MoFo Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 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? There are no certainties in model contests. Judges can be good or bad. They can apply the rules haphazardly. They can follow IPMS Nats standards, or a variation thereon, or pull it out of a dark and private hole. That being said... no, it *generally* wouldn't (shouldn't) get dinged. Judges work from basic construction, not accuracy or artistic interpretation. If there are glue smears on the opened panels, or silvered decals on the ordnance, it will get dinged. If it's got opened panels and ordnance... nope, not a judgeable issue. And it's a freakishly rare occurrance that models *don't* have some sort of construction fault. Mis-aligned wheels and doors, uneven paint, flubbed canopy/masking, un-filled seams, un-restored panel detail... Even John Vojtech's much praised F-15E was dinged at the nats for construction faults. There's just no such thing as a perfect model, where the judges would have to get so nit-picky as to debate the accuracy of weathering, paint colour, ordnance, etc. As others have said, the only real-world impact it will have is that, the more you do to a model, the more chances there are for things to go wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
frequent_flyer Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 @spike7451 Thanks a lot for your answer. Seems like you need a degree in computer science just to mount some bombs to a plane these days - but then they are not just simple "bombs" anymore. Regards frequent_flyer Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dedalus Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 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 Who do I build for? I build for myself without a doubt. But then that's another problem where construction is concerned. I am clearly my own worst critic--and I can't be the only one. I've found myself agonizing over the seam of an engine only to realize, remember, remind myself later that it will be sealed up inside the fuselage. My models turn out far from perfect still, but I can remember every little perfection, that's for sure. This also means I'm free to be as unrealistic as I want. I loaded a Tiger Meet F-15E with lots of live JDAMs and other guided ordnance, but I assume it was repainted before it ever reached a theater. It just looks cool to me. I could see doing the same with an aggressor/adversary F-15 because I don't like the look of an Eagle with nothing on it. Someone's gonna put all this detail into open panels, throw on a bunch of equally well built and detailed weapons, and someone else gets to dismiss or ding it for accuracy? THEY'RE right, but THAT ain't right in my book. That said, I will also say that when I display them at shows, I do it for my fellow modelers. Not judges. It feels neat to place (which I've done several times but never won except when I used to enter at the monthly meetings from which most serious models are held back for the regionals), but I don't stress over it. When I go to shows, I like to see a lot of models. Don't you? So I like to do my part to help out. But now you're talking about a lot of modelers who aren't beholden to the rules of judging. They're free to point out issues of accuracy. It's just something I deal with, but it has nothing to do with my decision to make my models look "cool" in my eyes. Mike Todd Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 Here is one with open panels and full weapon load: Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 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 Terribly sorry, I didn't see your question a year ago when you posted it. I can only talk to Hornets, but the weapons codes tell the airplane's systems the type of store loaded and what fuzes, if any, it is configured with. The airplane uses this info to calculate the gross weight, apply the correct ballistics tables for weapon delivery, determine the correct sequence to release stores, set the proper options for the pilot to select regarding fuze arm time or fin function, and in some cases adjust the flight control laws based on where in the envelope the jet is flying. You're right, the days of hang'em and go drop are long gone. The various weapons codes are part of the reason you can load a Hornet with 4 different types of stores on the wings and still be able to use them all the way they are intended to be used - the airplane is smart enough to know what stations to drop based on what the pilot selects. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
wardog Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I completely agree that when it comes to judging, accuracy should be left as a final decision factor in determining the winner between two equally perfect models. After all, somebody has to win and unless they are going to start handing out two first place prizes for a particular category, there has to be a way to separate the subjects being judged. The one and only issue I have with judging by accuracy is that models can conceivably be judged by someone who is not a technical expert with the subject and you therefore open yourself to whatever that judge "thinks" may be right.Yes, I believe that a fully armed "real" aircraft would never be up on jacks having It's engine(s)removed but if you can pull it off on a model and do it great, more power to you. You might lose in the end because of it but if that's the reason you lost, I think you're still a winner. And as far as judges are concerned, last I checked, I've yet to know a judge that knows everything about everything. Accurate or not, one of the things i enjoy most about modeling is the freedom to model as you wish, regardless of judging. It's part of what makes modeling fun and creative so enjoy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Here is a front view of the above pic: Now i suppose if Trumpeter includes full engines with their upcoming 1/32 scale A-6 kits, you can have the doors/panels open. As for real a/c loaded with open doors and panels, yes and no, it all depends on the situation. Speaking from personal experience, at times having numbers of a/c out on the flightline being loaded was more important that if they could fly or not. I've seen Voodoos being loaded with real weapons and there was only 1 engine in the a/c. As for load training, as long as the a/c could have electrical power applied and had pylons, racks and rails installed then we did our load training on that on matter the condition of the a/c. I've loaded CF-18s, with inert weapons of course, that were missing engines, canopys, ejection seats and flaps (which made loading the fuselage stations easier). So as long as you don't go overboard with a live loaded a/c with open panels, you should be fine. Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 A couple more examples from past and present, although the F-4 has a little more than just an open panel: http://arty611.smugmug.com/C-Battery-Photos/Vietnam-67-68-C-Battery/F4SCHULIA2/462370523_wndcY-L.jpg http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/crw_1163.jpg Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Litvyak Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I still don't see why IPMS can't do it when other groups such as the NMRA do their judging based on build quality AND accuracy (with a requirement for providing documentation to prove your model is accurate). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
loftycomfort Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 Wow! How did this thread get resurrected? When I started this thread more than a year ago, I was building a 1/32 Tornado with the avionics bays open and with a bomb load. I wanted to take it to a contest and was wondering if it would get dinged. Since then, I had taken the finished model to two contests, and it did quite well - took a silver in Ottawa, and gold in Guelph. So I guess it wasn't a "faux pas" after all. Here she is. Terry Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jester292 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Nice Tornado, Terry! Thanks for sharing. I get more excited about contests everyday, until I sit at the bench. Then I think "ain't no way I'm showing this thing off!" Aaron Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Not to steer this thread in another direction but in the F-4 pic posted above: http://arty611.smugmug.com/C-Battery-Photos/Vietnam-67-68-C-Battery/F4SCHULIA2/462370523_wndcY-L.jpg note the nose section of the left hand ext tank, is that a housing for a camera or something else? Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pigsty Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Here's a thought: if judging has to include accuracy, how do you judge "what-if" builds, science fiction, and fantasy figures? 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. That's just dreadful. The proper attitude for a judge presented with something unfamiliar is not to assume he knows everything and go downhill from there. It's to ask himself "I wonder what that is?" and, if possible, ask the bloody entrant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew Maverick Taylor Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I like the response about the Tornado scenario for the RAF. I know an ex RAF sparky who worked on Tornados who said that the gun is rigged in such a way that the first press of the trigger from the pilot loads the first round into the chamber and the second press actually fires the gun. So I can see that it would make sense the the gun panels are the last to be opened or closed when preping the aircraft for weapons delivery. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Finn Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 A bit more than open panels: http://www.gstatic.com/hostedimg/dd877ad5d47ba383_large http://www.gstatic.com/hostedimg/4cb80dec66d12817_large Jari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.