How Accurate do " I Need To Be" ?????

[crashwrench]

Hello to all ,
Not shure where to post this ?
I am Trying to a Build a  "1/5th Scale P-82 Twin Mustang " ( maybe enter it in a scale contest when finished ?? )
Yes , I know this :: Not Just Two Mustangs Slapped together ::  .....  Big Differances !!!!
My Question or, Quest to be !  \\ How Accurate do I need to be
What I'm asking IS , Can certain Changes be made to the model to make it a safer to fly ?
I am in the Process of Hand Drawing My Own Plans to build this model .
Trying to stay within the  " AMA"  And The " USSMA " Rule books .......
Like Increasing Flight Control Surfaces ,, Say ,, 10 % in area  ( for better Slow  Speed Handling ). Changes To the wing airfoil shape ( Increasing the Chord Thickness ??)
Increasing the Wing Area ( In Square Inches of Area ) , Just small Changes  ( You would need a ruler and a Calculator to see what was done  ...)
I have found several ;; Three-View Drawings , Hand Drawings , Model Drawings / Blueprints ( for small models ) , ( None are the same ) , A  "1/72nd " scale Plastic model ,
 Pictures, CAD Files , Books , Magazines , Several Musems ( have not been there yet ) , A Gentlemen in South Georgia ,USA ,, Is Restoring an ( Real! ) " XP - 82 Twin Mustang  .
I have been sitting on several  " FORUMS " ,, Looking of info , but there is not too much  to go on .
Ok, Reason 1 , I got the "" Itch to Build This """  While doing reasearch on the history of the  Mustangs  .......
Ok , Reason 2 , I have a " Top Flite Models "  1/5th Giant Scale P-51D Mustang  ( modded more to Scale )
with A  ;; Full Featured Cockpit , a " Dragon Models "- Pilot w/ Seat Pack Parachute , Sliding Canopy / Remodded Canopy Turtle Deck , " Robart Retracts "/ Mains , and Tailwheel ,
(Inner / Outer Main Gear Doors , Tail -Wheel Doors Too . ) " Robarts " P-51 Scale Main Wheels  ( also Added Their Air Disc Brakes System ) , NAV. Lightes ,
 A " Desert Aircraft " DA-85 Gas engine ,Swinging A " SOLO Prop " Scale 4 blade / 22" Inch DIA. , A " True Turn " Spinner ,
 A " Keleo Creations" Scale Exhaust system and Exhaust Shrouds .
" FiberGlass Specialtties Inc. " / Full Engine Cowling , Radiator Air Scoop ( also Added the Under side Rear Radiator Door ( It Works / Moves TOO ) .
For covering  Will be Using " Flite Metal " Alumminum  To Make The Panels . ( I want to build a ''' Look_ like a Restored Mustang  ) ...
Ok, Reason 3 , I have in stock a Pair of  " DA- 85's  ( One Turns Clockwise , the Other Turns __Counter-Clockwise ) set up By
" Desert Aircraft " , Two ( 2 ) " SOLO Props / 24" inch DIA. / 4 Blade Props ( just Happens to be the correct DIA. For my Project  )..

SO, Any Ideas ??
Thanks foor your time ..
Later,
Mark K.
AMA - 877235
High Point, N.C. , USA

[Curtis Kitteringham]

Mark
I am going to start with, where do you want to compete with the model. In AMA, USSMA, local events or Top Gun, each have a class to fly in at different static points and how you earn them. USSMA does work on a percent from your out line drawings for Expert, Team and Advanced classes. With the ProAm class in USSMA you need a picture to show that you modeled a full size plane. With in the web site there are areas that can help you with what the judges are looking for in static, the goal is to build the model as close to your outline drawings as possible. For me this is the area that I have trouble in, it's hard for me to pick and stay focused on one plane, I am always finding a different color picture of the full size that I am building.
Curtis Kitteringham   
   

[Flite-Metal]

Mark,

I will reduce this to its simplest level, whether your model is to complete in any of the AMA, USSMA, etc classes.
Obtain a multiple view line drawing, preferably one with more than (3) three views or projections of the P-82. If
you do not have an accurate (read as published) mutliple view drawing I will gladly provide you with one which is
appropriate, regardless of the class you will compete.

