Armed aircraft and open equipment bays

[niart17]

You know, in all my years and all the contest I've ever been to, I've NEVER seen a model aircraft explode or cause injury because maintenance panels were open on an armed jet.

If a judge penalizes a model in an IPMS rules contest because panels are open on an armed jet (assuming it's not a diorama) then that person should not be allowed to judge. There are very few people that know everything about every subject modeled in a contest. IF a judge starts using such criteria as "that panel shouldn't be open on this type of aircraft" because they "know" that about one particular aircraft then it is unfair advantage or disadvantage for that model. That is exactly the reason specific accuracy items shouldn't be considered when judging an IPMS rules contest. Only build. So build it the way you want. If you want to have one engine out of the plane with the other one shown in full afterburner and all the instruments lit up and on with nobody in the plane...then go for it.

Bill

[Finn]

Of course in wartime, in this case Korea, anything is possible:

http://www.gstatic.com/hostedimg/dd877ad5d47ba383_large

http://www.gstatic.com/hostedimg/4cb80dec66d12817_large

Jari

[phasephantomphixer]

You know, in all my years and all the contest I've ever been to, I've NEVER seen a model aircraft explode or cause injury because maintenance panels were open on an armed jet.

If a judge penalizes a model in an IPMS rules contest because panels are open on an armed jet (assuming it's not a diorama) then that person should not be allowed to judge. There are very few people that know everything about every subject modeled in a contest. IF a judge starts using such criteria as "that panel shouldn't be open on this type of aircraft" because they "know" that about one particular aircraft then it is unfair advantage or disadvantage for that model. That is exactly the reason specific accuracy items shouldn't be considered when judging an IPMS rules contest. Only build. So build it the way you want. If you want to have one engine out of the plane with the other one shown in full afterburner and all the instruments lit up and on with nobody in the plane...then go for it.

Bill

Yes, such a subject should be non-issue with judging. I completely agree and speak up if I find one veering away from the basics. Personally I prefer that an aircraft be displayed in an accurate manner as well as nicely built.

[DET1460]

It wasn't that uncommon to be in the launch phase of a mission to have an anomaly with the avionics of an aircraft with a crew on board, engines running. They go through checks of all the systems and finding a problem the avionics people would show up to repair it and we'd have removed or opened the panel, sometimes without cutting the engines for a common fix.

With turn around times limited, the aircraft were armed for the next mission as the avionics guys were doing their thing. The armorers were sometimes finished and gone while the avionics guys were still doing their thing.

Armed with panels open was not that big of a deal. It happened often.

FINN posted some nice pics, one of a B-57, either a 'B' or an 'E', with panels opened. These were part of the crew's preflight inspection and were opened until they checked inside. The crewchief would follow and close everything behind them. (I used to that)....

My advice, to be sure the arrogant, know-it-all 'judge' is put in his place is to copy and print the pics in this thread and produce them if you have problems.

JMHO

DET1460

[spike7451]

Open panels on armed aircraft NEVER happens - well that is it never happens

in the world of the self proclaimed "experts".

RAF Tonkas at CFB Cold Lake. Note long sleeves and hat it was cold so

no need to keep components cool. However if it was warm enough its

possible there's a greater need to keep panels open as getting good

cooling airflow to electronics can be an issue on some combat aircraft

i.e. the F-35 has an on board ACMI contained internally that's cooled with

liquid nitrogen. I checked the EXIF data on these pictures and in spite of

the FOD covers being in place these aircraft launched in under 24 minutes

from the time I took these shots.

I recall seeing F-18 Hornets and F-15 Eagles loaded with panels open however

being a visiting guest I was not permitted to take pictures of aircraft with

open panels, it is often normal protocol for visiting photographers on bases

to be instructed not to shoot aircraft with open panels.

In the case of these images I asked for permission and was given it. If in

doubt always ask the PAO (or whoever is running your visit) before you take

the shot, as being allowed to do this was an exception rather than the rule.

pictures.

I recall an incident when someone pointed a camera at aircraft we had been

told NOT to shoot literally within seconds we had two base police cars on top

of us and 8 of us came pretty close to loosing our camera gear and being chucked

off of the base because someone didn't follow the PAO's instructions.

I'm not by any means saying that open panels are the norm but I've seen it on a

number of occasions.

Top picture shws the weapon computer access panel,bottom one is the Mauser cannon access door,that'd only be open on gun change or loading.Unlike modern guns the rounds have to be manually cocked into the chamber & the gun can bite back! (I have the missing thumb tip to prove it!)

Also the bombs shown are inert bombs used for load practice & are not for flight in most cases.These panels in the pics you wouldn't nomally see open on the Tonka,the only one you'd see is just forward of the Starboard undercarriage bay for the ground computer,refueler hose,power connection & one under the corresponding intake for the groundcrew comms

[spike7451]

I think yes, armed (parked) aircrafts and opened panels can coexist ... because even after the plane has armed they could (after) however have problems that force them to open and inspect some avionics bays ... all without having to dismantle the missiles whenever.

in some photos (like the ones posted by centuaryseries and Jari) Italian and English Tornados are armed, parked and with some open panel ... I mean, there are the safety pins so it is very difficult that the missile explodes there so easily :-)

the only exception that I can say is when the plane is ready to take off... then yes it has to be completely closed.

cheers.

Most of the safety pins you see on the Tornado on the weapon pylons are not to prevent the weapon from going off,rather they are safety interlock pins to prevent some idiot releasing the stores on thaat wing.On most jets the is what we call a WOW Switch,which stands for Weight on Wheels,that isolates the power to the weapon systems as soon as the aircraft touches down,we also carry out a No Volt check on the ERU's of an aircraft prior to loading any weapon,to chec the are no volts in the system.

As to bombs like the LGB,you'll find the are steel cables that attach to the weapon pylon & are then threaded thru & into the fuze location on the bomb,where a pin is fitted.On dropping the bomb,the wire pulls the pin out,which allows the impellor on the rear of the bomb,which in turn arms the bomb.

Thats' the simplified version.

Merv (ex RAF Tornado Armourer)

[worldslaziestbusker]

Getting a gong would be a nice cherry on top of a build, but I wouldn't sacrifice an iota of my own satisfaction in trying to second guess a judge. Build the way you want, and try to accept competition victory or defeat with equal grace.

My current build has a lizard in the pilot seat, because my kids and I find that funny.

While it's not directly analogous, the only surf comp I ever entered saw me come last, as I knew I would. What mattered was not winning, or competing, but getting that break to myself for twenty minutes. Sweet. If I ever get off my arse and enter a build in a competition, I will take it as satisfaction enough that people other than my family are seeing what I've done. Perhaps not the same as getting barrel after barrel at Posso's, but nice nonetheless.

[ChesshireCat]

I've watched many an A4 and A7, and F100's roll into the arming pit with some access panels left open (Chu Lai, DaNang, Pleiku, and Cam Rhan Bay). You could see the pilot's hands up in the air while the guys charged the cannon and pulled the flags.

gary

[Finn]

Here is a loaded F-4 jacked up:

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/F-464-67301800xweb.jpg

Jari

[Scott R Wilson]

Here is a loaded F-4 jacked up:

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/F-464-67301800xweb.jpg

Jari

I wouldn't have believed it, thanks for finding that photo.

[Neeko]

Here is a loaded F-4 jacked up:

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/F-464-67301800xweb.jpg

Jari

Seeing that photo makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand straight up!

We could do "minor maintenance" with weapons on, but jacking a bird up with bombs on it defeats every bit of logic set up to keep from pickling those things on deck. Sure we all know that Doug Masters blew up a truck full of goons with a Maverick while taxiing, but what the movie doesn't show was the person flipping a switch in the wheel well and jamming a screwdriver in the landing gear strut weight-on-wheels switch...

[Joe Hegedus]

never mind

Edited August 19, 2015 by Joe Hegedus

[boom175]

Seeing that photo makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand straight up!

We could do "minor maintenance" with weapons on, but jacking a bird up with bombs on it defeats every bit of logic set up to keep from pickling those things on deck. Sure we all know that Doug Masters blew up a truck full of goons with a Maverick while taxiing, but what the movie doesn't show was the person flipping a switch in the wheel well and jamming a screwdriver in the landing gear strut weight-on-wheels switch...

