This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here:

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      Ongoing DDoS Attack causing Forum Slowness   26/04/17

      In case you have missed the announcement, the reason that the forum has been slow at times since the minor version update the other day is due to a Denial of Service attack, brute force attack on our email, and judging by the lag with our FTP response, that too.  If you're feeling like you're experiencing a glitch in the Matrix, you're not wrong.  This is the same MO as the attack in September 2016 that occurred when we transitioned to the new version 4 of the software.  We're currently working with US and UK cyber-crime departments, who specialise in this sort of thing, and we're hopeful that we'll be able to track them down this time by using the accumulated evidence already held.    We are pretty certain that it's a continuation of the same attack last year, only at a reduced intensity to deter people from using the site "because it's terribly slow", rather than taking it down completely, and we're also sure of the motivations of those responsible.  Spite.   Please bear with us in the interim, and wish us luck in dealing with these.... "people".


Gold Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

639 Excellent

About JasonC

  • Rank
    Obsessed Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Bath, UK
  • Interests
    1/48 props, WW2 & onwards.
    Occasionally armour.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,725 profile views
  1. Type 69 I believe, which in turn is very similar to the 59 but has a different headlight arrangement amongst other things. J.
  2. Going by the roadwheel spacing and headlight position, the latter looks like a Type 69: Chinese T-54/55 variant. J.
  3. Hi Guy, Thanks for your post. I've sent you a PM. regards, Jason
  4. Creating fuselage stations. Some were based on the available sections from plans, and I've had to eyeball some intermediate ones. And the result after lofting through the stations. Obviously a lot left to do, but it's feeling like progress! You can see in the above pic the makings of the prominent slot at the rear of the Centaurus cowl - a feature of both the Sea Fury and Firebrand installations of the engine. cheers, J.
  5. You just need to take the link itself, in this case http://s17.....etc and put {img} before it, and {/img} at the end. Note that the brackets should be square brackets (i.e. [ & ]), but I can't use them otherwise the software tries to parse it. cheers, Jason
  6. Played around a bit with the 'chin'. J.
  7. As you say, primer. Preferably something solvent based, like a spray primer (Halfords, Tamiya, Gunze, etc). Water based acrylics don't have the best adhesion to bare plastic. regards, Jason
  8. Hi Christer, There is a small cross section (at the correct fuselage station) in one set of plans, but how good is anyone's guess. FWIW, I've been looking at the 'keel' as well and wondering about the width of it. To a large extent its size would depend on its function, but sadly the cutaways I've seen are at the wrong angle to show this area. I think I'll have a bit of a play and see how it looks with this area made a little broader. cheers, Jason
  9. Thanks Clive. If you see any major howlers feel free to shout; I'd welcome any thoughts.
  10. Cheer for the pointers. In the end, I found a way to create a full 360-degree sweep, while maintaining a port/starboard mirrored relationship between the two sides. So that should hopefully avoid the issue you've described. Anyway, I've created the deeper cowl by tweaking the edges and vertices. Going from this: To this: and from the front: J.
  11. That's a great model in its own right, and the effort you've made to re-create your WoT ride add something extra on top. Love it! J.
  12. Cowling Sat within the cowling is Bristol’s doughty Centaurus. On first inspection the aspiring scratchbuilder (i.e. muggins) might entertain notions of using the cowling from, say, a Sea Fury kit for this project. Sadly there are some differences vis a vis the Firebrand that make this problematic. Firstly, the Sea Fury cowl is cylindrical and axi-symmetric; i.e. as near as dammit parallel top and bottom (obligatory red lines for emphasis): The Firebrand cowl is not: As far as I can tell the difference is principally around the lower section, which features a deeper ‘chin’, thereby throwing the cross section out of round. What this extra depth accommodates I’m not sure, but I suspect it has something to do with the inlet scoop visible in the photo above. It’s as well to note at this point that I don’t fully trust any of the commonly available Firebrand plans. One area that urges caution is the profile of the cowl. Some drawings show a very pronounced and deep chin, which I don’t believe