Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Petarvu

Aviation Art Su-33 1/48

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Flankerman said:

 

Does this help ???

 

Trumpeter (and all others) LERX concave curvature shape.........

 

Su-27SM_51.jpg

 

Correct curvature - with slight bulge - on Zvezda Su-27SM and Su-33.....

 

Su-27SM_50.jpg

 

..... and on a real Su-27SM......

 

Su-27SM_49.jpg

 

Ken

Thank you, Ken!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SuperTomcat21 said:

 

 

78f2bd8bgy1firet6bozrj21hv0yrdk9.jpg

I think it was ok now

Yes, looks much better than the original. Thank you. Looking forward to this kit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, i would need to check to be sure, but several things in the CAD above looks like an early version of the original (V1.0 if you will) of the AA Su-33 CAD's. There are several bugs seen that were later fixed...

Edited by Berkut

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To Flankerman's great description of fuselage curvature in cross section I want to describe something that perhaps developers of this kit haven't noticed.

 

At radome attachment frame the fuselage section is circular. The upper central part of the fuselage is actually circular in shape EVERYWHERE, from radome up to the tail sting! See attached Su-33 drawing from Aviatsiya i Vremya magazine. The drawing is not perfect, but the author of this drawing obviously understood the shape of the aircraft, something not all kit makers did. I overimposed the circles on cross sections, perfect match. In fuselage sideview the location of circle's centers is a complex curve. The diameter increases slowly, then decreases (not linearly!) from about mid of the aircraft towards the tail.

 

c0f1788e062824b5df5b670d9314bb24.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You see, I did notice this all these years. Perhaps the kit makers notice it too, but I believe a more complex mold might be required to capture this shape properly.

Offhand, I would say the Kitty Hawk Su-35 captures the shape fairly well.

I hope our friends at Aviation Art didn't start cutting steel, and have noticed this shape too. The kinetic kit definitely doesn't have it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since it is still in the planning stage, is it possible to design a better way of attaching wings in the folded position? the kinetic system did not work very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Poncho 6231 said:

To Flankerman's great description of fuselage curvature in cross section I want to describe something that perhaps developers of this kit haven't noticed.

 

At radome attachment frame the fuselage section is circular. The upper central part of the fuselage is actually circular in shape EVERYWHERE, from radome up to the tail sting! See attached Su-33 drawing from Aviatsiya i Vremya magazine. The drawing is not perfect, but the author of this drawing obviously understood the shape of the aircraft, something not all kit makers did. I overimposed the circles on cross sections, perfect match. In fuselage sideview the location of circle's centers is a complex curve. The diameter increases slowly, then decreases (not linearly!) from about mid of the aircraft towards the tail.

 

c0f1788e062824b5df5b670d9314bb24.jpg

We must admit that Su-33 's CAD is not perfectly compatible with this drawing due to the constraints of objective conditions. Just as this blueprint is not perfect, all the open information in the present position is not complete, and it is older, and it is not accurate when we use it to compare the plane photos. We compared the CAD section with the drawing, although it is not completely fit, but we can see that there is no fundamental error in the basic section, the previous design defects have been improved.
78f2bd8bgy1fisbn603qwj21f9137wh5.jpg78f2bd8bgy1fisbn5242jj21lz17bae1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ That is definitely good enough! I suspected the fuselage was too flat (or not bulged enough) in the area between cockpit and beginning of airbrake, but couldn't tell for sure from the CAD drawings posted. That's clearly not the case. I like what I see :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SuperTomcat21 said:
We must admit that Su-33 's CAD is not perfectly compatible with this drawing due to the constraints of objective conditions. Just as this blueprint is not perfect, all the open information in the present position is not complete, and it is older, and it is not accurate when we use it to compare the plane photos. We compared the CAD section with the drawing, although it is not completely fit, but we can see that there is no fundamental error in the basic section, the previous design defects have been improved.
78f2bd8bgy1fisbn603qwj21f9137wh5.jpg78f2bd8bgy1fisbn5242jj21lz17bae1.jpg

Close enough!  LOL I salute you for your efforts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The attention to surface details visible in released CADs is truly incredible, in 1:48 I'm not sure I've seen anything like it.

 

However I have a small nitpick. It's the boarding steps on left side of the fuselage, see image. This is present on only one series aircraft, bort 88. My humble suggestion is to have them removed. They are incorrect for all series Su-33 and all T-10K prototypes, except for one aircraft! If not possible, no problem, will fill them with CA glue.

