Sea Vixen FAW.1x2

[Pete in Lincs]

2 hours ago, TheBaron said:

Permission to make whooshing sound?

Yes please. Volume at 11.

[perdu]

Will you be making those little wibblle-ey intakes below the fuselage/wing junction as separate items Tony?

 

As to the rest

 

Mmm yummy

[Space Ranger]

1 hour ago, Pete in Lincs said:

Yes please. Volume at 11.

There are reports of localized whooshing in this area.

[Brandy]

Funny, I had the same notification re the time zones, so it's obviously not just your carrier!

Those renders though, I can almost hear them (you?) whooshing from here! Very impressive!
 

Ian

[giemme]

Same here, I can hear the renders wooshing - all looking grand, Tony

 

Ciao

[CedB]

That’s one big step for a modeller, one small... oh, that’s not working is it?  

 

More great stuff oh Baronial one!

[TheBaron]

2 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

🤫 Shhhhhhhhh ... Skynet might hear you 

I see you made it back to our time John Connor...

2 hours ago, Pete in Lincs said:

Yes please. Volume at 11.

If you hold a 3d print of it up to your ear you can hear the resin sea....

1 hour ago, perdu said:

Will you be making those little wibblle-ey intakes below the fuselage/wing junction as separate items Tony?

You're exactly right Bill.

They've been left as just a blanking plate at present as I'm currently only blocking out the gross profile of the overall airframe in space. The flared profile of that intake (that narrows to the bifurcated opening) will get done in a secondary pass later on, alongside other missing shapes like the airbrake, canopy, creating the ailerons and wheel bays &etc., followed by a third pass doing all the detailing in places like wheel wells and engine bays. Then of course there's the cockpit and radar array. I must actually break all that down into a coherent list to avoid forgetting stuff..

1 hour ago, Space Ranger said:

There are reports of localized whooshing in this area.

I can can confirm that no animals were harmed during the whoosh.

1 hour ago, limeypilot said:

Funny, I had the same notification re the time zones, so it's obviously not just your carrier!

So it's just the two of us then Ian? Like Sapphire & Steel?

1 hour ago, giemme said:

Same here, I can hear the renders wooshing - all looking grand, Tony

Cheers G. I was beginning to think I'd never get those intakes sorted so the whooshing may also have concealed a deep sigh of relief in its midst!

55 minutes ago, CedB said:

That’s one big step for a modeller, one small... oh, that’s not working is it?

We came in pieces for all mankind (to assemble)... 😁

 

Saw this on Trev Clark's Twitter feed earlier - madasfeck but look at all that tubing!

 

 

 

[perdu]

No

I will not be using up unwanted Italeri H-34s on that thing

 

Really

[Space Ranger]

9 hours ago, limeypilot said:

Funny, I had the same notification re the time zones, so it's obviously not just your carrier!

Damn! The Tardis malfunctioning again!

[bigbadbadge]

The test renders look lovely Tony, great work fella.

Carry on

All the best

Chris

[The Spadgent]

On 5/11/2020 at 3:49 PM, hendie said:

Ah, 3DS Max. A fine piece of software (from way back in my career).

 

On 5/16/2020 at 3:38 PM, TheBaron said:

Been yonks since I used 3DSMax

Blimey Sounds like I’m working with an abacus. 🤣 our studio / most studios For that matter either use max or maya for raw 3D polygon work. No need for rendering really. Funnily enough when D-paint moved out of the way for 3D back in 94 / 95 I think it was my first 3D package was 3D Studio. (Just wire frame) oh man thems was crazy days. 🤪🤓

 

Great looking shapes there Tony, I had to zoom back to page one to see if there was a kit originally. (I’d forgotten) 🥳 

 

keep up the good work.

 

Johnny

[TheBaron]

Monthurdnedsday the twerty-fiveth of Mapriltember.

Or something.

Systems check: 2+2 still equals 4?

Good, we're ready to go.

 

 

Some virtual smithying first, in order to finesse the inner curves of the intake to ensure that it will mate with the inner tunnel:

How much inside there will be actually visible at the end inside the 1/72 shadows is debatable of course, but with such a quality audience as this there's no question of half-measures being countenanced.

On top of this curve I then built on the narrow vertical intake up againts the fuselage side:

I don't know the purpose of this slit ( @71chally?), and although at this scale it's impractical to hollow such a feature out to match the actuality (the width of that vertical opening would be about 0.1mm or less and impossible to resolve with the printer), it is visible enough peeking out of the intake to need representing.

 

Also added at this point were those fluted exhaust channels that flare out from the rear of the exhaust fairing:

You can also see up at the front in the image above that I finally got round to hollowing out those intake ducts leading inside as far as the front spar:

The terminal disk currently blanking-off the end of the tunnelis where the front of the Avons will eventually be visible of course.

