to show the scartchbuilt interior skin!

Now I think you would never remove wing panels from and armed aircraft.

[spike7451]

Correct and we also opended the gun door so the pilot can see status of his gun during his walkaround.

It isn't so much as a matter of panels being opened, it is work is not done on an armed jet. Only once in my career was I permitted to do maintenance on an armed jet, that was during the G8 Leaders protection in 2005.

You would never see a jet on jacks with weapons loaded. Nor would an engine be changed.

Happened a few times with the Tornado's on Granby,sometimes on start up,the jet would develop a fault,be it with the engines,avionics or INS,so a SNEC techy would go out & uversee the repairs while the crew sat in situ.If the fault couldn't be fixed,then the crew would walk to a spare jet.

We also practiced hot Turn Around's where the jet would taxi in & it would be bombed up & refueled while the crew changed over.

[mrvark]

The question was about judging and the answer is "No". On aircraft I know about, I frequently see inaccuracies. On aircraft I don't know about there are undoubtedly inaccuracies that I'm oblivious to. With the former I may roll my eyes and grumble that you 'd never see that, but it would be grossly unfair to the modeler who happens to have built a model of an aircraft I have knowledge of to punish him in favor of another who may have equally bad (or worse) inaccuracies I'm unaware of. As a judge, you have to leave your ego at the door and evaluate the WORKMANSHIP of the modeler. That is the only way you can be fair.

Having said that, if you open doors, drop flaps, etc., etc., you'd better do so flawlessly. The competition out there is stiff, and I frequently see ambitious, but poorly executed projects lose out to a simpler effort done well. 95% of the things that keep folks from getting an award are (often minor) flaws in basic construction, painting, and/or decaling. One of the worst things about being a judge is that I know the second I've made a mistake that will make a model non-competitive. Good thing I model for my own pleasure and not for those awful judges!

[Grey Ghost 531]

From a modeling/contest point of view, having access panels open while the aircraft is armed wouldn't matter unless the model were displayed in a diorama. And even then that consideration wouldn't come into play until well after basic construction and painting were assessed (when the category winners are identified in most cases).

This gets my vote for the best answer. Accuracy is very low on the list of judging criteria. It's only going to come into play as a tie breaker between a couple of basically perfect builds. That doesn't happen very often (it hasn't happened yet in any catagory that I helped judge).

Here's my cool story of an exeption to the rules.

I once worked on an armed aircraft on the flight deck. I had to open the radome, extend the radar package and change out some receiver crystals to get the CO's airplane up for the launch. It was armed with 4 AIM-7s and 4 AIM-9s with a carted centerline. Not only was it armed, the port engine was still running! But if the CO says "jump", you only ask "how high?"

[RedStar]

As the resident "display only" proponent, I'd ask this question:

WHO CARES WHAT THE JUDGES THINK?

Are you building this model for you or for the judges?

Now I don't want to go off on a rant here (he says in his best Dennis Miller) - but contests are absolutely a bane to modeling. We worry too much about what the judges are going to think and not enough about just enjoying the project.

The answers above are all correct - at least where US IPMS contests are concerned: the quality of the build should outweigh the accuracy of the build. According to the letter of the IPMS law, factors like basic alignment, seam filling, smooth finish, silver decals, etc. all should be taken into account before accuracy or any more subjective criteria (like weather) are considered. A well built OOB model will beat a flawed super detailed model IF the criteria are properly followed.

Unfortunately outside of the nationals the criteria are not always followed, and regional tendencies tend to creep in. You put your model on a table at one contest and win, and at another you don't.

Most of the time that I judged, alignment alone was enough to determine the winners.

But then I asked myself WHY? Why am I concerned about winning another trophy that I'm going to throw in a box at home? Why am I going to concern myself with sometimes very arbitrary results when I can just enjoy building the model?

It doesn't mean that I won't build it well, or that I'm going to put a less than full effort into the project, it just means that giving any weight to how a model will judge will almost certainly detract from my satisfaction and enjoyment in the project.

I could go on and on here about the damage that the IPMS Contest does to the hobby:

* About how it lends itself to only seeing certain types of models on display - those that are suited to IPMS style judging.

* About how the IPMS judging process hasn't evolved, and as a result, it's fractured the hobby - ask yourself why groups like AMPS, NNL and Wonderfest popped up?

* About how the contest does nothing to encourage new modelers to get involved, and frankly can be very intimidating to new members.

* About how the contest doesn't represent the full cross section of folks modeling - only the best of the best.

I've won more than my fair share of trophies, but it's really come clear to me over the last couple of years that the contest process is broken, and that IPMS has lost sight of what's important. There are endless debates over how to continue to refine the contest instead of really figuring out how to PROMOTE the hobby.