is borne out by photographs. Since this area is rather important to the overall look of the Firebrand, I’m keen to make a good a job of it as possible. In no particular order: Of these, I’m more inclined to trust the last* (hereafter AoFP), although I have reservations in other areas. [*And no, not just because it has more lines] It’s always tricky comparing against photographs, but the fact that said plans don’t even agree with each other suggests that something is amiss somewhere. Given evidence like the photographs below, I think the Firebrand cowl is somewhat leaner than the first two drawings suggest. Other differences (to the Sea Fury) include the shape of the area behind the exhaust stubs*, and the point at which the nose profile begins to incline towards the windscreen. [*Also note that the Sea Fury features nine stubs per bank in this area, versus the Firebrand’s eight. The two remaining stubs on the Firebrand exhaust on the underside] So how to model it in 3D? Another nifty feature of 123D and Fusion 360 is the ability to ‘sweep’ a cross section around a central axis to generate a solid. A process demonstrated here. The astute amongst you will have already noted that this method will give an axi-symmetric cowl around the central axis; correct for the Sea Fury style, but not the Firebrand. All is not lost however; Fusion 360 allows basic shapes to be tweaked after creation– hopefully into something resembling a Firebrand. The cross section has been created based on a Bristol Centaurus installation drawing (below). This is a generic installation drawing from Bristol and not (I believe) specifically for the Firebrand. However the principle is fairly standard between installations, and the unit is so closely cowled that it should be representative enough. Another detail that gives some confidence is the presence of the cooling fan (Item 1, green), which is a feature of the Firebrand Centaurus installation. The relevant cross section is shown in red (for a change). I’ve thickened the rear section in order to give enough thickness for 3D printing when reduced to scale size. I’ve done a 180 degree section rather than the full 360. I think it might be easier to work on a half section and mirror it, rather than try and keep everything symmetrical as I tinker with the shape. J.
  13. Thanks for the pointers. I've not yet had a look at the free model sites, but no doubt will at some point. I'm also fully expecting to have to clean up and detail most of the 3D parts; you're right to say that it's the shape that's the important thing. Good to have you along and thanks! J.
  14. Hi Tony, I knew as soon as I posted the comment about the Magna kit that someone would produce an example of an excellent build! I must confess that part of my reason going down this route is out of desire to do some experimentation with various techniques like 3D design, and to expand my scratchbuilding repertoire. It also lets me focus on areas which I know might bug me about a kit offering, rather than accepting what's in the box. Thanks as well for the link; I'd seen it during my various searches for information. cheers, Jason
  15. Propeller Starting, for lack of a better idea, at the front of the aircraft, the propeller blades were the first parts that I modelled. There is a ‘loft’ function in the software that will create a solid shape from a series of cross sections, much in the same way that lofts are used in traditional shipbuilding. Lacking better information I assumed the propeller cross section to be a Clark Y aerofoil, which was not uncommon for period propellers. Of course, the cross section won’t be terribly obvious in the final article, but it should at least give a convincing look to the prop. Having drawn out the aerofoil in 2D within the software, it was then duplicated and scaled to give the tapering sectional shapes as one progresses along the blade. The root sections were thickened up in order to accommodate the shaft leading into the spinner and hub. The sections were then rotated to give the twist down the length of the blade. The final arrangement of sections is shown below. One then presses the ‘loft’ button and presto, a solid propeller blade appears. I’m aware that the tip shape is not right; due to vagaries of the loft feature I think it’ll be easier to manually trim the tip into the correct ‘steak knife’ profile. Mildly interesting is the fact that the LE and TE of the blades are more or less parallel from root to about two-thirds length. In some photos this is obvious, in others the twist obfuscates matters slightly. [After doing the prop I mostly transitioned to Fusion 360 for modelling. This offers much more functionality than 123D, at the cost of greater complexity and a longer learning curve. In the end I didn’t think I could do some of the more complex shapes in 123D.]