second Asian fighter plane scale model
I apparently got the hang of it after finishing the second maritime plane model finding myself surfing on 'carrier-based jets'.
The fifth URL drew my attention to the Chinese jet fighter 'Flying Shark'.
Not aware of a Chinese aircraft industry and already built a Japanese Zero I decided to immerse myself in this model.
3d views
Surfing on 3d view pictures I found four views of which two were only distinctive in colour and decals.
Cross-sections
The fifth URL drew my attention to the Chinese jet fighter 'Flying Shark'.
Not aware of a Chinese aircraft industry and already built a Japanese Zero I decided to immerse myself in this model.
3d views
Surfing on 3d view pictures I found four views of which two were only distinctive in colour and decals.
 |
| only three different J-15 3views |
After having imported them in DraftSight and figured out that the size of the plane was too large to stay on a 1`: 75 scale (length 22m and span 17m) I compared both measurements on a 1:100 scale (219 and 174mm).
Apart from devations in these values I found mutual discrepancies of their shapes as well and returned to the internet where I learned that this
Shenyang J-15 'Flying Shark' in fact was a copy of the Russian Sukhoi S33-37.
Using the two 3d views of the latter I think to have made a reasonable appoache to the plane's real shape and sizes.
But, quite often on 3d views, there were considerable deviations and, since L and S of J15 and S37 were exactly the same I added the S37 views and found the differences below.
 |
| Seven 3d views, one upon the other. 1) the upper part of this vector-screendump shows them all; 2) the center part shows three enlarged wingstections with- out the light green vector which was much too far out; 3) the lower part shows dotted the weighed average vector and major differences of the various 3d views in mm. |
The fun of cardboard modeling and its problem at the same time consists in the fact that paper only bends in one direction. Therefore the plane's fuselage has te be cut in conical sections on places where one curve is meeting an other.
The joints are chosen at positions where the fuselage shows significant changes in its form. The cross-sections of top-view and side-view are usually at different positions:
From this sketch it may be clear that one can't do without a reliable 3d-view.
If you're lucky you will find 3views with fuselage-sections at significant positions. Then it is still worthwile to check their heights and widths on the above top- and side views.
If not one has to generate the cross-sections on its own through the use of as much photographic material as availabe.
If you're lucky you will find 3views with fuselage-sections at significant positions. Then it is still worthwile to check their heights and widths on the above top- and side views.
If not one has to generate the cross-sections on its own through the use of as much photographic material as availabe.
 |
| will the paper agree with my ideas ?
The following message was in my mailbox this morning
You haven't been active over at PaperModelers.com for a while
so I decided to contribute this blog-link to them and an intermediate result of the progress.
Progress is hardly worthy its name since I have been struggling with the fuselage for quite while. Not because of the way the elements were fitting in but due to deminishing skills.
For the time being I leave the Shark as it is because there are many other things to be dealt with.
As soon as the Paper-Spirit is allowed to come down on me I will let you know.
|