Visual check with all the fairing and leading-edge gubbins reinstated:

A final render to look for blemishes:

aaand that's you up-to-date.

 

Quite a few problems converting many of those fairing/leading-edge profiles into solid (as opposed to just surface) units. Won't bore you with the minutiae but one discovery I made that will be of use to anyone using Fusion for 3d printing is this:

 

The simplest way to 3d print is to go directly from Fusion rather than save your design out in a common format. Saves a lot of time but the problem is that the software only lets you print an individual component at a time when you run this from the file menu (which is frustrating if you've got a whole bunch of bits you want to print together but don't want to prematurely group them into a component, for a variety of reasons).

 

Here's a workaround that avoids this limitation:

Self-explanatory but right-click on name of design at top of the tree on the left yields a 'save as .stl' option, one that is significantly different from the 'file' menu method however, as this one lets you send everything visible on the screen directly to your 3d printing software as a single combined design (just remember to have the 'refinement' option set to high to give the most detail for output). A damn sight easier for prototyping/testing batches of shapes like this:

This screenshot gives an idea of just how big the current design has gotten compared to the available printing area of the Elegoo - anything seen in magenta won't fit. Critically important information necessary to help you decide how to break down the overall aircraft into a series of components for printing later-on.

 

Like many people at present, serious-serious reading has fallen into abeyance and have been following whimsy to help keep independent booksellers going during the lockdown as much as possible instead.  Been buying from a splendid chap over in York with some absolutely corking titles:

The Martlesham Heath one I was aware of from someone recommending it here on the forum recently (I hate forgetting to credit someone for such valuable intel so thanks whoever you were!) but the others were all new discoveries to me. I have a (vaguely aviation-orientated) story to tell one day about working in a warehouse on the Brooklands site in the early 80s.

Take care m'dears and more anon!

Tony

Poor chaps - must have been bad light....

 

 

[71chally]

It takes in the boundary layer airflow, this spills out through the little vents above and inboard of the intakes.

Airfix Sea Vixen inlet by James Thomas, on Flickr

[TheBaron]

2 hours ago, 71chally said:

It takes in the boundary layer airflow, this spills out through the little vents above and inboard of the intakes.

Clear as a  bell James - I knew this area of the airframe was something boundary-layer related but didn't appreciate until your explanation the functional relationship of these in- and outtakes. Thanks as always.

[CedB]

3 hours ago, TheBaron said:

Monthurdnedsday the twerty-fiveth of Mapriltember.

Or something.

 

More great designing Tony. Close to more printing are we yet? Are we yet?  

[Brandy]

Not only do we get CAD design and 3d printing lessons, but aerodynamics is thrown in too! Great stuff!

 

Ian

[Space Ranger]

3 hours ago, limeypilot said:

Not only do we get CAD design and 3d printing lessons, but aerodynamics is thrown in too! Great stuff!

 

Ian

Britmodeller makes learning fun!

[71chally]

Apologies Tony, didn't have enough time to comment about your work earlier, and I'm not sure that any comment now is going to do it justice!

Incredible work, and you seem to capturing every nuance of the design beautifully.  The intake work is superb.

It is incredible to see this work from CAD to printer render.

 

It's funny, the other day I bought an old Technics record player and played my favourite LP (801 Live) for the first time in 30 years probably. I stared at the stylus undulating up and down with the record and thought, how the bleedin hell did someone ever sit down and work out that it could produce sound and music this way.  It was kind of how great and clever is analogue now that we are in a digital age.

Anyhow, the upshot of this meaningless piffle is, how the bleeding hell did people manage to draw on paper, interpret and then fashion chunks of metal to make things like the DH110?  In black it looked like it was milled from a solid chunk of something.

What I'm trying to say, is that your great work here is giving me an insight to the complexity of designing the real thing.

Edited May 19, 2020 by 71chally

[Pete in Lincs]

Ah, the old 'save as stl' trick. Or was it ftl? I'd better go back and have a quick look. Ahem

Not now, Kato! you fool!

 

It's slowly sinking in. Earlier today I found out that you can print copper! Where will it all end?

[Terry1954]

I've commented very little on this thread of late, but I've followed it all. It's as if we are watching our hobby evolve into a new dimension. We all know this stuff is out there now, but you are taking us on a journey into an area that can further and indeed definitely benefit the hobby immensely. Some of us will never go down this path, some of us might and I am sure a small number actually will. You are showing it can be done Tony.

 

One thing seems very certain to me. You are crafting what looks to be the closest thing we have yet got to a rather splendid and accurate Sea Vixen in "The One True Scale". 

