Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

blackadder's not using CAD dsteingass, he's using STC.

Actually the FW offering is nowheres near as refined in detail as the 3D images but the cost of such a highly intricate model would probably be prohibitive.

That is awesome. I too can look at a picture and build it, but nowhere as preciseley as you do.

The_Blackadder wrote:Actually the FW offering is nowheres near as refined in detail as the 3D images but the cost of such a highly intricate model would probably be prohibitive.

Right, cause the cost of the one they do offer isn't prohibitive. Which is exactly why the forums aren't brimming with scratch Thunderhawks and Warhounds. LOL....... oh, wait.....

dsteingass wrote:That is awesome. I too can look at a picture and build it, but nowhere as preciseley as you do.

It all comes down to how "Obsessive compulsive" you are. Obviously you are a well adjusted individual who knows when a project is satisfactory. I on the other hand suffer from a poor anal phase and must squeeze out the last bit of detail regardless of the personal discomfort.

mxwllmdr wrote:

The_Blackadder wrote:Actually the FW offering is nowheres near as refined in detail as the 3D images but the cost of such a highly intricate model would probably be prohibitive.

Right, cause the cost of the one they do offer isn't prohibitive. Which is exactly why the forums aren't brimming with scratch Thunderhawks and Warhounds. LOL....... oh, wait.....

FW knows when and where to cut their losses. Refining the T'hawk would probably not increase sales and their current offering is far superior to the original. I on the other hand can devote as much time and energy to a one time project.

Eww you used anal and squeeze in the same sentence! lol

No I just get tired ofprojects and don't finish them lol

Blackadder wrote:I on the other hand suffer from a poor anal phase and must squeeze out the last bit

@dstein: Haha! I was just thinking that

Nice to see subtle humor isn't wasted on you guys.

The 8 year old in me is never far away.

Enough sophomoric humor; or the vain attempt at such.

The gear well and landing pads scale = 13 ft X 7 ft per pad or 4 meters X 2 meters if you like. We now begin the excursion into attempting to build the retraction mechanism.

Is that square styrene rod there? or just card cut into strips? What are the measurements of the landing gear wells? I'm assuming they are the same size as my Marauder Destroyer.

I order you to stop... If you keep this up I am going to have to buy a thunderhawk

Landing gear is looking promising, though I expected nothing less from you!

My question would be how are you going to make retractable landing gear that will hold the weight of the model? It is an follow up question to a lingering wondering about how you ensure stability and strength in most portions of your designs.
I failed utterly in making sure my wings were well connected enough and as a result had to have the upper wings fixed to the lower wings for strength. I had wanted them to be articulate as the model suggests but couldn't. Of course I know now what I could have done for strength and I should have scrapped the wings and done them over.
When I look at your stuff I can see that it will be sturdy. How do you come up it before you build something or are there just pictures of attempts that failed that you don't post. Lord knows, I have scrapped some bad stuff before.

mxwllmdr wrote: My question would be how are you going to make retractable landing gear that will hold the weight of the model? It is an follow up question to a lingering wondering about how you ensure stability and strength in most portions of your designs.
I failed utterly in making sure my wings were well connected enough and as a result had to have the upper wings fixed to the lower wings for strength. I had wanted them to be articulate as the model suggests but couldn't. Of course I know now what I could have done for strength and I should have scrapped the wings and done them over.
When I look at your stuff I can see that it will be sturdy. How do you come up it before you build something or are there just pictures of attempts that failed that you don't post. Lord knows, I have scrapped some bad stuff before.

You ask a lot of questions for someone from Fort Lee New Jersey! (To quote Roseanne Roseannadanna/Gilda Radner SNL circa 1980s )

My question would be how are you going to make retractable landing gear that will hold the weight of the model? It is an follow up question to a lingering wondering about how you ensure stability and strength in most portions of your designs.

First of all I'm going to experiment with different strength springs Starting with Ball Point Pen springs. I made the hull out of foam core posterboard which saves a lot of weight but since then the multiple layers of styrene has almost doubled the mass.

I failed utterly in making sure my wings were well connected enough and as a result had to have the upper wings fixed to the lower wings for strength. I had wanted them to be articulate as the model suggests but couldn't. Of course I know now what I could have done for strength and I should have scrapped the wings and done them over.

I am using the 3D model which gives a very thick wing root ( One Centimeter ) below the bottom of the hull. This gives a much more sturdy attach point the the FW model. I plan to bolt the wings/landing gear wells to the hull for strength and ease of removal for transport.

.................. How do you come up it before you build something or are there just pictures of attempts that failed that you don't post.

Everything I build is on the fly i.e. I come up with it as I go along. Until this morning driving to work I hadn't thought up a working landing gear retract mechanism but by the time I arrived I had a working theoretical model.