I'll tell you one thing, if you want to PROMOTE the hobby - the contest ISN'T the answer.

So to answer the original question - build the model how you want, and have a good time doing it - all other considerations are secondary.

Just my take...

Paul

[frequent_flyer]

Hornets routinely have the access panel for the starboard avionics bay open, since that is where the weapons codes are entered into the jet and the crew should be verifying the correct codes as part of the walkaround.

Just a side question: why do these weapons codes have to be entered into the jet in the first place? What is this done for? I guess the days where you just hung some stuff making boom on a plane and be done with it are gone.

Regards

frequent_flyer

[spike7451]

Just a side question: why do these weapons codes have to be entered into the jet in the first place? What is this done for? I guess the days where you just hung some stuff making boom on a plane and be done with it are gone.

Regards

frequent_flyer

In the RAF,we use a Mk 960 MFBF (Multi-Function Bomb Fuze) now I can't go into the intracacies of it for security reasons,but when we load the bomb,the fuse is programmed by us,the load team.Now if we fit,say,8x1000lb bombs we would have to use a TSC (Twin Store Carrier) which was (we don't use them on Tornado anymore) our version or the TER or MER.

Obviously you don't want to drop the TSC as well as the bombs (as happened a couple times in the Gulf War) so you programme into the jet what you have fitted to the jet.You also programme in a code for bomb one on station1,bomb 2 on station 2 ect ect.This allows the Nav to select what ever mode he want's each bomb fuse to be set for detonation.

On the Nimrod,we used what we call 'Roll Cards'.This is a plate with holes in it.These holes are in a certain order depending on what we loaded.Next to the Tac Nav's position was a box of circuit breakers.These cards slot over the circuit breakers & allow the ones you don't need to 'pop' which sets the Weps comp to allow dropping of what you have loaded.On the Nimrod,it's very 1960'S tech!

[ross blackford]

:D, I know I've mentioned this on these boards here somewhere before, but while I was in the RAAF at Richmond I attended a model display and competition at Blacktown Workers Club once. There was a 1/72 Revell Mirage IIIO in the competition section in overall grey-green primer (A3-34) built by an enthusiastic 14 year old who had obviously done his homework. As the judges approached the chief judge went off into a tirade about how no Mirage had ever been painted that way. Having worked on -34 when she ws painted that way, I decided to weigh in to the argument; I wasn't going to see the young kid put down like that so I defended him. After my little speech the chief judge threw up his hands and stomped off. The other judges took up their pencils and started ticking boxes on the kid's entry sheet. I'd hate to think what the chief judge would have said if I had entered a model of scene I was involved with at Learmonth in 1980.

A pilot had started his Miracle and the alternator refused to come on line. This pilot was already running a bit late so the decision was made to keep him in the aircraft he was sitting in and remove the main AC contactor panel on the starboard side right behind the auxiliary intake door with the engine shut down. We then got him to start up and I gave the contactor a belt with the head of a screw driver. The alternator immediately came on line. Then there was the job of replacing the panel with the engine running. There are about 100 screws hold that panel on so here were 2 of us working carefully from either end of the panel replacing screws. I was working from the end nearest the aux. intake door, the other bloke from the other end. I wonder how that would be marked as a diorama in a competition if absolute accuracy was the order of the day. I think probably no judge would believe you if you told them it was true and no photos exist of this incident as none were taken,we didn't hve time. By the way, the aircraft was armed with guns and bombs at the time.

,

Ross.

Edited for typos, written at 0530.

Edited June 2, 2011 by ross blackford

[Zactoman]

The question was about judging and the answer is "No". On aircraft I know about, I frequently see inaccuracies. On aircraft I don't know about there are undoubtedly inaccuracies that I'm oblivious to. With the former I may roll my eyes and grumble that you 'd never see that, but it would be grossly unfair to the modeler who happens to have built a model of an aircraft I have knowledge of to punish him in favor of another who may have equally bad (or worse) inaccuracies I'm unaware of. As a judge, you have to leave your ego at the door and evaluate the WORKMANSHIP of the modeler. That is the only way you can be fair.

Having said that, if you open doors, drop flaps, etc., etc., you'd better do so flawlessly. The competition out there is stiff, and I frequently see ambitious, but poorly executed projects lose out to a simpler effort done well. 95% of the things that keep folks from getting an award are (often minor) flaws in basic construction, painting, and/or decaling. One of the worst things about being a judge is that I know the second I've made a mistake that will make a model non-competitive. Good thing I model for my own pleasure and not for those awful judges!

My personal point of view as a viewer/admirer, not a judge:

I give 'operational accuracy' a pass on aircraft sitting on a display base. I consider models to be display pieces and appreciate a well done model with 'everything' on display.

A diorama on the other hand should represent 'a moment in time' and should be historically accurate.