"Oh, there are multiple, multiple view drawings available for the P-82...which of these do I select?"...I just heard
you say to yourself.

Painting one's self into a complex corner out of which there may seem no escape is not what you want to do. You
want to have fun learning from your fellow competitors just what it takes to earn the highest score for your attempt
to build a "replica". Few replicas exist, though many models win scale contests. Winning is a reward, partitipating
and learning while competing is what this sport is all about.

Select a level of multiple view drawings you feel comfortable duplicating in your project. The important thing is to
replicate as much of the drawing as you can without leaving too much unduplicated. I always select no less than
three different drawings. After increasing or reducing their size (scale) I copy them onto transparencies so I can
more easily compare each to the others to observe major inconsistancies...(there are always going to be some).
Look at these and see if there is anything you find interesting and accurate enough to do what you want to do.

Before you do anything else...go scan an excellent P-51 line art drawing, scale it the same as these...either edit
the images electronically to create a transparent .gif for each drawing then lay them all on top of the others to see
the difference between a P-51 and a P-82/F-82.

After you do that, select the amount of duplication you are willing to do to create as close to a replica as can be
created. Its projects like yours that either turns modelers into craftsmen or drives them out of the hobby...

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa78/JJELLIS_PHOTO/F82%20Twin%20Mustang/F823v1.jpg

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa78/JJELLIS_PHOTO/F82%20Twin%20Mustang/F823v3.jpg

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa78/JJELLIS_PHOTO/F82%20Twin%20Mustang/F823v2.jpg

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa78/JJELLIS_PHOTO/F82%20Twin%20Mustang/F823v5.jpg



You probably already have these.

[crashwrench]

Hi Flight Metal ,
Thanks for the Pict' .
Spot - ON ! Thanks
How true ,,  Every time I get a chance to Sit down , HAnd Crank Up My oLd P.C. ( Oh, Just a Minute \ Losing power, Need  To CrAnK Up
Bang,,,,, WWWHIRRRRRRRRRRRRR Bang ,RRRRR ,, Snap,,,, Oh, ,, Where''s my ELeKrtic  StERTER , Ok ,, BuZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, WHIr Whir
VaVOOM  < Got It Now\\\ WOT\\   / broke the handle , Need A Band-aid 
Sorry, Where Were We ,
Oh yes , Thanks Flight Metal for The Pict's .. Will Add These To My Collection .
Every Time I start Digging For info , Ether here, Online , meeting people , Places ,  It Is Very Interesting To Read / Hear the Stories .
For this project , ( Two Years Search  ) I found on the internet A bunch of color pictures, Some Drawings ( some 3- veiws ) A couple of Hard Back Books,
A couple of Museums , A Gentelman In South Georgia, USA , He and crew Are Restoring ( Real Aircraft and to Flight Condition  ) An "XP-82 Twin Mustang  --
It Is One of POTOTYPE's  ..............

[Flite-Metal]

Mark,

Sounds like you have a need to narrow your field of view a mite... This is really very simple. You are not
building a precision museum model to be feather duster dusted every morning before the spot lights turn on.

Photographic documentation is the most abused portion of your documentation binder. It would be good if
you were to start by creating your documentation binder. This will force your field of view to focus on what
is really important and what is a good accompaniment to the important items in your binder.

I believe you have yet to understand with exception of your multiple view drawings your documentation must
be for a single BuNo, "yes" one aircraft. I thought I read in your post you were replicating the prototype for
your model. Maybe I am wrong, but I have never ever seen someone be so lucky to have found as much as
you profess having found documentation for.

Most of us struggle to achieve proper photos in support of what we "thought" we wanted to build. I'd like a
dollar for every subject I thought I would build but didn't for lack of proper documentaiton. I went against all
odds on my current B-47's. The FBI was directed to burn all records for the B-47 when the B-52 rolled out.
What remains is declassified microfische at the Smithsonian's research library...and here .  