You just pull the carts out of the TER. Takes about a minute.

[Finn]

You just pull the carts out of the TER. Takes about a minute.

Plus remove all the carts from all the pylons, including the wing tanks, and remove the fuzes from the bombs. Accidents have no one single cause, several factors all come to together and things go boom. I remember reading there was an accident where a nuclear weapon lost and all but one safety feature failed. Anyway getting back to the pic, since having another TER on the other side that would have added another 3,000lb to be jacked up.

Jari

[boom175]

Plus remove all the carts from all the pylons, including the wing tanks, and remove the fuzes from the bombs. Accidents have no one single cause, several factors all come to together and things go boom. I remember reading there was an accident where a nuclear weapon lost and all but one safety feature failed. Anyway getting back to the pic, since having another TER on the other side that would have added another 3,000lb to be jacked up.

Jari

Thats what i was more suprised at. That F-4 must be empty! Heck unless we had hardly any 30 mm onboard, we had to defuel about 5K from the A-10 to max jacking weight.

[nfiler]

If this is an IPMS contest, and most at least use those rules, then this is a none issue.

Accuracy is NOT a consideration. If you get past the initial negative reaction to this it is obvious why. Who determines what is accurate on a model? The judges? How can they be experts on every subject? And questions about accuracy between the contestant and the judges is very seldom going to go well. The whole subject is nothing but a mine field.

My time with F-100s and F-104s was from 1956-1960. Both had panels open during pre-flight walk around to show the pilot different stuff and some were closed after the lookie-see. On the F-100 the panel on the spine aft of the canopy was always open during during start up. The flight control hydraulic flight control stuff was there and needed to be checked after engine start. If it was a gunnery mission the gun bay doors might be left off during pre flight inspection and the guns were not actually charged until the plane reached the end of the runway. If there were problems at start up prior to taxi, the ground crew did whatever they could do quickly to fix it. Major stuff was a down a/c, but minor stuff was usually fixed quickly.

[nfiler]

If this is an IPMS contest, and most at least use those rules, then this is a none issue.

Accuracy is NOT a consideration. If you get past the initial negative reaction to this it is obvious why. Who determines what is accurate on a model? The judges? How can they be experts on every subject? And questions about accuracy between the contestant and the judges is very seldom going to go well. The whole subject is nothing but a mine field.

My time with F-100s and F-104s was from 1956-1960. Both had panels open during pre-flight walk around to show the pilot different stuff and some were closed after the lookie-see. On the F-100 the panel on the spine aft of the canopy was always open during during start up. The flight control hydraulic flight control stuff was there and needed to be checked after engine start. If it was a gunnery mission the gun bay doors might be left off during pre flight inspection and the guns were not actually charged until the plane reached the end of the runway. If there were problems at start up prior to taxi, the ground crew did whatever they could do quickly to fix it. Major stuff was a down a/c, but minor stuff was usually fixed quickly.

[jinmmydel]

Yeah, my understanding was accuracy was not supposed to be judging criteria. But that doesn't mean some know it all "expert" judge isn't going to knock you for someone. There are many reasons I don't enter contest, but this is a big one.

[erik_g]

Yeah, my understanding was accuracy was not supposed to be judging criteria. But that doesn't mean some know it all "expert" judge isn't going to knock you for someone. There are many reasons I don't enter contest, but this is a big one.

That´s why judges work in pairs (in Sweden at least). In that case, it is less likely that a judgement is coloured by one judges personal preferences.

Anyway, as a contest judge and a (not too successful) competition participant my advice is to build for yourself, not for competition, but do learn what competition judges do look for (or should look for). It might make you a better model builder. You have no idea how many times we deduct points on generally nice models just because they went sloppy at some point and made basic errors like glue stains, silvered decals (some decals are just a pain to work with, but never the less..) mold parting lines, items not straight and symetrical and so on.

The best way of getting to know what the judges look for and how they work is to participate as a trainee.

That said, the best thing about entering a competition is to win.. but the SECOND best thing, and the thing I usually have to settle for is the pleasure of showing my work to my colleagues while admiring their work up close. :-)