I'll oragise that shortly. I'll have to alter the camouflage scheme of course to represent Middle East Theatre! Of course, scaling it up a bit would help as I feel 5/8 scale is a little cramped. 75% scale would work for a Hurricane
Why is it that the bigger the scale, the smaller the bulge in the man's crotch, but no change to the woman's bust line?I knocked these visualisations up quickly yesterday so I could get some idea of how each modeling scale looks. Posting here in case these are useful for anyone.
I find being able to picture the sizes helps to know what the end result will look like.
In short there was at one time everything but a fuselage either present or located and available to restore a Mk.XII. The main driver behind it all passed a year and a half ago but the rumour is there’s an engineered set of drawings somewhere in the hangar for a welded tube fuselage that’s a direct replacement for the hollow-riveted nightmare that Hawker designed.WHAT? Now you have to tell us about the full scale Hurricane........!
I looked at building a scaled down Me-109 many years ago. After running a bunch of numbers I concluded the 80% scale was the minimum. It is possible to build a 80% model without distorting the shape. For example, I was able to lay a tape measure on the Me-109G-10 that Planes of Fame has at Valle, AZ. The cockpit rails measure 30" wide to the outside edge. 80% would be 24" which is as wide as my Thatcher CX4. I don't remember the fuselage depth at that point but it is deep enough to work. 80% gives a large enough wing to make stall manageable. The canopy might be the biggest problem since it isn't very tall. The best option for the canopy might be the Galland hood. The other problem might be the tall narrow landing gear. The landing gear was splayed out further on the late models so that would help.
W.A.R. replicas did tend to deal with the larger fighters out there, Mustang, Corsair, Thunderbolt, Seafury, in fact the original W.A.R. plane, the FW190 is about the smallest of the lot, and you wear it more than sit in it.
Reminds me of some of the early scale plastic models. While today we have popular scales for model building, at one time they did what’s now referred to as ‘box scale.’. Just like it sounds, they made the kit however big would fill the box it was to be sold in.What we did with the ScaleBirds concept and what I tend to think makes the most sense for any replica project that isn't being done by scaling original drawings via slide rule, is just find the size of airplane you want first. Then just adjust the scale of the original arbitrarily over top of the idealized template until it overlaps as close as possible.
What we did with the ScaleBirds concept and what I tend to think makes the most sense for any replica project that isn't being done by scaling original drawings via slide rule, is just find the size of airplane you want first. Then just adjust the scale of the original arbitrarily over top of the idealized template until it overlaps as close as possible. Then tweak from there either up or down to something that's vaguely round or nominal or fractional, or accept that the ideal final resulting machine will have so many subtle deviations from the original that you can call it an 80% when really it's the 81.42% fuse and a 82.14% wing with a 76.4% landing gear and a cowling that's stretched 106% athwartships and 98% longitudinally from exact proportion at 81.42% and the cockpit is at 93% scale with some canopy elements pretty-much unchanged from original and yet the whole thing is forward about 20% from where it should be. Ultimately if you're within 5% of a notional scale factor on 90% of the shapes, and stick the details in the relationally correct spots, no-one is going to be able to really say you're wrong.
I can't find any good data on one at this point, but would HIGHLY doubt a WAR 109 was truly 50%. Must be closer to 65-70% but everyone just knows that the WAR were 'generally' 1/2 scale with a very broad brush of what 1/2 means.
Peanut and Pistachio rubber-powered flying scale models are like that—maximum dimensions rather than a specific scale. It means planes with relatively low AR (Fike E, for example) can be quite competitive because they can fit so much wing area in.Reminds me of some of the early scale plastic models. While today we have popular scales for model building, at one time they did what’s now referred to as ‘box scale.’. Just like it sounds, they made the kit however big would fill the box it was to be sold in.
I guess the smallest successful scale warbirds could be called ‘pilot scale.’
Enter your email address to join:
Register today and take advantage of membership benefits.
Enter your email address to join: