- Joined
- 28 October 2006
- Messages
- 1,004
- Reaction score
- 97
Focke-Wulf jet fighter
- Thread starter Flitzer
- Start date
- Joined
- 28 October 2006
- Messages
- 1,004
- Reaction score
- 97
Many thanks Justo.
Interesting.
On your flared fuselage/tail version, which mine is supposed to be, the guns are mounted high in the nose.
On the ref I have they are lower.
But I think yours are the correct location. (as usual ;D)
P
Interesting.
On your flared fuselage/tail version, which mine is supposed to be, the guns are mounted high in the nose.
On the ref I have they are lower.
But I think yours are the correct location. (as usual ;D)
P
- Joined
- 28 October 2006
- Messages
- 1,004
- Reaction score
- 97
Thanks for the double bonus Justo.
Great stuff.
I notice you have all the stencils etc in place on bonus 1, could I ask if you have clear references for these please? i.e. What they say?
It's one area in which my refs are poor.
Many, many thanks
Peter
Great stuff.
I notice you have all the stencils etc in place on bonus 1, could I ask if you have clear references for these please? i.e. What they say?
It's one area in which my refs are poor.
Many, many thanks
Peter
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,134
- Reaction score
- 6,471
OMG
thanks justo
by the way
Wat for a font the germans used on there Blueprints and documentation,
was dat DIN 1421 or DIN 1451 or another ???
thanks justo
by the way
Wat for a font the germans used on there Blueprints and documentation,
was dat DIN 1421 or DIN 1451 or another ???
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,134
- Reaction score
- 6,471
Thanks for "be helpful-post"
know i can draw accurate German WW2 aircrafts ;D
this show the Font i looking for
from Up-ship.com
know i can draw accurate German WW2 aircrafts ;D
this show the Font i looking for
from Up-ship.com
Michel Van said:Thanks for "be helpful-post"
know i can draw accurate German WW2 aircrafts ;D
this show the Font i looking for
from Up-ship.com
Years back when I was working on issue V5N6 of Aerospace Projects Review, I cobbled together some drawings and made an attempt to make them look appropriate to the WWII-German era. This included the font in the blueprints. I found a font in the standard collection of Microsoft Word that looked pretty close; see the attached. I don't recall what font it was, but I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find... some standard Truetype font included in Microsoft Office 1999 release.
Not speaking German means that my fake blueprints are almost certainly laughably goofy to actual Germans...
Attachments
- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,134
- Reaction score
- 6,471
OMG that wat I looking for !
zillion Thanks Scott
to that font used on Diagrams (as Technical lettering)
its DIN 6776–1 replaced by EN ISO 3098
Din't know that was already been used in ww2...
zillion Thanks Scott
to that font used on Diagrams (as Technical lettering)
its DIN 6776–1 replaced by EN ISO 3098
Din't know that was already been used in ww2...
- Joined
- 11 March 2006
- Messages
- 8,606
- Reaction score
- 3,048
Nowadays there quite probably is a digital font like this, but about 30 years ago, during
my apprenticeship, we simply learnt this as "Normschrift" (standard font). There were templates
available, but we always had to write by hand. And professional draughtsman proudly rejected
the use of such templates (We sometimes used them, but in most cases our foreman noticed : )
DIN 6776 already was a later form, avoiding acute angles, which often gave issues on micro fiches.
my apprenticeship, we simply learnt this as "Normschrift" (standard font). There were templates
available, but we always had to write by hand. And professional draughtsman proudly rejected
the use of such templates (We sometimes used them, but in most cases our foreman noticed :
)DIN 6776 already was a later form, avoiding acute angles, which often gave issues on micro fiches.
Please note cap filler tank wings in "bonus"
- Joined
- 31 May 2006
- Messages
- 648
- Reaction score
- 394
Just like to second what Apteryx said - your stuff really is first rate Flitzer.
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,286
- Reaction score
- 5,851
Hi!
Ta183.
(pictures from http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft22182.htm and Google)
Especially Ta183 fuselage tail shape is impressive compared with recent jet fighter. Also the length of Ta183 fuselage is very short. Vertical tail stabilizer is very long.
Why so short or why so long? Also horizontal tail stabilizer best position is the question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJYRjpGnigU
Ta183.
(pictures from http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft22182.htm and Google)
Especially Ta183 fuselage tail shape is impressive compared with recent jet fighter. Also the length of Ta183 fuselage is very short. Vertical tail stabilizer is very long.
Why so short or why so long? Also horizontal tail stabilizer best position is the question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJYRjpGnigU
Attachments
- Joined
- 11 March 2006
- Messages
- 8,606
- Reaction score
- 3,048
blackkite said:
A long jet pipe/intake was found to lower thrust (there's a photo of ground tests using a Me 262
with an elongated intake in Schick/Radinger "Messerschmitt Geheimprojekte"), but the overall
length is the momentum arm for the tailplane and cannot be shortened at will. So this
configuration probably was regarded as a good compromise.
Bill Walker
Per Ardua ad Nauseum
I suspect the FW fuselage and jet pipe were kept short to minimize empty weight, and to minimize inlet and exhaust losses. The F-86 and MiG-15 had more thrust available, so they could carry a bit more structure in order to improve the aerodynamics, and were less bothered by the losses on a long inlet. Shifting the cockpit forward, and the engine aft, helped keep the jet pipe length down as well..
Similar threads
-
-
-
-
Two Argentine variants of the Focke Wulf F$22J
- Started by Badner
- Replies: 0
-