 

On the abovementioned bort 88 aircraft in the same area on the underside of the LERX there is present a foldable ladder also unique for this particular aircraft, but I see is not present in the CADs.

 

824bb4d8faaaeb4f52bf848cfe4cc40d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Poncho 6231 said:

The attention to surface details visible in released CADs is truly incredible, in 1:48 I'm not sure I've seen anything like it.

 

However I have a small nitpick. It's the boarding steps on left side of the fuselage, see image. This is present on only one series aircraft, bort 88. My humble suggestion is to have them removed. They are incorrect for all series Su-33 and all T-10K prototypes, except for one aircraft! If not possible, no problem, will fill them with CA glue.

 

On the abovementioned bort 88 aircraft in the same area on the underside of the LERX there is present a foldable ladder also unique for this particular aircraft, but I see is not present in the CADs.

 

824bb4d8faaaeb4f52bf848cfe4cc40d.jpg

Thank you for your attention, about the hidden check-in ladder, at least the final production of the RED70 Red88 has been equipped. The details below the fuselage will use PE performance, if choose no this structure of model, just do not install this PE and fill in the above details with putty.

Edited by SuperTomcat21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more important thing regarding Sukhoi family shapes is fuselage belly section. There are also mistakes in Kinetic Su-33 release. The belly section of all Su-27/30/33/35 is formed by two FLAT surfaces joined at plane of symmetry with noticeable dihedral. These flat surfaces are not restricted by area between engine air intakes. They are spreaded from dihedral axis to the wing attachment joints, including wheel well area. That is why slats and flaps have kinks on lower surfaces along wing-to-fuselage joint axis. The dihedral begins from frame #18 and finishes at #34. The flat belly area begins from frame #38. The transition area is between #34 and #38 frames.

Some pictures to illustrate.

 36557541642_675a329394_b.jpgСу-35_SHAPES_DESC1 by Alexey Matvienko, on Flickr

36001882751_cc8d06ca45_b.jpgSu27_bottom_s by Alexey Matvienko, on Flickr

36735979005_7d3eff8085_b.jpgDSCF8785 by Alexey Matvienko, on Flickr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Alex Matvey said:

One more important thing regarding Sukhoi family shapes is fuselage belly section. There are also mistakes in Kinetic Su-33 release. The belly section of all Su-27/30/33/35 is formed by two FLAT surfaces joined at plane of symmetry with noticeable dihedral. These flat surfaces are not restricted by area between engine air intakes. They are spreaded from dihedral axis to the wing attachment joints, including wheel well area. That is why slats and flaps have kinks on lower surfaces along wing-to-fuselage joint axis. The dihedral begins from frame #18 and finishes at #34. The flat belly area begins from frame #38. The transition area is between #34 and #38 frames.

Some pictures to illustrate.

 36557541642_675a329394_b.jpgСу-35_SHAPES_DESC1 by Alexey Matvienko, on Flickr

36001882751_cc8d06ca45_b.jpgSu27_bottom_s by Alexey Matvienko, on Flickr

36735979005_7d3eff8085_b.jpgDSCF8785 by Alexey Matvienko, on Flickr

Dear Alex

We now design the region has the same characteristics, the following CAD can be seen in the middle of the fuselage belly from the original two inclined to extend to the tail plane, but because the current Su-33 data is relatively small, it may not be accurate.
Thank you again for your attention and professionalism, I hope you can continue to our products to make more comments and suggestions.
Best regards
Ran
78f2bd8bgy1fiti5o3q7aj22ud1gbwxv.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23.08.2017 at 1:37 PM, SuperTomcat21 said:

Dear Alex

We now design the region has the same characteristics, the following CAD can be seen in the middle of the fuselage belly from the original two inclined to extend to the tail plane, but because the current Su-33 data is relatively small, it may not be accurate.
Thank you again for your attention and professionalism, I hope you can continue to our products to make more comments and suggestions.
Best regards
Ran

Thank you for attention to my comments!

One more thing I've noticed in Kinetic Su-33 is that engine nozzles are slightly less in diameter, than should be (so, the engine nacelles too). True diameter for 1/48 is 25.4mm at the base of nozzle feathers. Hobby Boss got this size right in their Su-27/J-11 release (but other things, such as cross-sections, intakes etc. are just awful).

 

Regards,

 

Alex.

Share this post


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

True diameter for 1/48 is 25.4mm at the base of nozzle feathers.

 

Really?  That's surprising.  I'd have thought the Flanker would be designed in metric, not imperial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MoFo said:

Really?  That's surprising.  I'd have thought the Flanker would be designed in metric, not imperial.

