Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It may be a bit far, but it's really interesting for me to know, and habu2 is killing it :-) When I think about as a layman, it indeed makes no sense to start with white pencils and blue papers😄  Anyway, if ultimately what ChesshireCat's trying so say is that, since Tamiya mostly likely didn't get the blueprints of F-14, so it's most likely not accurate either, then I simply can not agree.

 

I have no idea if anyone could get his hands on the real thing and measure it, we may know the truth and use the information then, but the kit itself is not going to be more accurate any more. I believe new and small manufacturers does tend to do shortcuts on their research, even it might be possible, they wouldn't get their hands on the real thing as it will increase the cost of their investment, or they don't have the manpower, time, or what else. Instead they just design their kits based on inexpensive drawings, not the way I like, but that's the way it is. But I think they should at least spend more time to try to verify the drawings first, even with Internet photos only, if their design work is based on rather inaccurate drawings, then obviously there are going to be a lot of errors in details and shapes in the final kits, you will be doing it wrong even you are doing it right. And it's going to cost additionally too, if they revise the molds later. So I think it's very important to find accurate drawings, of course even then there will be errors in the designs, but some mistakes at least could be prevented.    

Edited by delide
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ya-gabor said:

It is fascinating to read the discussion about what is and what is not a blue print or a factory drawing or in this case an internal arrangement draft. Interesting but getting very far from some real questions of a plastic kit.

 

It seems that no real F-14 Tomcat survives to this day in the great US of A. If there are any, has anyone ever considered getting up from the armchair in front of the computer and actually going out to have a closer look at one, do some simple measurement?? There is no need for a 3D scan (although it would be great) just some basic measurements and taking photos of that so much discussed tail or other questionable parts of the real aircraft and compare it to the kit.

Some instant and very authentic answers could result from such a visit!

 

Just asking.

 

Around here in Central Europe there are not too many Tomcats (I mean real ones) although not far in the middle east there are still some operational ones. I am not sure if they would like me going up to them with a measuring tape or a laser measurer. (I think I would have any problems of spending my free time in the next few years solved immediately)  😊

 

Best regards

Gabor

There is one 10 miles from my house and I plan on doing that exact thing when I have a kit in hand. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, delide said:

I have no idea if anyone could get his hands on the real thing and measure it, we may know the truth and use the information then, but the kit itself is not going to be more accurate any more.    

 

Of course a good measurement would not change anything on an already produced kit but at least it could put an end to some discussions and we can look at the kit.

 

I don’t think a 3D scan is something that one would just do in his spare time on a rainy afternoon. I was thinking more about some measurements. Museums tend to be very helpful if one asks them in advance and you makes arrangements in time! Of course one is not supposed to just cross barriers in a museum and get his measuring tape out without prior arrangement. You be surprised how helpful some museums are and some of the places where I was able to get in and get close to subjects! It is all about simply asking!!!!!!!

 

The questions about this kit have been going on for years, surely in that time it could have been possible to make a visit or two with this in mind.

 

Looking back at hundreds of previous pages it seems that even though the Tomcat is well documented it is now that we have to find out that there are areas missing or have not been looked at from a particular point of view which can help with this discussion!   

 

Best regards

Gabor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to backup Habu, blueprints can't come first. Blueprints are simply copies of a drawing. I think what might be the confusion is people meaning the difference between manufacturing prints and line drawings. I don't work in the aviation field but in my case, we'll have assembly drawings that show all major parts and how they assemble. Those are USUALLY accurate as to shapes and obviously layout locations. Now days they are exact because of 3D cad, but in the past they would sometimes be off since it's very hard to keep up with every minor change on a simple part and have that change accurately get made on every sub-assembly and top level assembly it's shown on. So yes, there are times when a top level assembly would be slightly off. BUT anything that's major (like a structural frame member shape on an aircraft frame assembly) would more than likely be corrected all the way up the chain. And even in my field our drawings for some items have some critical dimensions that have tolerances to +/- .001" and in some extreme cases +/- .0005". So being off by inches? I doubt it if it comes from Grumman.

 

I'd find it hard to believe that Grumman's own line assembly drawings would be that far off from an accurate overall shape. Perhaps a door hinge mechanism or such might not show the latest iteration of the actual part, but the overalls would be correct if it comes from the company engineering group. Now if it's not a Grumman document then who knows? There are also drawings that would have been made for general use such as explaining things to a person that's not necessarily making parts for the structure of the plane but would have some reason to know the general aspects. Maybe for instance the seat manufacturer wouldn't have to know everything but they would have exact prints of the areas they are designing around. And then there are presentation drawings that might be used in administrative meetings to talk about budgets and timelines and all the other things managers talk about and need reference drawings for conversation. Those likely would be fairly accurate but not always. They may have shapes off etc...because they wouldn't concerned with revising them for every little change. Those drawings wouldn't have dimensions associated with them probably unless there was a specific reason for a dimension. 