You are permited 8 full pages in the binder, plus your multiple view line drawings. In a perfect world you are
going to create three identical documentation binders. There is an example found within the USSMA site and
I have a more visual example in ScaleAero.com. Mine will help you see a way of presenting your model to a
judge with focused attention to your model's best features while achieving everything the judge needs.

Click here to visit which will show how and why a binder arranged in its manner can change the static portion of
your contest score. You do have a way of influencing the way the static judge goes about his/her task.

You should download AMA's Competition Guide if you have not already done so. The AMA guide is basis
for USSMA Competition Rules.

[Curtis Kitteringham]

Very good input on this subject , I need to follow the above advice myself.  I get to tried up looking for that perfect picture of the full size that I what to model. At this time I have two models a P-47 and a B-17 both giant scale and I have been digging for that full size picture for both for some time now. I will find what I think would make a good model and then I will find a different full size picture to pick from. Depending on what you are doing a model of, you can get lost in research, I am guilty of it.
Curtis K.     

[crashwrench]

Hi to all ,
Here are a Couple of websites , That I have Found  while Doing my search ;; 
http://xp-82twinmustangproject.blogspot.com/p/home_17.html  ,,, This is the gentleman and his Crew That is Restoring the " XP-82 Pototype Twin Mustang .......
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/ ,,, The Air Force Museum in Dayton , OHIO, USA  ( A Must Seee ! ) There two (2) Examples/ Verions Of this Aircraft On Display .....
http://www.airliners.net/ ,,, For some Color  Photo's ....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page ,,, The Internet encyclopedia  ,, ( Just about Anything ) ...
http://aerofiles.com/ ,,, Aircraft Photo's ...
http://www.aircraft-manuals.com/ ,,, Varies Combined Information ...
http://www.specialtypress.com/  For// At Your Local Bookstore Or Order Online sales ...
http://www.specialtypress.com/vstore/showdetl.cfm?User_ID=6827163&DS_ID=4&St=106&St2=-82014&St3=-73087&Product_ID=2601&DID=8 ,,, Books ,
( USAF INTERCEPTORS: A Military Photo Logbook (1946-1979)

These next two websites is all got started ,,
http://www.rcscalebuilder.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17708&KW=Mustang+History ,,,    My  searching out info For my P-51D Mustang
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/index.page ,, Where It all began ..........

[crashwrench]

Hi to all ,
One Other Question  Or A Bunch More ,,,,,
Do you/ Or Can you Compete With the "" same Model Aircraft "" At Each Contest ,, For the year .
Or Do you have to pick A differant Subject / Model For the next Year.
Like If I were to say ;; The Mustang 's History starting with NA-73 /XP-51 to A-36 "Apache " , F-A- 6 /P-51 ,, P-51A ,, Mutang " X " , XP-51B/XP-78 ,  P-51B/C (F-6BC )
 XP-51D, P-51D, P-51K, XP-51F, XP-51G, XP-51J, P-51H,  P-51M  ...... Each Is A bit Differant , Still A Mustang ......
Just Saying ??
Thanks ,
Mark K. 

[Flite-Metal]

Mark,

Between your 6th and 7th post there is an answer to your core question... Step back, way back
and take this to heart. You are replicating whatever photographic (minimum three (3) view of a SINGLE
aircraft BuNo. from roughly 50 feet away. It is impossible to take photos any closer and keep headon,
side, rear, and top view in a single image frame. There is nothing more to this.

Yes, that is a period after the sentence "There is nothing more to this."

The greatest problem you encounter is finding supporting photo documentation to fulfill the above minimum
documentation. Beyond this, if the documentation available is to your benefit score wise, and your skill
set will support it being included on your model, then include the additional photo documentation...otherwise
only show additional photos if the multiple view line drawing you provide judges does not show the feature
you do an excellent job of replicating.

