Attention bored model builders...

[J.C.Seixas]

Last edited by J.C.Seixas on Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:58 pm, edited 3 times in total.

[bipe215]

How does a CAD program handle wing overlap. That would seem to be the advantage of models. Lots of big a/c with little ones stuck under them.

Steve G

[TAdan]

How does a CAD program handle wing overlap. That would seem to be the advantage of models. Lots of big a/c with little ones stuck under them.

Steve G

That is an issue. Unless everything were modeled in 3-D it would be tricky to figure out where you could overlap. I normally work in 2-D so I am only helpful for as far as an architectural plan can go.

[J.C.Seixas]

Last edited by J.C.Seixas on Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[Iclo]

A CAD program only allows to modelate in 3D each plane, after that, it would be necessary to create a software, allowing to move each plane, and who can detect "conflict" between two plane, (using the "Mesh" of each plane.)
It's similar to video games, where isn't possible to walk trough walls, etc.
There are differents free tools used to build this sort of software easily.

Sorry for my bad english, from Belgium...

[J.C.Seixas]

Last edited by J.C.Seixas on Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:40 pm, edited 3 times in total.

[Iclo]

When I speak to use Flight simulator plane, is not to use this game, but to ask to the devellopers of free add-on, to use their 3D modelisation, in a "homemade" software. (These modelisation are made in "cad" style software)
If a plane type is not available, it will not be very difficult to create it, we only need of the general mesh of the plane.

Concerning the portability of this kind of software, is only a question of technical choice. Languages like Java are portable on all the common operating system.

Yes, the real problem is the time needed to build one software of this type.


Sorry, but it's not very easy for me to find the good words in English to explain technical questions on a forum.

Regards.

[Jack Cook]

Gary,
JCW had a hanger program set-up for him by one of the computer gurus in his C-130 squadron. You may want to ask him about it. Seeing the 6 a/c he's stuffed into that small 2-3 plane hanger is amazing. We're not talking Tomahawks here I mean big bi-planes, t-6 ect
or try this

[gregv]

A two-pronged attack then; use the 3D version to block everything in, then use the models to actually proof the plan and add final tweaks.

Works for me, but then again I already started the Hellcat

Seriously, though, I'm sure that both systems would work well, but from my experience there is no substitute for maquettes, especially when you have to get the approvals of others who may or may not be super computer savvy. Simply put, people like seeing things in the flesh so to speak. But being able to lay it out in a program will sure take some of the guesswork out.

cheers

gv

[TAdan]

Whatever Gary decides, this thread has displayed a number of good options.

[K5DH]

There have been some valid points made against using 1/72 scale models (they take up a lot of space, they are easily broken, etc). But... why not build up the hangar diorama and make it part of the Museum's displays? Enclose it in a glass display case so that the models won't get broken or dusty. The public, by and large, seem to be fascinated by models, and I think they'd get a kick out of seeing the CAF's collection in miniature before they venture out into the hangar to see it in full scale. If the staff needs to rearrange the aircraft, they can open up the display, do their magic, and then close it back up again.

Something to think about.

Cheers, beers, and Happy New Years!

[bipe215]

Notice in the picture of the MAPS hangar model, the L-4 dwarfs the fighters. The aforementioned scale problems on display.

Steve G

[Obergrafeter]

I keep trying to shrink the cats but they won't stay still long enough to get them in the microrange. How about a 1/72 scale model of Randy? Maybe I can get him to stay still.

[gregv]

Notice in the picture of the MAPS hangar model, the L-4 dwarfs the fighters. The aforementioned scale problems on display.
Steve G

I am guessing that the L4 is 1/48 scale vs the 1/72 of the rest of the group. While the accuracy of the kits is a very good point, it should only be a problem with some of the older kits out there, and can easily be checked against the real thing in the hangar with a measuring tape, ruler & calculator. And as long as a constant scale is kept, in this case 1/72, there really shouldn't be any issues.

As far as storage goes, the models could all be glued to individual thin triangular-shaped flat bases, with velcro on the backside; make the "hangar" floor out of felt or some other suitable fabric, and the entire thing could then be hung vertically from a wall for storage and/or display.

And the WWII recognition model feel that would be given by the overall black finish on all the kits is an added bonus....

cheers

greg v

[Second Air Force]

How about 1/144th scale? Minicraft has produced quite a few of the required airplanes and they would make the display more manageable. Rather than using the fragile kit landing gear, use plastic dowel as a sturdy alternative. After all, they are going to be more like Identification models than contest entrants.

Just a thought,
Scott