 

For a project as massive as a fighter jet there were likely hundreds and thousands of different type assembly drawings of the overall aircraft and various sub-sections made. Some may be off slightly but most would be pretty close.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ya-gabor said:

 

Of course a good measurement would not change anything on an already produced kit but at least it could put an end to some discussions and we can look at the kit.

 

I don’t think a 3D scan is something that one would just do in his spare time on a rainy afternoon. I was thinking more about some measurements. Museums tend to be very helpful if one asks them in advance and you makes arrangements in time! Of course one is not supposed to just cross barriers in a museum and get his measuring tape out without prior arrangement. You be surprised how helpful some museums are and some of the places where I was able to get in and get close to subjects! It is all about simply asking!!!!!!!

 

The questions about this kit have been going on for years, surely in that time it could have been possible to make a visit or two with this in mind.

 

Looking back at hundreds of previous pages it seems that even though the Tomcat is well documented it is now that we have to find out that there are areas missing or have not been looked at from a particular point of view which can help with this discussion!   

 

Best regards

Gabor

 

Yes, I understand and agree. My point is that some manufacturers may not want to get their hand on the real thing, due to the additional cost and time it must take for example, or there is none in the public, yet they could still improve their way of design. If AMK's canopy was indeed too short, then I'd say that's because the drawing they used are not accurate, as the difference is rather sufficient. If they take some more time to verify and find a possibly more accurate drawing, like the ones Zactoman has found, which he checked and matched the photo closely, then I would expect the length of the canopy would match photos/be more or less correct too, even without measuring, which is ideal of course, but I believe some just don't do it, at least the smaller or new companies.

 

Anyway, it's amazing that Dave Roof basically live with one :-) It's just a pity that the opportunity/work can not be used for AMK any more. If it would turn out that AMK designed a more accurate kit than Tamiya, without having access to the real thing (didn't hear anything about it), then they don't need to improve anything, they are the best, but I highly doubt that would be the case.

Edited by delide
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ya-gabor said:

It is fascinating to read the discussion about what is and what is not a blue print or a factory drawing or in this case an internal arrangement draft. Interesting but getting very far from some real questions of a plastic kit.

 

It seems that no real F-14 Tomcat survives to this day in the great US of A. If there are any, has anyone ever considered getting up from the armchair in front of the computer and actually going out to have a closer look at one, do some simple measurement?? There is no need for a 3D scan (although it would be great) just some basic measurements and taking photos of that so much discussed tail or other questionable parts of the real aircraft and compare it to the kit.

Some instant and very authentic answers could result from such a visit!

 

Just asking.

 

Around here in Central Europe there are not too many Tomcats (I mean real ones) although not far in the middle east there are still some operational ones. I am not sure if they would like me going up to them with a measuring tape or a laser measurer. (I think I would have any problems of spending my free time in the next few years solved immediately)  😊

 

Best regards

Gabor

 

 I enjoy sitting down in the morning with some of the local farmers at the gas station. We sit around, pay for one cup of coffee, drink 3 more, and fix all the nation's problems, and generally don't listen to each other.... then go back to the farm.

 

 Seems oddly familiar.

 

-Scott

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, habu2 said:

If you want to believe drawings come after blueprints just keep telling yourself that. 

 

And yes I’m aware of the timeline history of CAD. I still have my T-square, compass, dividers and yes a few french curves from my time as a draftsman, and I have personally made hundreds if not thousands of blueprints from drawings.  I was also doing computer aided design on aircraft programs in the early 80s. Been there done that seen the world from both sides now. 

 

There are many here who have worked on real F-14s, not just plastic models of them.    I’ve worked as a draftsman and a CAD designer on aircraft programs and I stand by what I stated. Blueprints are made from drawings. 

Your telling your age. I remember developing my first modified involute gear with curve after curve comming from imaginary points. Used more than one French curve. Compound curves are harder to do than 90% think. Let alone machine them

Gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ChesshireCat said:

Your telling your age. 

 

Yeah I’m an old fart. I remember where I was when JFK was shot. Somewhere I still have my draft number/notice from selective service.  It was over 300 so I didn’t get drafted/called up. Lots of friends from high school did get called up and I never saw them again.

  •  :occasion2:

My senior project in college was a gearbox design that allowed you to incrementally vary the distance and angle between two gears and evaluate the resulting contact patch and wear on the gear teeth. Even designed and built the sand castings for the gearbox housing. 

 

Yeah I’m an old fart.

 

.

 

Edited by habu2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, crackerjazz said:

 

Its the model companies that should be hiring these guys. Don't know how much it would cost, especially considering they would have to travel to a site (once permission is obtained). Probably NOT cheap. But these guys seem to know what they're doing and appear to have all sorts of techno-wizardry stuff to make it happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Mstor said:

 

Its the model companies that should be hiring these guys. 

QFT After all what would scanning a real world Tomcat do now, unless one is interested in producing a kit or a resin update set? And considering that an update set would sell a fraction of the copies that the AMK kit will, there is NO way it would be fiscally feasible to use those expensive scanes to produce it. I am sure that if it is officially deemed out of kilter AND that it is fixable, some enterprising resin guru will undertake a correction for the AMK kit. But, you may need to hock your kids for said correction, just sayin'!

