Jump to content

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Zactoman said:


Flashback to when I made the fan for my 1/32 Su-27 intakes:
I asked the question "Why 23 blades??? Why not 24, or 22?"
I got an answer of " If you mean why there are an uneven number of blades in the compressor hub, it's because if one blade dislodges or brakes away from the hub during rotation the rotating assembly becomes unbalanced putting a huge strain on a blade that would be 180 degrees across from the missing blade position, so that's why there are two blades across from each single blade position, the strain is taken up by two instead of one . I hope this explains it. Oh, by the way I build jet engines for a living !"
I accepted the answer but thinking about it now, would it even matter if the hub was unbalanced? I'd think the broken blade would destroy the whole engine anyway.

Interesting though that U.S. is even and Russia is odd...

 

 

I mostly based my 1/32 intakes on the F-14D Christine which is an upgraded F-14A and does not have the bypass brace or mounting hardware for it. What I didn't notice was the circular plug on the part the strut passes through.

f-14d_159600_christine_parts_209_of_354.

 

I wasn't aware of the strut being used on earlier models until after I had finished my intakes. At that point I did some research (searching the internet and looking at pics) and found that the majority of F-14D pics, where that detail can be seen, didn't have the strut but found no answers as to why. I did however find some F-14Ds with the strut. I checked some bureau numbers and found that one without the strut was an early D so assume that the majority don't have it.

 

Here are a few pics showing the D without the strut:

https://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Navy/Grumman-F-14D-Tomcat/1045239/L  (does this air-frame look familiar? Check your references!)

https://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Navy/Grumman-F-14D-R-Tomcat/1045449/L

https://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Navy/Grumman-F-14D-Tomcat/1044516/L

http://www.primeportal.net/hangar/bill_spidle4/f-14d_161159/index.php?Page=2

 

And here's one (I don't know if this is an F-14D) with no strut but without the hole plugged:

f14-detail-airintake-11l.jpg

Bigger pic available HERE.

 

:cheers:

I believe you are correct.

 

The more I think about it (haven't thought about this stuff for almost 20 years), the Alpha's and re-manufactured Bravos had the brace but the new Bravos didn't. Then, sometime during the early-mid 90's, when the brace was removed when the birds went through depot. For the Delta's, I think they were removed when they went through mod from Alpha's and were never installed on the new Delta's.

 

And just for some history IIRC, that brace replaced an actuator on the very first blocks, the original Tomcats had the bleed exit door movable and would move in unison with the ramps. The actuator was deleted shortly after the Tomcat entered service and replaced with a brace to keep it in place. Since it was part of the design all the Tomcats build had or had a place for it since it was in the cast/molds for the parts.

Edited by GW8345
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

For the Delta's, I think they were removed when they went through mod from Alpha's and were never installed on the new Delta's.

Then I was probably mistaken when I said that some Ds had the brace. I didn't know squat about the Tomcat back then (and am still learning, thank you for your contributions :cheers:) and didn't know how to tell the difference between a late B or D. If it had the newer engines I assumed it was a D (as in Doh! :doh:).

So don't check your references, just omit those parts...

 

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, niart17 said:

Not sure where the thought came about that if someone points out a mistake on a kit that means they are saying its unbuildable. It is what it is, that's all

 

Some silliness started by people poking fun at rivet counters. I was poking fun at the whole "unbuildable" business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to both Zactoman and GW8345 for clarifying that business. I noticed the hole where the strut goes on some Ds and not on others but wasn't clear on what I was looking at from within the intakes. Great find with those pics of Ds without the strut Z man. In all the photos I looked at the area was too dark for me to tell for certainty.

:thumbsup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stunning model. The picture looking at the rear end of the model imho does show the issue with hip area. Thankfully the rest of the model looks good. (in terns of shape).  Really need to get cross section comparisons of this area compared to tamiya.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zactoman said:


I got an answer of " If you mean why there are an uneven number of blades in the compressor hub, it's because if one blade dislodges or brakes away from the hub during rotation the rotating assembly becomes unbalanced putting a huge strain on a blade that would be 180 degrees across from the missing blade position, so that's why there are two blades across from each single blade position, the strain is taken up by two instead of one . I hope this explains it. Oh, by the way I build jet engines for a living !"
I accepted the answer but thinking about it now, would it even matter if the hub was unbalanced? I'd think the broken blade would destroy the whole engine anyway. 

 

 

Okay I don’t build jet engines for a living, but I agree once you lose one blade it’s game over. To shoot another hole in this even/odd logic, if you had an even number of blades and somehow lost a blade without totally fragging the engine, and if that meant a huge strain on the opposite blade, so much strain you also lost the opposite blade, your compressor hub/blade assembly is now “re-balanced”.   🙂  OK, one more hole in the logic, since 23 is a prime number your assembly is going to be unbalanced no matter how many (or few) blades you lose. 