 

This hobby never ceases to amaze me!

 

Terry

 

 

[hendie]

another wonderful update Tony.  I, like many others I'm sure, cannot wait to see this move from a bunch of binary bits to actual plastic/resin.  (I've been giving my printer another thrashing this week - I have to say that has been one of my best modeling investments.  Its paid for itself and then some.)

 

After all this effort you've put in to get this far and the knowledge you've gained over the course of the journey, creating the tail structure should be a walk in the park,  - a couple of rods and a plank and you're done!

 

 

 

 

[TheBaron]

18 hours ago, CedB said:

More great designing Tony. Close to more printing are we yet? Are we yet?

You kids - what are you like?

 

I do hope to be running off another test in the near future Ced but want to get the booms and elevator done first. This is so that it will be a proper test of the overall outline of the aircraft seen as a physical print for the first time. Only once I/we're convinced of its relative accuracy will I then move on to the detailing stage.

 

18 hours ago, limeypilot said:

Not only do we get CAD design and 3d printing lessons, but aerodynamics is thrown in too! Great stuff!

 

14 hours ago, Space Ranger said:

Britmodeller makes learning fun!

I like to think of it as The Winchester Club myself....

13 hours ago, 71chally said:

It is incredible to see this work from CAD to printer render.

It never gets old James.

 

13 hours ago, 71chally said:

It's funny, the other day I bought an old Technics record player and played my favourite LP (801 Live) for the first time in 30 years probably. I stared at the stylus undulating up and down with the record and thought, how the bleedin hell did someone ever sit down and work out that it could produce sound and music this way.  It was kind of how great and clever is analogue now that we are in a digital age.

Anyhow, the upshot of this meaningless piffle is, how the bleeding hell did people manage to draw on paper, interpret and then fashion chunks of metal to make things like the DH110?  In black it looked like it was milled from a solid chunk of something.

I agree completely re: analog ingenuities and the turning of paper plans into physical realities. If anything, working digitally gives me a profound respect for pre-digital processes of such complexity, made up of wires and switches and hydraulics. I've a friend who's wife is a sound artist and although the pair of them are solidly in the digital age, much of what she makes revolves around analog physicality in a most satisfying way.

13 hours ago, 71chally said:

What I'm trying to say, is that your great work here is giving me an insight to the complexity of designing the real thing.

At heart it's two very old and fundamental human skills James - looking and drawing. Even in our digitalized age those are the two core pillars in understanding the physical world and making things appear within it.

Eye+hand=understanding.

Just as those guys in the de Havilland office were poised over their drawing tables bitd with a French curve in one hand and a Senior Service in the other, I'm still only following that essential craft of drawing, conscious in being far luckier and more pampered though in that I can draw interactively in three-dimensions in ways that they could only fantasize about.

13 hours ago, Pete in Lincs said:

Earlier today I found out that you can print copper! Where will it all end?

On a ten-stretch in the Scrubs for counterfeiting 2p coins I'll wager. 👮‍♂️👮‍♂️👮‍♂️ 🏛️

12 hours ago, Terry1954 said:

We all know this stuff is out there now, but you are taking us on a journey into an area that can further and indeed definitely benefit the hobby immensely. Some of us will never go down this path, some of us might and I am sure a small number actually will. You are showing it can be done Tony.

Gracious of you Terry. Thak-you

I know I probably go on at greater length about the design process sometimes than makes for easy reading but one a motivating factor in posting such information is to make it visible for others to assess to what extent they may wish to try printing their own projects. I love the diversity of this forum and this is, as you say, just another development in the range of options available that make this community so rewarding to be a part of.

10 hours ago, hendie said:

I, like many others I'm sure, cannot wait to see this move from a bunch of binary bits to actual plastic/resin.  (I've been giving my printer another thrashing this week - I have to say that has been one of my best modeling investments.  Its paid for itself and then some.)

Ditto on both counts Alan!

Once the

10 hours ago, hendie said:

rods and a plank

are in place we'll go for a full Thunderbirds are Go test print of everything to see what the verdict is on shape and proportion.

 

Threatening to be sunny today so no modelling as off work and down to the bog to foot turf for the stove.* Should be home by evening with sunstroke, the back gone and covered with midgey bites if I'm lucky. 🙄

 

More as it develops.

T.

 

*Yes, despite being a tradition in these parts (for a variety of understandable economic and historical reasons) it's a horrible ecological pillaging that we're trying to move away from. About 50% of the fuel we burn in the stove (which heats the house and provides hot water) is wood from a sustainable source and with solar panels for the hot water circuit this cuts down the need even more, however we're still partly reliant on the oul' sod until the cost of PV panels and/or windmills becomes more integrated into the national infrastructure. It's too damn slow but maybe current events will provide a fresh impetus....