Edited by madmanrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

A correction set would be necessary only if there was something fundamentally wrong with this kit. So far, I cannot see anything other but things important only to those that have actually been working on the plane. I do not think that market can actually make profit only from those people. Otherwise there would be "correction" sets for any model out there. And I don't mean the classical seats and wheels.

Edited by DIO
Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue prints probably get name from blue, of way they are copied. In my company, before CAD, engineers make assembly, make calculations, and draw with graphite pencil on paper. Then after that technician make part drawings on paper for each and every part, and then after that, there was tehnician who make copy over that, on paus paper ( translucent paper) with Rotring rapidograph pen. All involved signed on paus paper... and this was only ORIGINAL drawing.


When company need to produce parts, you get those paus papers, and put in copy machine and make copies.... before modern machines, there was ammonia copy machine, and copied copies have red lines and all paper was red, and have smell on amoniac.... even 30-40 years after it  paper have smell. In those days everything is done in that way.... have many drawings like this. Any only original on paus paper was saved.

 

It is very hard that even Tamiya get original paus paper drawings to make plastic kit...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I'm not referring to AMK and its F-14. What done is done with that kit. I just talking about model companies in general. This is the kind of service that they should be taking advantage of. Accurate scans of the actual aircraft. I would think that would be a good starting point for the manufacture of an accurate scale model. Of course, there is still the translation of these scans into 3D models (which this company appears to do) and then into the injection molds used to make the parts. Many places where compromises might be required due to the limitations of injection molding technologies which may lead to inaccuracies. One interesting feature of some new models is the inclusion of cast resin parts. Usually cockpits, ejections seats, or jet exhausts. We may see the inclusion of more cast resin or even 3D printed parts in the future as a way around injection molding limitations. It is, after all, "scale modeling", where we are trying to make models look as much like the real thing as possible. It is the force that has driven the many improvements in scale models over the years. Now we can take a laser and capture all the subtle lines and curves of any airframe. Wow! Welcome to the future! :thumbsup2:

 

P.S. This was in response to madmanrick's post above. Had some computer problems while trying to respond to his post.

Edited by Mstor
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mstor said:

Oh, I'm not referring to AMK and its F-14. What done is done with that kit. I just talking about model companies in general. This is the kind of service that they should be taking advantage of. Accurate scans of the actual aircraft. I would think that would be a good starting point for the manufacture of an accurate scale model. Of course, there is still the translation of these scans into 3D models (which this company appears to do) and then into the injection molds used to make the parts. Many places where compromises might be required due to the limitations of injection molding technologies which may lead to inaccuracies. One interesting feature of some new models is the inclusion of cast resin parts. Usually cockpits, ejections seats, or jet exhausts. We may see the inclusion of more cast resin or even 3D printed parts in the future as a way around injection molding limitations. It is, after all, "scale modeling", where we are trying to make models look as much like the real thing as possible. It is the force that has driven the many improvements in scale models over the years. Now we can take a laser and capture all the subtle lines and curves of any airframe. Wow! Welcome to the future! :thumbsup2:

 

Yep, there is great potential out there. And the more detail we get, the more we will be adding on top... Great times are coming!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2019 at 5:06 PM, Zactoman said:

 

👽👽👽Let's not forget the upcoming Area 51 raid! 👽👽👽


There's still a chance that if we successfully capture one of them aliens we can get it to roll back the clock so that everybody had a kit under the Christmas tree several years ago. :santa:

:smiley-transport006:
There's also a chance that we could convince the aliens to go back in time to fix the tooling and maybe even include pilot figures (un-buildable without!).

 

Here's the countdown clock: https://timeanddate.com/s/3zbs

I'm providing the clock with Las Vegas time since most of our team will be partying there before and after the raid. :beer4:
For those not participating in the raid, wish us luck (I think we'll need it!)!!! :smiley-transport023:

 

:cheers:

 

 

It's warmer here in Vegas than I was expecting!
Most of the team is here, the rest showing up any time now. Vegas is partying tonight! Seems we weren't the only ones planning to see them aliens! :banana:
Fortunately we found a shuttle bus that will drop us 1/4 mile from the front gate so the beers are flowing. :cheers:
Wish us luck...
We might need it:

BNL_51_zpsrlqqvmsm.jpg

 

:hmmm: :dontknow: :pray:

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Zactoman said:

 

It's warmer here in Vegas than I was expecting!
Most of the team is here, the rest showing up any time now. Vegas is partying tonight! Seems we weren't the only ones planning to see them aliens! :banana:
Fortunately we found a shuttle bus that will drop us 1/4 mile from the front gate so the beers are flowing. :cheers:
Wish us luck...
We might need it:

BNL_51_zpsrlqqvmsm.jpg

 

:hmmm: :dontknow: :pray:

 

 

Take pictures!!!! 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...