........ I have scrapped some bad stuff before.

With Lucie I only scrapped the initial legs because they were too small but I used the information I learned building them to make Larger more robust legs. I posted the failed legs at that time. There are many layers to some parts of Lucie such as the waist where I just kept adding 2 mm layers until the size was satisfactory. Hence the strength.

So far I've used everything I've built on this model; even the hideous foam core.

Yeah sorry, I don't mean to be a bother or nosy, it just that I am not a very technically educated person. My father once told me a man may have four or five hundred hobbies before he finds the one he does so incessantly that his wife makes him quit. I think I have found my last hobby but am still learning. I appreciate your posts so much and the work is amazing.
And nice classic SNL quote, btw.....
"Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger"

mxwllmdr wrote:Yeah sorry, I don't mean to be a bother or nosy, .............
And nice classic SNL quote, btw.....
"Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger"

I really have to stop trying to be funny; everyone takes me serious. I love getting questions and relish answering them. Yours were neither a bother or nosy and I did my best to answer them as fully as I could.

As for the SNL quote, I couldn't resist seeing how you actually are from Fort Leonard MO.

Now if your name was really Richard Fader, well that would be down right spooky!

Nah...... That's my father...

He could really shake, shake, shake his booty too.

dsteingass wrote:Is that square styrene rod there? or just card cut into strips? What are the measurements of the landing gear wells? I'm assuming they are the same size as my Marauder Destroyer.

Just 2 MM card cut into strips.

Slightly larger than the pads themselves; about two and an eighth by one and a sixteenth inches.

Best scrathbuilt model ever. Looking forward on seeing it finished. Keep up the good work

Oh wow, smaller! my hefty girl's feet are 1 1/4" x3/4". mine is really heavy though, so she probably needs em.

dsteingass wrote:................my hefty girl's feet are 1 1/4" x3/4". mine is really heavy though, so she probably needs em.

Mrs Blackadder wears a 7 1/2 and would probably not appreciate being referred to as hefty. You obviously have a healthy relationship.

The gear well skin surface covered with the actual model for reference.


http://i.imgur.com/K4MPm.jpg


http://i.imgur.com/QQn5v.jpg

Now in most of the images I have seen the gear is canted outboard. This will pose a problem as the centering strut ( That which keeps the gear aligned with the direction of flight/landing) will have to pivot as the gear raises or lowers. This posed no problem for FW as their gear doesn't move but it appears unique in my experience with aircraft unless the gear folds out from the centerline in the manner of say a Boeing 727. The problem is that the main strut descends vertically down so the centering 'down and locked strut' jams on deployment. A pretty pickle of a problem.

Also the 'Down and lock' strut has no where to go when the gear is retracted; Ha! What's up with that???? FW really dropped the ball on this; engineeringwise.

IMCO

--
E. Blackadder

Quit 'cher bellyach'n Blackadder and stop make'n excuses!

lol, I was talking about my Marauder Destroyer lol

dsteingass wrote:lol, I was talking about my Marauder Destroyer lol

I know what you mean; mine gets like that once a month as well.

She sounds like quite a handful. It's well that you can keep your sense of humor about it.

Good stuff Blackadder!

I'll admit youve lost me slightly with all that gear talk! Still, I know you'll be able to pull it off, whatever "it" may be

Love the humour as well

The resolution of the foot pad is pretty pitiful but this is what I gleaned from it.


http://i.imgur.com/xOrIU.jpg



http://i.imgur.com/W2i3Q.jpg

It's your overhead lamp. it's just to the right over your workpiece. Is that Hex tube?

dsteingass wrote:It's your overhead lamp. it's just to the right over your workpiece. Is that Hex tube?

I meant the resolution in the 3D image I'm working from.

I bet you have hex tube if you have mini blinds. It's the slat adjusting rod. Incidentally mini blind slats are an excellent source of thin styrene material.

Save a buck here and there, that's my motto.

OMG Great idea! Except the min-blinds I have are falling apart from brittleness (the slats have lost their spring, they just snap now) but The adjusting rod will be used tonight! Thanks

dsteingass wrote:OMG Great idea! Except the min-blinds I have are falling apart from brittleness (the slats have lost their spring, they just snap now) but The adjusting rod will be used tonight! Thanks

Yes styrene is light sensitive and the oils dry out in direct sunlight especially the thin stuff that's why I keep all my models in a climate controlled darkened room much as the Mona Lisa is kept and for greater reasons. IMHO

You must read my thread on building a Super Heavy tank 'Titan Hunter' using IBM printer ribbon cartridges for the frame.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/210995.page

And my shelved Super, Super, Heavy 'Storm Hammer' project that's twice the mass of an ordinary Baneblade also from IBM cartridges. I'll resurrect that beauty someday.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236187.page