Why? You want to guide the judge around your model, not let the judge take their habit developed pathway
around a model. What is gained in you controlling the pathway. Number one is you take them "away" from
your model's weak points. All models have weak points Do not fall into the trap of thinking because John
or Joe built something its going to be wonderful. Wonderful is rare or everyone would be God's gift to scale
competition.

Guiding the judge will manage his allocated time for static judging. They would like to think they are in control
of that time. Its true unless you manage your documentation presentation and lead the judge on your chosen
bread crumb path. I illustrated that with the ScaleAero.com how to assemble a documenetation binder. Weigh
this way of leading to letting the judge wander aimlessly "looking for something to down grade"... Well, which
would you rather have happen during your static point awarding session?

As for having to take the same airframe to the Final you qualified with... You obviously see there are two
schools of thought. It all gets down to whether the model qualified or the builder/pilot qualified. If the model
qualified then it should progress to the Championship. If the builder/pilot qualified on their witnessed skill set
in these two areas the feeling is they should be permitted to compete with whatever it is in their opinion is their
best...this year.

We all got into modeling because we envisioned building and flying a replica of a full size something. Some of
us are more skilled, some are more patient and attenative to replicating details. Details make the difference
between 1st place and all the rest when compared to the same set of questions the judges are supposed to use
as their guideline...the same one you have an opportunity to help them adhere to... ;^)

[Flyfast1]

Unless I am missing something, the 2014 USSMA Competition Guide does not require supporting photographic documentation for the three view drawings.
-Ed B.

[crashwrench]

Hi ,
Some more pictures ,
Thanks,
Mark K.

[crashwrench]

Hi to All ,
Hi Flite Metal , Question ? ,,,, Are you still Looking for Pictures, Info For the " Boeing B-47 Stratojet  "
Maybe This can Help ;
http://www.aerofiles.com/ ,
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/ ,,
http://www.airliners.net/  ,
Hope this helps ,
Later ,
Mark k.

[Flite-Metal]

"That'll do pig...."

Your second and third drawings are close, don't use NAA general layout. Now, go back to the well and find
a better four view with less marginal text. No judge will ever read the marginal text, its often considered excess
clutter and you don't want conflict with the judge.You want surface details; easily identified outline of wing, fuse,
and headon...if rear is not available. I sent a set with less congestion.

Be spot on with outline. It is always good to carry multiple sets of transparencies if judges don't like your outline.
You should provide that as a decision tool for the judge(s).

[Flite-Metal]

Mark,

No but if you would like to buy some I have 14 gig of B-47 documentation. This includes hand measurement/validation of
four B-47E of the eight we visited in four states. There are three people who shared data back and forth after two of us
had two years ahead of the third.

80% of our documentation is validated with photographic and line drawings. This is pretty good considering all of it was to
have been destroyed upon B-52 roll-out.

The majority of what we acquired in Boeing documentation came from service men who took technical orders (TO) home
with them when one of the four manufacturers of the B-47 shut down. I have a set of Russian drawings for the YB-47D with
turboprop. They are more detailed than anything found in US during the Cold War.

Another Russian line art drawing set documents the YDB-47B. A pair of these accompanied each attack flight of SAC B-47.
One left and one right of the attack wing to sense early warning and AA radar emissions. Four drones were carried under
wings with their flight control in semi-autonomous mode after being guided to relative close proximity of the radar emission.
This to maintain the stealth value for the attacking SAC Wing.

The other configuration of my B-47 is the 1000th B-47 manufactured and rolled out with grand fan fair to threaten Russia
by sheer numbers of B-47's in the air on duty around the world. This config performs the famous LABS maneuver with the
atomic bomb released "vertically" during an Immelmann Turn.

[rcphotog]

Unless I am missing something, the 2014 USSMA Competition Guide does not require supporting photographic documentation for the three view drawings.
-Ed B.

[Flite-Metal]

Tried to put this image file with the one above. This is the second of my two configurations in one airframe. The
other config is the 1000th Boeing B-47 to be produced.

[Flite-Metal]

Unless I am missing something, the 2014 USSMA Competition Guide does not require supporting photographic documentation for the three view drawings. -Ed B.