 

[Kushan_Farsight]

1 hour ago, TheBaron said:

a full Thunderbirds are Go test print of everything to see what the verdict is on shape and proportion

Cannot wait to see this! Its all looking very good in the renders so it should be a joy in the flesh!  Good Luck!

[TheBaron]

On 5/20/2020 at 12:19 PM, Kushan_Farsight said:

Cannot wait to see this! Its all looking very good in the renders so it should be a joy in the flesh!  Good Luck!

Thanks Mr. K.

 

As I write this my youngest heir is upstairs finishing his last online exam from school for the year with all the seriousness of a seal that's grown sick of constantly being fed from a bucket of sardines. Can't blame him really.

Home schooling was a disaster: he failed to identify a single Fairey aircraft correctly, whilst for PE he had a note from his mother exempting him from bringing me constant cups of coffee (I suspect this to have been a forgery).

 

Managed to get an hour in last evening roughing-out the lateral outlines for the tail boom/empennage sub-assemblies from assembled evidence:

^{(apologies once more for not crediting all the original photographers - please let me know if any objections to seeing your stuff here)}

It never ceases to amaze me quite how different the same set of shapes can appear in photographs taken from different angles, in different lighting, with different lenses and in different proximities to the subject. In much the same way as colour refs can vary horribly according to the WB settings on the camera taking the shot (or emulsion sensitivity of older film), combinations of perspective and focal length have the capacity to routinely fool me into thinking that I've successfully captured a characteristic, only to be cruelly disabused of this notion by the photo immediately next to it.

 

In such situations, the most reliable guide (blindingly obvious to many but the penny only recently dropped for me) is quite similar to that used in cartography for triangulating features in relation to each other - I suppose when you think about it, in working with reference photography we're conducting reverse cartography in a way, taking the 2D mapping and converting it back into a 3D subject. Anyway, enough guff - this is what came out of the subsequent triangulatifying:

Purple is obvs the aerofoil cross section down the centreline of the booms.

 

As you can see there was what on first view appeared to be a _{rather-more-accurate-than-usual} plan drawing from the maintenance manual for the fin part that I overlaid as a guide but in my view it has perspectival distortion of some kind built into it. I've not bothered detailing the tail bumbers and rudder &etc. into the profile at this particular stage as want to get the gross outline sorted from triangulating lines - any 'bumps' (whether big like airbrakes or small as in this case) will be the subject of a second detailing pass over the whole airframe once the main outlines are established in three dimensions.

 

View of same up against the existing solids:

I tilted this aspect in the screenshot to match that of the aircraft sitting on its wheels as (whether it's my wonky visual wiring or not) I've noticed that assessing the accuracy of a level subject in the design software when the view in the photo is tilted gives some odd subjective effects sometimes in terms of whether something is scaled/proportioned/angled accuractely. I've sometimes thought something looks anomalous but tilting it to match the photograph contradicts this, and vice versa.

 

I see cockfighting is on the rise again in Wales (worth reaading to the end for Viz level reporting):

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/justin-cadwell-milford-haven-jailed-18238829.amp?utm_source=facebook%2C twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wales_jason&__twitter_impression=true

 

More over the weekend.

Mwah.

Tony

 

 

[71chally]

40 minutes ago, TheBaron said:

Thanks Mr. K.

 

As I write this my youngest heir is upstairs finishing his last online exam from school for the year with all the seriousness of a seal that's grown sick of constantly being fed from a bucket of sardines. Can't blame him really.

Home schooling was a disaster: he failed to identify a single Fairey aircraft correctly, whilst for PE he had a note from his mother exempting him from bringing me constant cups of coffee (I suspect this to have been a forgery).

 

Managed to get an hour in last evening roughing-out the lateral outlines for the tail boom/empennage sub-assemblies from assembled evidence:

It never ceases to amaze me quite how different the same set of shapes can appear in photographs taken from different angles, in different lighting, with different lenses and in different proximities to the subject. In much the same way as colour refs can vary horribly according to the Wb settings on the camera taking the shot, combinations of perspective and focal length have the capacity to routinely fool me into thinking that I've captured a characteristic, only to be cruelly disabused of this notion by the photo next to it.

 

In such situations, thl

I see cockfighting is on the rise again in Wales (worth reaading to the end for Viz level reporting):

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/justin-cadwell-milford-haven-jailed-18238829.amp?utm_source=facebook%2C twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wales_jason&__twitter_impression=tr

Oh man, I struggled to believe that was a real article😅

Mind you, not as bad as not being able to put names to Faireys!

 

Nice to see the booms getting the join the dots treatment.

 

 

I'm trying to delete the quote😲