 

I’ve heard of engines surviving damaged blades, but pretty sure losing a blade is a catastrophic engine failure. If contained, you FOD the engine. If uncontained you destroy hydraulic lines, fuel lines, passengers....  An unbalanced hub is the least of your worries at that point. 

 

.

 

Edited by habu2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, shion said:

I doubt these are CAD renders.

First because there look like the same drawings we saw years ago , I mean these ones:

 

15895771_732076750290488_404245865413716

 

Then, because they look a lot like vector drawings made from Illustrator or Corel draw.

Third because they're lacking a lot of 2nd order details.

Fourth some lines don't correspond neither other CAD renders we saw either the kit.

 

Then I would guess that these are the in-house drawings that they generated, probably based on some published drawings and modified to their liking, to build the CAD model from and are probably a pretty close match to the plastic. A lot of the major features seem to match the kit (i.e. hips) and even some minor ones (BDR patches below starboard nose slime-light).
Unfortunately they never provided multi-view drawings during the CAD phase despite asking for modelers input in the design.
The old drawing you posted is similar but different, especially in the rear fuselage thickness and exhausts.


Here are overlays of the Grumman drawing (red), the Tamiya lines (blue, borrowed from Alex Matvey's pics, just for comparison since it's already been brought up) and the AMK decal placement drawings. There are a few discrepancies with the Grumman drawing to note.
The Grumman side-view fuselage drawing represents a section through the centerline, so features like the glove stiffeners, glove sealing plates and wing are not included. They also combine a section through the intake, engine tunnel, exhaust and v-stab as well as a few other areas, so it gets a little confusing.
Also note that the top-view area of the windscreen on the Grumman drawing is incorrect and has the center pane extending too far forward. I traced over the canopy lines and included that to better show them, but wouldn't trust the windscreen area.

 

Overlay_AMK_views_zpsm5bpf415.jpg

Overlay_Tamiya_views_zpssodnsenh.jpg

Some zoomed pics:

Overlay_nose_sides_zpssr3anyeg.jpg

For this comparison I eliminated a bunch of the distracting features of the Grumman drawing and included my tracing of the canopy lines (windscreen inaccuracy noted above):

Overlay_nose_tops_zpsz6oqalfl.jpg

Hips, wingtips and stabs.

Overlay_rear_tops_zpsgelnnnmn.jpg

I used the black AMK drawing here because the wing glove sealing plates showed up better. Note the size/shape difference between it and the Tamiya lines.
I included the Grumman drawing to show a couple of discrepancies. The few diagonal lines in the wing glove sealing plate area don't come close to matching either kit. The break in the slat doesn't match either.

Overlay_glove_plates_zpswn3jkga8.jpg

 

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zactoman said:

I asked the question "Why 23 blades??? Why not 24, or 22?"
I got an answer of " If you mean why there are an uneven number of blades in the compressor hub, it's because if one blade dislodges or brakes away from the hub during rotation the rotating assembly becomes unbalanced putting a huge strain on a blade that would be 180 degrees across from the missing blade position, so that's why there are two blades across from each single blade position, the strain is taken up by two instead of one . I hope this explains it. Oh, by the way I build jet engines for a living !"
I accepted the answer but thinking about it now, would it even matter if the hub was unbalanced? I'd think the broken blade would destroy the whole engine anyway.

Interesting though that U.S. is even and Russia is odd...

I wouldn't be surprised if a factor of compressor/turbine stage design is avoiding some resonant vibration modes.

Edited by Laurent
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got this email from HobbyEasy!!!

 

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your order on the AMK 88007 F-14D. This kit will arrive within a couple of day. Your pre-order will receive an US ORDNANCE weapon set as bonus.

 

The F-14D is a very large kit weight 1.4kg and the bonus weapon set weight another 700g. The postage for the F-14D and the US ORDNANCE weapon set by registered Airmail is HKD237. Please have your approval to process the payment for the kit HKD428 plus the postage HKD237 accordingly.

 

Regards,

 

 

Daniel

Hobbyeasy

Link to post
Share on other sites

In CAD work it is SO EASY to zoom in on a part in progress, look over at the walkaround photo, and think "Wow I better do the hex head on that bolt. I wonder if it's an M10 or an M12." Sometimes you have to zoom out to the approximate size of the final part just to reset your reality.

 

They won't be able to mold that bolt head anyway. Maybe just a bump.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Grindcore said:

Please have your approval to process the payment for the kit HKD428 plus the postage HKD237 accordingly.

