Chris Ward

From what I have seen the problem seems to be that the 'levitated' item wants to wander off in the horizontal plane - therefore, I think the way forward would be a 'booth' with magnetised wingtips, so that it can realistically move around, but not very far before it is pushed back centrally. It will happen. If it hasn't already....

It is being done, using an electro-magnetic field - but not 100% reliably as far as I have seen to date. It's also so far over my head that my hair doesn't even move.

Hello Sir, Magnets certainly will work, a 15mm diameter disc that is 5mm thick has almost frightening power - they need careful handling and you do not want to get any part of you between two of them. I am currently experimenting with a rectangular magnet inside the fuselage and a 'disc on a stick' outside. It seems to be all about the siting of the internal magnet(s). Don't overlook the extra possibilities offered by drop/slipper tanks and even bombs too. I am trying to summon the courage to try one unattached, i.e. floating inside the fuselage, thus allowing (theoretically) unlimited positioning and have ordered a Tamiya Fieseler V1 doodlebug to experiment with. Thinking ahead, past that experiment, maybe a loose magnet inside a sealed, fixed tube might be the way to go to minimise the potential for internal damage... C.

Thank you Max. They look great (so does your Harvard) but can it be true that they are the 'only game in town' as Collin says ? If they can injection mould pigeons in 1/35 scale....

I guess, as previously mentioned Wolfgang (may I call you Wolf ?) it depends on the eye of the beholder and what it expects to see. For myself, I am very intolerant of any attempt to model motion - I dislike figures in 'action' poses for this reason. That said, if the aftermarket were to produce an etch of a representative spinning prop in, say, 20 strands of differing thickness for each of the major scales, I'm sure they would sell lots of them. And if they have, could someone post a link to it here, as it would be a worthy capture for the thread ? Best, C.

Absolutely. It is completely acceptable to look upon what we do as Art, prototypical fidelity be damned, but it has to have a solid engineering foundation or it won't work.

Update - the Revell 1/32 Spitfire has arrived to act as guinea pig. Early indications on a taped together wingset and fuselage are that a single 10mm/3mm N52 magnet is probably not going to be strong enough for the desired effect. It works, but isn't fabulous. I have some 15mm/5mm coming. Key to making this work is going to be siting the internal magnet to allow for maximum interface with the outside one.

Yes, I think that N52 magnets are so strong that they remove the need for piercing the fuselage and offer all sorts of possibilities for post fixing pose-ability, not to mention the opportunity to disassemble the model with the storage advantages that gives as well. Bigger plane - bigger magnet Greater variety of poses - more magnets fixed internally. And presumably you can paint them if you want to.

Or horrified Peter - depends on the mind ! I love the use of forced perspective you have employed there.... Method/Devilish detail is what this thread is all about Rick. I need to have sound engineering principles in place before I 'unleash the mind' as Peter has so memorably done above. The thread is still young, we may get some more input yet.... C.

Thanks for your help Mike. Hi Collin, Thanks for the inspiration, I can't post any pictures for the usual reasons - I don't have any because I haven't started yet ! I'm glad I broke cover and posted, it has been quite useful and motivating. I must say, that I am surprised that more effort has not been directed into this from the manufacturers, given the comparative elegance of a lot of airborne airframes viz their earthbound alternatives. But then, I guess you could say the same about airfield support vehicles, equipment and personnel, but that is a different subject isn't it. Best, C.

Good Morning from the Channel Coast of England folks, So, I think we may have solved the problem. No more stressful hole drilling, we just attach two strong magnets either side of the inside of the fuselage during the build and one to the end of a piece of acrylic rod (well anything actually, even the wall) - being careful with the polarity, yes - and we should be able to move it about to our hearts content. There also exists such a thing as magnetic putty, should we require it. I have some magnets and I have just sandwiched a 3mm sheet of acrylic between two of them. No matter how hard I try or how violent I am, I cannot shake it to the point of 'fail', and they are little bigger than a watch battery. It should be child's play to slide the AoA around. How exciting is that ? Thank you Thierry. C.

Thierry, magnets are a brilliant idea - thank you. Richie, that's starting to sound awfully complicated Mate - good, but very complicated ? Some food for thought coming in now - keep it coming folks.... C.

Hi Mike, Thanks for contributing and for the welcome. Enjoyed the pics of your lovely models, in the last of them I spy a ball. Talk to me about this ball - it is presumably dismountable, since the 262 has disappeared - how does it attach to the aircraft ? C.

Morning Steve, Thanks for the pictures Mate - we are, I think, on the same page of the same book. Google long barrel eyelet - there are many types of grommet too ? A fixed AOA is probably the compromise I will have to accept. I still believe that a ball joint exists in another application, but I have exhausted plumbing and photography (exhausted myself anyway). I'm now wondering if an epoxied nut with the thread facing out of the fuselage screwing into some kind of jointed receiver is an avenue worth exploring ? Clever solution to your problem though, well done. C.

Thanks for contributions, some excellent stuff there. I suppose that I should have explained that I am trying to achieve a repeatable formula, so that additional aircraft can be added flying alongside (or above) at some point in the future. All the 'surgery' needs to be carried out right at the beginning of the build as well. I'm trying to take the randomness out of the equation. If a receiver is used into which a rod is fitted, how does one align the receiver - that would be the same as inserting the rod directly and epoxy-ing it. It would work, but there would be no guarantee of attitude of the aircraft. I also don't think the cross section of a Spitfire would allow entry from the tail, it would have to come in from below ? It could come in from below and then bend 90 degrees into a bulkhead (existing or manufactured) but how do you reliably bend acrylic rod at the same angle over and over ? I did achieve a decent result on a Lancaster using aluminium pipe and a pipe bender, but I'm holding out that someone, somewhere in the modelling world has done this simply and effectively and that I am way overthinking the thing ? C.