VAL-4 Black Ponies Posted May 13, 2017 4 hours ago, Zactoman said: Facebook alert : HazMAT Models has updated their cover photo: I'll be posting a bunch of final renders in the coming days. Grey with LAU 33s - makes it VAL-4's 155494. Why no nose #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ziggyfoos Posted May 13, 2017 4 hours ago, VAL-4 Black Ponies said: Grey with LAU 33s - makes it VAL-4's 155494. Why no nose #? It's a CAD image, the grey is just plastic representation. Everything is grey (props, tires, ordnance, etc) except some brass color showing photo etch in the cockpit. It's not meant to show a scheme. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zactoman Posted May 22, 2017 On 5/12/2017 at 6:01 PM, Zactoman said: I'll be posting a bunch of final renders in the coming days. Sorry for the delay. Not only was ARC broken but Facebook locked my account for several days until I sent and they verified a picture of my face. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zactoman Posted May 22, 2017 I hope I'm not overdoing it and posting too many pics. I plan to post more tomorrow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zactoman Posted May 22, 2017 On 5/12/2017 at 6:50 PM, Dale Bohling said: Dang, I can't stop drooling. You don't work for Pavlov do you? Pavlov? Pavlov who? No. Pavlov is not a very common Chinese name... On 5/12/2017 at 7:03 PM, Sabre Freak said: Outstanding job on a subject desired by a lot of modelers and sadly overlooked by manufacturers. The CAD looks magnificent so far! I am curious. The list is probably a mile long of subjects desired by modelers and sadly overlooked by manufacturers. What motivated you guys to say OV-10! Let's do The OV-10! i ask because sometimes the motivation can be as interesting a story as the endeavor itself. Happy to hear that you like what you've seen so far. Sorry, but the background of the choice is not exciting. The Bronco is just what the boss wanted to do first (well, Su-33 was first but that went South...). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zactoman Posted May 23, 2017 22 hours ago, Zactoman said: I hope I'm not overdoing it and posting too many pics. I plan to post more tomorrow Since nobody complained ( ): Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted May 23, 2017 looks great for the most part. the second to last shot though has the rudder pedals on the side consoles rather than on the floor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAL-4 Black Ponies Posted May 23, 2017 Seat on the right (without backpad) is the pilot's (front seat). Seat on the left (with backpad) is the backseat. Drag on the parachute pack that is on the back left side of the front seat would make the seat go to the left on ejection. And the back seat would go to the right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAL-4 Black Ponies Posted May 23, 2017 Is the actual plastic going to be as rough as it looks on the CAD images? Actual plane was a lot more streamlined than the fourth picture indicates. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAL-4 Black Ponies Posted May 23, 2017 OK - a poser. System won't let me upload another photo so use the one above. Centerline tank with aircraft on ground has a slight nose down angle. If you look at where the fill point is you can tell that it is below the tail of the tank. How do you completely fill the tank? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zactoman Posted May 23, 2017 2 hours ago, dylan said: looks great for the most part. the second to last shot though has the rudder pedals on the side consoles rather than on the floor. The pedals in the observer's compartment are in the correct location. Perhaps one of the Bronco guys can fill us in on why they are located there. I'm also curious about the fact that the rear flight controls (flap handle, control stick and pedals) are listed in the NAVAIR manual as "optional". Where they ever not installed? 55 minutes ago, VAL-4 Black Ponies said: Seat on the right (without backpad) is the pilot's (front seat). Seat on the left (with backpad) is the backseat. Drag on the parachute pack that is on the back left side of the front seat would make the seat go to the left on ejection. And the back seat would go to the right. I was curious as to why they are opposite. Thanks for the explanation! So many nagging Bronco questions the more I study the plane... Do you happen to know if I got the latch and ring answer correct in this post? http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/296183-148-ov-10a-bronco/&do=findComment&comment=2853273 41 minutes ago, VAL-4 Black Ponies said: Is the actual plastic going to be as rough as it looks on the CAD images? Actual plane was a lot more streamlined than the fourth picture indicates. I'm not exactly sure what you're asking