Starfighter Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Good question, Erik - and I sadly don't know the answer. It seems that no official Grumman drawings are available on the net - these could be a reliable source, but as already mentioned before, even factory drawings which are available to the public aren't always 100% accurate! Willy Peeters' drawing in the DACO book look pretty good to me, but they certainly have some inaccuracies as well. I am relying mostly on photos in my attempt to get the proportions of the Revell kit right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luca Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Dany Boy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfighter Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Different focal widths and perspectives... you can clearly see much more of the canopy side on the pic of the real aircraft than on the model on the bigger pic. This kind of comparison simply does not work! LSP_K2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luca Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 (edited) Can the focal length shrink a curved surface Starfighter? I've simply zoomed the original pic to match the dimensions with the photo on the left Edited June 1, 2017 by Luca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfighter Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 I hope you understand that focal length influences the way an object is distorted as does the perspective! As the photo of the real aircraft was not taken perfectly from front, the LH side curved portion of the windscreen appears wider as you see it slightly from side - see what I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airfixer Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Thanks, Ben. You were in a way forestalling my next question - Willy's drawings. From my past experience with Willy Peeters' drawings from the good old Verlinden Lock On and the more recent DACO publications, I for one, I agree with you rating his drawings as pretty accurate. Not perfect, but accurate enough to use them as solid base to start from. I'm not that familiar with the mighty Turkey...if it was a MiG-23 or MiG-29, things would be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee White Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Grumman used to have an archive, run by a lady whose name I can't remember, and they used to field inquiries all the time. You could write in and ask, "What is the length and ratio of the flibjab anomutator Janobab on the F4F-3?" and, several weeks later, you'd get an answer in the mail. Those days are loooooooong gone, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titan Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 Any further info on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Mike Posted June 5, 2017 Author Share Posted June 5, 2017 her husband must have been the guy that explained the Turboentabulator. Lee White and Troy Molitor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony T Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 Grumman used to have an archive, run by a lady whose name I can't remember, and they used to field inquiries all the time. You could write in and ask, "What is the length and ratio of the flibjab anomutator Janobab on the F4F-3?" and, several weeks later, you'd get an answer in the mail. Those days are loooooooong gone, unfortunately. Lois Lovisolo. She was amazing when I was researching A-6, EA-6 and F-111B. Last I heard, maybe just after the turn of the century, she was curator/archivist of the files at the Grumman heritage center. Tony Lee White 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony T Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 This is it now... http://www.bethpagecommunity.com/mobile/template.aspx?folder=community&file=northrop_grumman_history_center HTH Tony Lee White 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfighter Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 The Tomcat kept me busy during the weekend. I still wasn't happy with the nose shape and length after the first correction, so the saw came out again. Here ist the nose before shortening. Upper and mostly the lower curvature are not correct and the aread between windscreen and radome is too long. Out comes the saw. I have removed around 2,5mm behind the radome. I angled the nose a tad more downwards when I glued it back into place. Some more sanding - we're getting closer, I think. The bottom of the radome has to be flattened a bit more just in front of the groove line. johncrow, Tony T, Luca and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luca Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 great work sir! Starfighter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Mike Posted June 6, 2017 Author Share Posted June 6, 2017 I see how you moved the pointy thing down, in relation to where the reflective /shiny things go. Shawn M, LSP_K2 and Starfighter 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chek Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 It's looking a lot better already Star, although it requires a lot of care sanding all those subtle curves just by hand and eye. Starfighter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now