Jim Barry

Great work! Love the version counts on your project saves! I too have this 1969 F4F in the stash.

For those silently holding their tongues, saying "Geez, Jim the pontoon struts are a little simple" , I recognize this too and have added loft rails to guide the shape more realistically. This view here is more proof of concept since I had to learn how to construct a plane that intersected the two lofting profiles. (fwiw, it's a plane defined by three points). I'll resize the fuselage contact footprint here later today. I believe that are almost touching. I must say, this is some beautiful aviation design.

Productive night.

There's so many nice cockpits here on the forum, but this still stands out. Nice work.

Yes, it’s a big gap in the 1/32 offering, these planes. in news unrelated to the S.4, I’m so psyched to get the rare rare rare opportunity to see my favorites performing on Sunday here in Maine. So close I can ride my bike to the gates! They’ve been practicing all week. I've never seen the Red Arrows before.

You’re welcome, Guy. Good luck with Rhino, Hubert. I was hitting some dead ends with Fusion a few months ago and was just about to go learn Blender, but I’ve since dislodged what was frustrating me in Fusion and now seeing it’s pretty viable end to end, I’m going to stay. Here’s today’s show making the vertical stabilizer into a reality. It’s a little long at 5:00 but you can see real time work and not a canned demo.

Glad you liked it, Guy. Here’s a better vid, what I really intended to make, but didn’t have time.,

Per request, here’s what it looks like to edit a form (in this case a cylinder type) to match the plane. It’s a lot of this. Really all that’s important is one side is good. One just cleaves the plane in half when happy, throws the bad side away (aka hide it) and then uses the mirror function really create the other side

But you don’t have 2 in the stash… RIP Marsh planes. Perhaps I can fill the gap. Thanks for the offer to help.

I think I should slow it down a bit and get a good grip on a source of the plane's design because I think what I started with were the original design drawings and not a documentation of the plane as built. (closer to drawing #2, but even that is suspect). More research, coming up.

Ha. The games. This will be a kit , God willing, Very limited production. The shipping to Europe is pricey but working on solutions that that. It's not too bad though. $70. Kit likely $150. Here's the Curtiss R3C-2 built as a real alpha test. Hubert Boillot has one coming to him in the mail as we speak.

I'll try to document kinda what it's like to design in Fusion though I'm not an expert at all. I just get by. I lately sort of impressed myself though with the Curtiss so maybe I have some game. So, in Fusion you can build a couple of ways. One is to loft profiles like covering a balsa R/C plane in tissue linking one bulkhead to another. The other way is to create what's called a form. For me, when the geometry gets a bit wild, I prefer to sort of sculpt my way to the goal. Well, not much is wilder than the nose of the S.4 so I'm going to create all the bumps in the engine cover by editing the points in what's called a t-spline. It's pretty fun, but does take practice until you know what you are doing. After the form is cool, then I'll thicken it which then creates an official "Body", the real core object in Fusion (to me anyway) In the background here you can see I'm using a blueprint of sorts I found and can insert it into the workspace as a Canvas. This is critical skill number 1.

The recent release of my first commercial kit, the Curtiss R3C-2 is exciting, but it’s unfortunately created a terrible addiction to racing seaplanes. There is a cure….More racing seaplanes!! I’m really busy getting the design work ready today, so excuse me if ai writes the summary! ___________________ The Supermarine S.4 was a pioneering racing seaplane designed by R.J. Mitchell for the 1925 Schneider Trophy. While it never competed in the race itself due to a crash, it holds a legendary status in aviation history for being the direct ancestor to the iconic Supermarine Spitfire. A Radical Departure The S.4 represented a massive leap in aeronautical design. Before its development, most racers—including Supermarine’s own previous entries—were biplanes. Mitchell, recognizing that drag was the primary enemy of speed, opted for a design that was years ahead of its time: Cantilever Monoplane: The S.4 featured an unbraced, mid-wing cantilever design. By eliminating the external wires and struts used in biplanes, Mitchell significantly reduced aerodynamic drag. Stressed-Skin Construction: The fuselage was a wooden semi-monocoque structure, a technique that would eventually evolve into the advanced metal skinning seen in the Spitfire. Engine & Power: It was powered by a 700 hp Napier Lion VII W-12 engine, a "broad-arrow" configuration that gave the aircraft its distinctive "hunched" nose profile. The 1925 Schneider Trophy & Aftermath The S.4 was built with great urgency after the Air Ministry approved the project in March 1925. It demonstrated its potential early on: World Record: On September 13, 1925, just weeks after its maiden flight, the S.4 set a new world seaplane speed record of 226.752 mph. The Crash: After being shipped to Baltimore for the 1925 Schneider Trophy, disaster struck during navigation trials on October 23. The aircraft developed violent aileron flutter, went out of control, and dived into the water from 100 feet. The pilot, Henry Biard, survived with injuries, but the S.4 was destroyed. Legacy and Significance Although the S.4 did not win the Schneider Trophy, the lessons learned from its design and failure were foundational for future successes: Solving Flutter: The crash highlighted that "aeroelasticity" (the interaction between aerodynamic forces and structural flexibility) was not well understood at the time. Mitchell’s later designs, specifically the S.5 and S.6, utilized more rigid, wire-braced wings and metal construction to overcome these issues. The Path to the Spitfire: The S.4 was the starting point of the evolutionary chain that led to the Spitfire. It taught Mitchell how to build a high-speed, streamlined, stressed-skin monoplane. This lineage—from the S.4 through the S.6B—provided the engineering experience necessary to create one of history's most successful fighter aircraft. Specifications Feature Detail Crew 1 Length 26 ft 7.75 in Wingspan 30 ft 7.5 in Engine Napier Lion VII (700 hp) Max Speed ~239 mph Construction Primarily wood (spruce/plywood)