 

 

Wow, that's quite a steep price just for shipping! Is it $54.60 for the kit + $30.20 for the weapons set = I fear to add the total ($84.80!).

How much is the AMK Tomcat kit alone...?

Edited by Hubbie Marsten
Never mind; my dog just made it clear for me now...
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hubbie Marsten said:

 

 

Wow, that's quite a steep price just for shipping! Is it $54.60 for the kit + $30.20 for the weapons set = I fear to add the total ($84.80!).

How much is the AMK Tomcat kit alone...?

 

I think originally the total was $77ish, the weapon set is free so I just had to pay for the additional weight.  Basically $85 for the kit and weapons set shipped.  Not bad in my book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the same email few days back, and i got to throw in 1/72 JA-37 for very small increase in shipping price, atleast in my case they are shipping the weapon set separate so there was room to spare there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question? Is there anyone else here who preordered AND paid for the kit from Sincere Hobby? If so, have you heard anything about your preorder at all? The two kits i paid for way back when (In May 2017, as fortunately I posted in this thread (page 55 lol) that I had done so!) don't even show up in my account record. I guess I better try to locate the cc purchase.

Edited by madmanrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

My first Sincere kit is on the way.

I ordered them seperately to get lower postage so the others are stillto ship.

Funnily the shipped my most recent pre order first not the oldest.

Anyway at least they are shipping.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, madmanrick said:

Question? Is there anyone else here who preordered AND paid for the kit from Sincere Hobby? If so, have you heard anything about your preorder at all? The two kits i paid for way back when (In May 2017, as fortunately I posted in this thread (page 55 lol) that I had done so!) don't even show up in my account record. I guess I better try to locate the cc purchase.

Yeah im in the same state. I contacted them about it a while back and it turns out that if your a new customer and create an account on checkout it considered a guess checkout hence dosent appear in your account. 

 

Im still waiting for shipping notification. Cant wait !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, madmanrick said:

Question? Is there anyone else here who preordered AND paid for the kit from Sincere Hobby? If so, have you heard anything about your preorder at all? The two kits i paid for way back when (In May 2017, as fortunately I posted in this thread (page 55 lol) that I had done so!) don't even show up in my account record. I guess I better try to locate the cc purchase.

Me too, i made the order: 20/12/2017, they still no send it, just waiting.

 

1/48 Grumman F-14D Tomcat
Launch Date: 03-10-2019
Product Code: 88007

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

18 hours ago, Laurent said:

They could be drawings made by Furball also.

Sorry, I missed your previous post suggesting that that might be the case:

 

On 10/1/2019 at 6:22 AM, Laurent said:

Interesting but are you sure about that ? I have verified this for KH, HB/Trumpy and GWH who make the decal designs themselves but in the case of AMK it's Furball that did the decal design so things could have been different. In other words I think you may have done a Tamiya vs Furball overlay.

 

Furball Geoff is a great guy and does great work so I wouldn't want to drag him into this mess.
The old drawing that shion posted is one that Geoff had previously used with his own products. I don't know if he drew it himself or used some other drawing. It doesn't quite match the Grumman drawing (or the Tamiya lines), but it's got a lot going for it and is certainly good enough for decal placement charts.
Because I didn't want to drag Geoff into this, I didn't discuss his previous drawing or include it in the overlays because it's different enough from the AMK drawing that I don't think they're related.
Whether he drew the new decal placement drawings, I don't know. It seems unlikely that he would have drawn it from scratch though (that's a lot of work considering AMK already has it on their computer). It seems more likely that AMK provided him line drawings for him to fill in the blanks or AMK did the placement charts themselves using his provided decal artwork.
That's what we did with the HazMAT Bronco. Steve at AOA decals provided his old placement charts, the new decal artwork (and a whole bunch more help!) and I did the color decal profiles using HazMAT provided CAD profiles. I colored in the CADs,  placed the decals, consulted with Steve and got his approval for the finished profiles (Thank you again Steve!).

 

It would be nice if AMK could confirm that these drawings match the CAD (or share their CAD related profiles). If not, I'm sure that somebody with the kit will get around to scanning the instruction drawings, scaling them and comparing to the plastic.

 

If AMK wants to crowdsource development help on future projects (as they have indicated they will on the F-104), I'd recommend that they share enough info that the crowd has a clear picture during the development.

 

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Neo said:

Yeah im in the same state. I contacted them about it a while back and it turns out that if your a new customer and create an account on checkout it considered a guess checkout hence dosent appear in your account. 

Thanks for that, that does help. Did they charge you additional shipping recently?

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...