Yes Ken, I read your and Ed B's minimal documentation posts. Not to sound curt or short...when was the
last time anyone won a scale contest incorporating the least amount of documentation required?

It is possible...once in Dallas a very famous designer and competitor qualified and went on to wing at the
Final with I believe was his own design of the Hawker Sea Fury. His drawings and a plastic box top for
a color match is all it took to win. Yes, it is possible.

However, to consider entering the USSMA Championship with minimal documentation is not advised if
one were to seriously consider winning.

In this hobby you typically achieve a level of award equal to your investment in a project.

[rcphotog]

Ed C & Ed B,
I'm sorry for the confusion in my post above. I had tried to reply to Ed Becker's comment with not only repeating his words but also adding a few words on the subject of my own.
When I hit the post button, all of my words dissapeared and all that's left is Ed's quote. Something wrong with the editor box or with my browser.
I had included about four paragraphs of helpful info,tips and recommendations for the benefit of everyone. But....it all just went poof.
Ken.
ps; lets see if this post will take.

[Flite-Metal]

Similar happened when I was posting images...apparently the server this is on is woefully shy in bandwidth.
You are either being drug around out of your control unless you prepare your doc binder as a tour around
the airframe following your preferred route...not the judges. Its that simple...nothing complicated about it.

[rcphotog]

Now that I see my coments show up I'll try to answer the original question.
Re: "how accurate do I need to be?"
To receive maximum points - your model must match the documentation that you provide.
To document the outline:
You may use photos, published line drawing (3-5 views), plastic model boxtop artwork, a fully assembled plastic model can also be used, (1:48 to 1:32 scale preferable) or any other "published" drawings, sketches,paintings,renderings from notable aviation artists.
You do NOT have to provide line drawings (3views).
If you do, then you are responsible for verifying the accuracy of all the details on those drawings with any other approved resources such as photos of the full size plane you are modeling. You may take your own photos of your exact prototype aircraft or any simular plane. If you have access to the full size plane, then you can get great "proof" of details.
Since the OP is building a P-82....access to the real thing is very limited to just a few examples. This is where you need to get creative about your documentation. Eg; plastic models, paintings,wartime photos of generic P-82s etc.
You may use any wartime photo you find to prove outline and surface details. The photo doesn't need to be of the exact same aircraft that you are replicating. Even the standard USSAF markings can be documented from a photo of a generic P-82. You may even find (on the net) a photo taken inflight of the top or bottom to show/prove outline of the plan-form and various surface details.
Another way to document the top side and botton side is to build that plastic model then stick a coat hangar wire into the nose and mount the model into a block of wood or foam. Then place it on a table and take a photo of that model using any camera that can zoom-in a little to remove distortion of the wide angle. Use a 100mm lens for best results. On a pocket camera that would be about a 16mm lens setting. Point-n-shoot cameras use about a 6x factor. You need to eliminate as much distortion as possible from standard & wide angle lenses. An 85mm -115mm would be idea for this.
After you take these photos of top & bottoms, then print them on standard 8.5x11 paper and now you have your own very accurate plan-form-views.You can even run the photos through a filter such as "photocopy" and convert to B&W and you'll end up with essentially a line drawing.
Don't laugh. It works!
It's best to have a clean backround like blue sky or a simple bed sheet or cardboard. Just make the backround as clean as possible.
Ken
ps; remember too that Photos always take priority over line drawings in a contest.

[Mitchell Baker]

Simlar happened when I was posting images...apparently the server this is on is woefully shy in bandwidth.  

I'll check the logs but bandwidth is not normally an issue. Most of the time those issues are caused by a timeout or router outside the datacenter between your ISP and the datacenter.  Other cause can be trying to attach to large of attachments but normally an error message is given.  Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.  --Mitch 

[Flite-Metal]

Ken and others:

I do not want to appear in conflict with someone's assumptions about the Competition Guide nor its baseline AMA
Sportsman Sport Scale Guideline...but

Relative to Expert and Team Scale Classes:

If there is a photo of any other aircraft with a different BuNo than that of the aircraft you declare replicated, that
photo should not be in documentation presented to judges as proof of scale. The color and markings can be of a
different aircraft if one is not available for your BuNo. because prescribed color and markings standards change
with chronology of war, not individual aircraft. 