Yes, absolutely in metric. Why do you think I mean imperial system?

Size for real aircraft is around 1220 mm, or 1 meter and 22 centimeters, so it is 25.4 mm or 0.0254 meters for 1/48 scale.

Edited by Alex Matvey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Alex Matvey said:

Thank you for attention to my comments!

One more thing I've noticed in Kinetic Su-33 is that engine nozzles are slightly less in diameter, than should be (so, the engine nacelles too). True diameter for 1/48 is 25.4mm at the base of nozzle feathers. Hobby Boss got this size right in their Su-27/J-11 release (but other things, such as cross-sections, intakes etc. are just awful).

 

Regards,

 

Alex.

Dear Alex

Thank you for your comments, in this area we have to modify the design of the time has indeed encountered trouble, because according to the current known AL-31 data diameter of 1280mm, in accordance with the 1/48 scale after the reduction of the post. 26.67mm. Can you share the data source of 1220mm (25.4mm) in diameter here?
AL-31 Engine model data for sale:
hobby boss 81711 25.3mm
zvezda 7279 16.8MM(as 1/48 25.2mm)
hasegawa 01565 16.5mm (as 1/48 24.75mm)
kinetic k48062 24.7mm (old design was 24.6mm)
 
Best regards
Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SuperTomcat21 said:

Dear Alex

Thank you for your comments, in this area we have to modify the design of the time has indeed encountered trouble, because according to the current known AL-31 data diameter of 1280mm, in accordance with the 1/48 scale after the reduction of the post. 26.67mm. Can you share the data source of 1220mm (25.4mm) in diameter here?
AL-31 Engine model data for sale:
hobby boss 81711 25.3mm
zvezda 7279 16.8MM(as 1/48 25.2mm)
hasegawa 01565 16.5mm (as 1/48 24.75mm)
kinetic k48062 24.7mm (old design was 24.6mm)
 
Best regards
Ran

Hello, Ran! 

This max-diameter 1280 mm size is true for engine alone, apart of the airplane. The nozzles feathers are the springs themself and this size is correct when they are free. When engine is installed on airplane, the titanium tailcone squeezed them to smaller diameter not to get a gap between tailcone and feathers. I measured tailcones separately and size was around 1,2-1,22 meters. I"m not sure if they were perfectly round and measurememt conditions were primitive to get presize data, but Zvezda and Hobby Boss almost confirm my data. This size also corresponds to factory diagrams I saw. 

Best regards, 

Alex. 

Edited by Alex Matvey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Helmsman said:

Maybe because 25.4 mm is 1 inch? :rolleyes:

 

Hence, the actual diameter would be 4'.  Designers tend to like round numbers, so a 4' exhaust kind of jumped out at me (as opposed to 25.4166666667mm)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017年8月25日 at 7:57 PM, Alex Matvey said:

Hello, Ran!

This max-diameter 1280 mm size is true for engine alone, apart of the airplane. The nozzles feathers are the springs themself and this size is correct when they are free. When engine is installed on airplane, the titanium tailcone squeezed them to smaller diameter not to get a gap between tailcone and feathers. I measured tailcones separately and size was around 1,2-1,22 meters. I"m not sure if they were perfectly round and measurememt conditions were primitive to get presize data, but Zvezda and Hobby Boss almost confirm my data. This size also corresponds to factory diagrams I saw.

Best regards,

Alex.

Hi Alex:
    I understand .Appreciate your comments,We are not able to measure the actual size of AL-31 engine in this moment, so we can only make it by speculation. We think 1280mm is not appropriate. However, your suggestion 25.4mm seems to be closer to the real value via CAD measuring. We updated our design according to your opinions.
Thank you again for your great help.

Ran

Edited by SuperTomcat21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 9:57 PM, Alex Matvey said:

Yes, absolutely in metric. Why do you think I mean imperial system?

Size for real aircraft is around 1220 mm, or 1 meter and 22 centimeters, so it is 25.4 mm or 0.0254 meters for 1/48 scale.

1219.2 mm = 4 feet = 48 inches and  in 1/48 scale = 1 inch/25.4mm

It might just be a coincidence. ;)

12 hours ago, SuperTomcat21 said:

Hi Alex:
    Thank you so much for your explaination!That answers our so many confusion in our correction work.Measuring by CAD ,25.4mm fit all parts aroud much better and we have already correct our model.
              
Best regards,  Sincerely!

Ran

fixed that for you.

Share this post


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...