Next stop: France!

I think I have everything now in place to begin production. Test prints are all 100% and though it's tempting to build it myself to make double sure it's good, I think I'm going to sell it. Kit #000001 . So.. time to request one if this is appealing to you. US$150. Buyer pays shipping and I think the international sales are going to be pricey there on shipping. (like $100 possibly) . Please DM with questions and requests to keep this thread clean. Or email Valkyrie.cycles at gmail dot com Masks complete. Ya'll gonna have to paint the inner part of the A and the R in ARMY because it's not attached to the mask and well, it's way too small to handle independently. The entire US ARMY graphic is just 1 cm but my paint tests prove it works pretty well.... even the punctuation. A white decal would serve better, but that's not something I can make. (white is not a printable "color") Also, please note the national insignia is a multiple layer thing. One paints the big blue circle with mask 1, they lays on the star mask and paints white, and then the red dot (centers well because the total circle is part of the mask. If you've ever done a British Roundel mask, you'll be right at home. Cockpit detail is SPARSE as was the real plane, but I do have an Instrument panel. The stick is fairly simple. You are on your own there. I'm not even sure you could see the pedals but I'll let the builder take that task as they see fit. I'd recommend guitar e-string for rigging which is fairly simple. Wire not supplied.

I admit to glazing but I did go pretty deep! Made me think that there were model builders in the 60's doing Revell Mustangs and knew all these similar details because they flew them. Carry on! (ps you know about holographic nail treatments ???

Thanks! I've been hacking my way forward here with the slicer. And yes, much of it is awesome. I just need to slow down and get my file game on to properly document process now that a more complex job is at hand and one I need to repeat. I know from actually developing software solutions that users all too often miss the grand design. Now it's my turn to be the stupid user!

I finished assembly and priming the 1/32 "prototype" in a relatively hasty lazy way to see its overall effect. I'm really pleased with how it came out. I mean, sure, it has flaws but looking past them, I'm seeing success is around the corner. I do need to vent about Elegoo printers and Satellite software. Maybe its me, but the file types the steps along the way (.elesat or .goo or .3mf or is it a slice file or is it a project file or am I working with an STL file, am I saving or exporting ?? Where's the save as button?? . It's something I'll figure out here soon, but I'm not a fan here. Vent over. Printing layout improvements in action. This is going to take 7 hours to print. Fuselage AND wings at 45 degrees this time should help keep it from deforming/underprinting

Scratch is like golf. Often, par. A few bogies, a few go in the water, in the trap, but then the birdie keeps you in the game.

Great run! Great products. Hope the next move is for the best.

Yes, it’s a good choice, I think. The radiators could have been something the builder could have wrestled with but they were not too too difficult. TBH this test is not really a test because I knew going in the prints were incomplete)aka fail. But I’m busy with in laws this week and have limited time to retrench. I will actually test soon. I did learn a few things though

A quick assembly to test fit etc. I don’t think I had the fuselage parts on the print bed in an optimal way making some joints disfigured. The prop had a print error. Getting there though!

Kinda rough like a newborn as I cut parts from supports sand them, but hey look! I made a model! This print has issues, but before I do another test, I thought I’d work this one up. No doubt, what you design is not EXACTLY translated to the print. Things that fit together with sub atomic precision on the screen are not so much. So, yes, there will be fitting and sanding and maybe a few swear words to keep it interesting!

Max, Thanks for the feedback. Enjoy the Wizard. Fokker D.VIII returns. Great subject for low run 3D .

The Curtiss got a like on Facebook by Paul Fisher! Kinda cool. I sure respect his work! His profile says he’s interested in getting into the 3D design aspect of the hobby. In other news, the first print batch went really well and would qualify as “buildable “ but it has a few flaws that I need to iron out. It’s not surprising I’m having to iterate to succeed.