Only one BuNo can be photographically documented and in support of your qualifier or Final aka Championship
entry. Reading the original to current Comp Guide, you will repeatedly read extended paragraphs stating all photo
documentation has to be photos taken of the aircraft presented for competition.


There have been multiple compensating allowances over the years in all other classes, but not in Expert nor Team.

[Roly]

Hello Mark,

Your quote; "I want to build a ''' Look_ like a Restored Mustang" it seems to me you want to create a very good illusion and if you are going to be judged you want to know how you did?

To do well you need documentation per Scale Masters guidelines;

• the aircraft is judged from the documentation you have and your model must show what's on the documentation.
• don't provide any photos that show items you do not have on your plane.
• "Prove it or lose it" - don't show any items on your plane that arn't in your photos or you will "lose points".
• Outline photos over rule your 3 views so show any differences with sticky notes on your documents.

That's about as simple as I can say it and you will do well.

Hope this helps,

                                    Roly Worsfold - Certified S.M. Static & Flight Judge

[Flite-Metal]

Mark,

I have assumed you reviewed the documentation example on ScaleAero.com after I referenced it. I show
how to use adhesive backed paper labels to provide a visual link between your multiple view drawing and
the photo documentation accompanying your drawings.
Drawing Wth Numbered Dots
Using a paper punch to create adhesive "dots" which are numbered sequencily in "PAIRS" will permit you
placing your photos and line art drawings within clear page protectors to protect your documentation while
permitting you to tie an explicit detail within a given photo with an area on the multiple view drawings.
Correspondding Dots On Photo Documentation
This will direct the static judge and craftsmanship judge to follow your "bread crumbs" on the pathway you
have defined instead of their wandering aimlessly looking for downgrades...which in all cases, you will always
be the recepiant of fewer points.

Start at the front center prop hub and work either left or right tieing together your photo to drawings. The
photo documentation is on the back of the next corresponding page in your documentation binder.

[crashwrench]

Hi to All ,
Wow, a lot to think about , Great info Everyone !!!!
Hi Ed , Thanks , I got the d.load from your " ScaleAero site , the AMA Rule Book(s) , Ussma's Book(s)  Last night .
I see What needs to be done . ( I mean What is Needed ) . Great Tips , I like the  " Guided Tour " Idea ,, Like walking  Around A real Aircraft , Yeah , I think I
got it .    
Hi Roly, Thanks for Joining us here . I understand about the ""  Prove It Or Lose It "" .
my Quote About Building a " Look Like A Restored Mustang " ( Referring to my Top Flite 1/5th P-51D Model  only ) .
 Was A Comment About Several Contests, An R/C Fly-in , Down inTexas , To the local Warbird Event(s) That I Have Attended ( I Did not Fly , Spectator Only )
To see ,Two or four , or up to 22 Mustang's ( The Meet In Texas ) .
All First Class Work, Different Scale Sizes,  But , All And Mean All , Had One Theme , Everyone Had A  '" Weathered Look ""  To all ....
I'm Not saying  " just exhaust / Oil Stains " , But Having the Faded Paint  To Bullet Holes ( Yes I said - Real- Bullet- Holes , Very Nicely Done with ( Real , I asked ) 
 thin Aluminum On the Wing and Vertical tail  , Varying degrees Of " weathering "  .. [[ First, Great showing their talents/ Craftsmanship  ( and CraftsWomen ) , 
""" My Ball Cap  Off To Them ! +1  """ ]] !!!!
So, Back , I was Thinking " Outside The BOX "  ,,, To build a " Restored Mustang " All Shiney , Shiney Or A Factory Fresh One just Of the Line ..  
( Not Talking About a Fresh Out Of The Box ARF plane )
I have Not seen or Heard anyone Trying this build Style .
Sorry , Here I Go Again , Off Course Again ,
Lets take a step back ,