Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
User Artwork / Re: Motocar's Cutaway drawings
« Last post by Motocar on Today at 03:55:56 pm »
Cutaway Lockheed A-12, author Rigatto and modified by Motocar to recrated
2
User Artwork / Re: Motocar's Cutaway drawings
« Last post by Motocar on Today at 03:53:52 pm »
Repost Cutaway Mikoyan Gurevich MiG SM-12 PMS, author WEAL and modified by Motocar to recreated
3
User Artwork / Re: von Brauns Ferry Rocket kit master parts
« Last post by athpilot on Today at 06:17:14 am »
Hi, very impressive artwork! I´ve got Myhra´s Book ("German ideas from ... for a proposed space program"[2014]). So my question is, what about the 570 other pictures not included in Myhra´s book? Can we see more here, please?
Greetings
Athpilot
4
User Artwork / Re: Motocar's Cutaway drawings
« Last post by Motocar on Today at 04:56:58 am »
Meantime, down in Moscow subway, yesterday.

Nice to see that work in such distant latitudes, thank you for the note ...! Thanks flateric
5
User Artwork / Re: Motocar's Cutaway drawings
« Last post by flateric on Yesterday at 09:54:49 pm »
Meantime, down in Moscow subway, yesterday.
6
Modelling Forum / Re: B-29 model
« Last post by Tonton-42 on Yesterday at 11:44:40 am »
As I understand, the size of the drawing is the problem ? There should be accurate 3-views on the net, but
scaling them to the 1/14 scale actually may not be the best solution.
But from wiki, you can download a 3-view as a svg- (vector graphic) file (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Boeing_B-29_Superfortress_3-view.svg,
which can be enlarged without loss of quality. And modifying and improving it, is quite simple, too. And you
probably don't need the postion of every rivet, do you ?
There are commercial drawings available, but I don't know, if they really are better.

Dear Jemiiba,

I do apologize for not having answered immediately something most detailled  :-[, but my English is approximate  ::) and a health worry tortures me a little. My objective is not of course to draw a hyperdetailed model but at less give it the best exact forms because as said higher the simplicity of the forms is not necessarily the easiest to be reproduced. Besides in one of my reference docs (B&S Vol.10 p.29 better than Warbirdtech Vol.14 p.11?) I indeed found the reproduction of the location of the frames of fuselage as well as ribs of wings and stabilizing plans. There is neither diameters nor length of the nervures other than extremities (I bought the plans Aerospace, but the most beautiful girl of the world cannot give that what she has...). However it is already that and I progress to give something usable and totaly free rights for fans who would like build a "little" 1/14 B-29, electical engined or PSS ... has condition to know how to stick two pieces of wood and of polystyrene. What I do not doubt  ;D !

Regards

Tonton
7
Patent Pending / Re: P. Pancani Unusual Concept
« Last post by hesham on Yesterday at 05:22:16 am »
Thank you my dear Zeroc.
8
Theoretical and Speculative Projects / Re: Ski-jump capable MiG-23?
« Last post by Pioneer on Yesterday at 01:27:59 am »

Would the MIG-23 even remotely fit in the Kiev classes hanger or (especially) the lifts.

Doing a comparison with Yak-38:

Yak-38M
Length: 16.37 m (50 ft 1 in)
Wingspan: 7.32 m (24 ft 0 in)
Height: 4.25 m (14 ft 5 in)
Wing area: 18.5 m² (199 ft²)
Empty weight: 7,385 kg (16,281 lb)
MiG-23MLD
Length: 15.65 m (51 ft 4 in)
Wingspan:
With wings spread: 13.965 m (45 ft 10 in)
With wings swept: 7.779 m (25 ft 6 in)
Height: 4.82 m (15 ft 9.75 in)
Empty weight: 9,595 kg (21,153 lb)

Thank's for the comparison figures Greg!

Im guessing, if the Soviet’s were serious enough, and deemed it a serious enough operational requirement (especially after the demonstrated shortcomings of the Yak-38’s performance), they could/would have at minimum kept Kiev as a proof-of-concept V/STOL heavy aviation cruiser; but incorporating structural changes into the design and building of Minsk (or at minimum Novorossiysk and Baku, had they been completed). These modifications could have incorporated the likes of a ski-jump, arrester gear/systems, larger and heavier capacity aircraft lift (or lifts) to facilitate the slightly larger dimensions of a heavier carrier-based MiG-23K and or MiG-27K variant(s).
Although saying this, I can only assume that the MiG-23K and or MiG-27K would be somewhat heavier, due to the necessity of structural and landing gear strengthening.
Im also thinking any MiG-23K/MiG-27K’s fuel and armament loads would have to be somewhat reduced to allow it to get of such a short deck, even with ski-jump assistance.
Im wondering if the naval variant would have necessitated pushing engine thrust to its limits.
One thing is for certain IMO, I wouldn’t be wanting to be barrelling down such a short runway, with everything depending on one engine!!

P.S. One think particully I liked with the 'proposed' MiG-23K, is the perceived vastly improved canopy/cockpit arrangement, which seems to have offered superior pilot visibility over the legacy MiG-23 'Flogger' series!!  :P 

 
Regards
Pioneer


9
Patent Pending / Re: P. Pancani Unusual Concept
« Last post by Avimimus on August 16, 2017, 04:50:50 pm »
Ah so probably an automatic breaking system to keep the pilot from accidentally causing a nose over (or something along those lines)?
10
Patent Pending / Re: P. Pancani Unusual Concept
« Last post by zeroc on August 16, 2017, 12:34:10 pm »
Hi,

I can't understand what was this Concept from P. Pancani ?.

http://www.avia-it.com/act/biblioteca/periodici/PDF%20Riviste/Ala%20d'Italia/L'ALA%20D'ITALIA%201931%2003.pdf

Title roughly stated "Device for airplanes to prevent capsizing"
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10