here. If it is in regards to the rivets/fasteners, we are limited by molding technology so have minimum sizes that can be molded. The flush rivets have to be molded as engraved details. A finely engraved flush circle done to scale isn't really possible and would disappear under the thinnest coat of paint. The detail will be as petite as our tooling will allow. I didn't realize how prominent the fastener detail was before starting this project: 34 minutes ago, VAL-4 Black Ponies said: OK - a poser. System won't let me upload another photo so use the one above. Centerline tank with aircraft on ground has a slight nose down angle. If you look at where the fill point is you can tell that it is below the tail of the tank. How do you completely fill the tank? Good question. Something I hadn't even considered. Rear filler cap? Or is they some fancy hydraulic system to jack the nose up that I'm not aware of? Park it uphill when fueling? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted May 23, 2017 Stunning job on the CAD design by the HazMat team Chris! Will the tooling be done by the same people as GWH MiG-29/Aviation Art Su-33? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hans Posted May 23, 2017 it's PERFECT!!!!! I'm so freakin' excited to see the first molds!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eastern Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) Hi Chris, Great project by far. It's gonna be a real stunner being plastic cast...in case the molds are as such as the 3D-modeling shows. I'm not a 1/48 scale fun but this kit will be an exquisite stuff I would eager to have in my stash. Well, I think I'd better go and take my bib to drool. :) Cheers! Alexander Edited May 24, 2017 by Eastern Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted May 23, 2017 5 hours ago, Zactoman said: The pedals in the observer's compartment are in the correct location. Perhaps one of the Bronco guys can fill us in on why they are located there. I'm also curious about the fact that the rear flight controls (flap handle, control stick and pedals) are listed in the NAVAIR manual as "optional". Where they ever not installed? well I stand corrected. they look like they would make flying the plane almost impossible. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted May 23, 2017 2 hours ago, VAL-4 Black Ponies said: Is the actual plastic going to be as rough as it looks on the CAD images? Just a comment on CAD models. CAD objects are used to control CNC machines that will cut steel (moulds) or copper (EDM electrodes) so one can only partially extrapolate how the plastic will look like from a CAD rendering. You can have a idea of the shapes and detailing but nothing more as the CAD model is a collection of abstract objects. CAD renderings must be taken with a pinch of salt as... - a CAD model is scaled (thickness of parts and details level depends on scale) but the rendering software allows to zoom in the CAD model infinitely close while you cannot look at plastic parts infinitely close; 4th photo makes the model look like it's a 1/10 scale model but it's still a 1/48 scale CAD model - objects of a CAD model have razor sharp edges and corners; this isn't the case with plastic parts where corners and edges are always a little rounded as the tool tip hasn't infinitely sharp edges and corners; EDM process also doesn't allow infinitely sharp details All in all the CAD model is an intermediate phase in a model kit design. What matters in the end are the plastic parts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Craig Baldwin Posted May 23, 2017 37 minutes ago, Laurent said: All in all the CAD model is an intermediate phase in a model kit design. What matters in the end are the plastic parts. That is exactly the point I feel about CADs and why I never get very worked up about them. For me it's the end product and sharpness of molding. Fitting of the parts and assemblies is very high on my "want list". I will wait for sprue shots before I get closer to purchase decision. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DonSS3 Posted May 23, 2017 Laurent, your post needs a "LIKE" button! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAL-4 Black Ponies Posted May 23, 2017 9 hours ago, Zactoman said: So many nagging Bronco questions the more I study the plane... Do you happen to know if I got the latch and ring answer correct in this post? http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/296183-148-ov-10a-bronco/&do=findComment&comment=2853273 Yep, door hold open assembly. I've got the Air Force version of the "Illustrated Parts Breakdown" on the Black Pony webpage - http://www.blackpony.org/ipb.pdf Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAL-4 Black Ponies Posted May 23, 2017 2 hours ago, Laurent said: Just a comment on CAD models. CAD objects are used to control CNC machines that will cut steel (moulds) or copper (EDM electrodes) so one can only partially extrapolate how the plastic will look like from a CAD rendering. You can have a idea of the shapes and detailing but nothing more as the CAD model is a collection of abstract objects. CAD renderings must be taken with a pinch of salt as... - a CAD model is scaled (thickness of parts and details level depends on scale) but the rendering software allows to zoom in the CAD model infinitely close while you cannot look at plastic parts infinitely close; 4th photo makes the model look like it's a 1/10 scale model but it's still a 1/48 scale CAD model - objects of a CAD model have razor sharp edges and corners; this isn't the case with plastic parts where corners and edges are always a little rounded as the tool tip hasn't infinitely sharp edges and corners; EDM process also doesn't allow infinitely sharp details All in all the CAD model is an intermediate phase in a model kit design. What matters in the end are the plastic parts. Thanks much Laurent - I'm not a modeler and didn't know. Bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VAL-4 Black Ponies Posted May 23, 2017 9 hours ago, Zactoman said: Good question. Something I hadn't even considered. Rear filler cap?Or is they some fancy hydraulic system to jack the nose up that I'm not aware of? Park it uphill when fueling? No hills in the Mekong Delta. Nothing in the books about it - so the North American Tech Reps told us to throw a line over the booms, loop & tie it loosely and sit on the rope to pull the nose up. In actual practice - we walked up to the nose gear facing aft, placed a shoulder blade under the fuselage - and straightened up lifting the nose until the gear extends & locks, place chock behind wheel and it would stay that way until your done. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted May 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Craig Baldwin said: That is exactly the point I feel about CADs and why I never get very worked up about them. For me it's the end product and sharpness of molding. Fitting of the parts and assemblies is very high on my "want list". I will wait for sprue shots before I get closer to purchase decision. Accuracy matters a lot to me so the CAD design phase is very important to my eyes... still designing a kit is like making a chain link by link. A weak link and the whole chain integrity is compromised. Reference material has to be reviewed, CAD model has to be reviewed, parts breakdown has to be reviewed (ease of build, tooling cost), toolshop has to use machines that match the specs (very complex and intricate CAD model require high precision so very expensive machines for tooling), moulds have to be designed to avoid injection issues (short shots, etc), care is needed to design helpful instructions, box should be sturdy enough and box art attractive. And the ETA should be predictable so that the company can recover the invested money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
junkman3353 Posted May 24, 2017 A related/unrelated kind of question: has anyone done the research to determine the markings of Marshall Harrison's OV-10 as written up in his book "A Lonely Kind of War"? Especially when he was flying where there wasn't supposed to be any US presence (i.e. Cambodia). I'm assuming some sanitizing was done (national markings, etc) but I've never seen it confirmed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted May 24, 2017 This thinking that the tooling is somehow very loosely based on the CAD has to stop. It is nonsense. Other than technical restrictions for the details, what you see in CAD - is what you will get in plastic. Thinking the CAD is loosely related to tooling just gives excuses for the modelmakers to make mistakes and modelbuilders to make excuses on modelmakers behalf. Mistakes in CAD will be reflected in the plastic. There isnt some magic gulf between the CAD design and the final product. Hobby Boss Su-34 mistakes are not some wish-washy result of CAD being "collection of abstract objects" or technical limitations. Spine and wheelbays in Su-27 kit isnt wrong because of that either. Or the nose/canopy on MiG-23/27. Zvezda's (and HB for that matter) T-50 doesnt look like it does because CAD's are some sort of random sketches of the final product. All the mistakes in those kits are mistakes in CAD because of lazy/shoddy work by the design team. Not some technical limitations of the technology. If Hobby Boss can tool thin panellines and rivets - then they are obviously not limited by the tooling technology when MiG-27 nose ends up looking as it is. These excuses of "don't complain about the CAD's, the product will look completely different!" are just that, excuses. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
