FG D-558-2 Skyrocket -- What am I doing WRONG???

[umtutsut]

I consider myself a fair-to-middling builder of card rocket models, but I’ve yet to finish a card aircraft model. My latest nemesis: the FG Douglas D-558-2 Skyrocket.

No matter how I cut out and assemble the fuselage parts, I can’t get a smooth joint. I’ve tried making my own joining strips from card and from white vinyl tape. I tried the technique of keeping the integral tabs but cutting a bit into the fuselage part itself, a la Nikischutt. I’ve cut the pieces inside the black lines, outside the black lines, on the black lines…but I always get a slight mismatch between the parts that looks nothing like the real aircraft.

When I build launch vehicle or satellites, I cut inside the black lines and never seem to have fit problems, even on a V-2, which has fuselage curves. So I’m stumped?

Any advice, particularly on the FG Skyrocket?

Les (feeling not so much like The Voice of Authority)

[ghshinn]

I did a Skyrocket build thread some years ago. It might help. I don't remember having any trouble with the fuselage, but there are pics of it in the thread:

FG Skyrocket-Blackhawk

Garland

[umtutsut]

Thanx, but wrong Skyrocket. The Douglas D-558-2 is this one from the 1950s: http://www.daviddarling.info/images/Skyrocket.jpg

Les (The Voice of Authority)

[ghshinn]

Sorry about that. Didn't know there was more than one.

Garland

[airdave]

I don't know this model...it doesn't seem to be on my FG discs...
but first off, its a Fiddlers Green model.

Thats not trying to be mean...just stating that they are not the most technically accurate models.
Not always designed for highly skilled builders.
So part of the problem might be the simpler design?

Another problem is that a limited number of fuselage sections results in more extreme angles at each seam.

The tubular sections of a fuselage are generally straight walled,
and multiple connected sections are how we create the curves and angled shapes of the fuselage,
but the fewer parts you use, the less "steps" involved to create a curved surface,
resulting in more extreme angles at each connection.
This is sometimes hard to hide, no matter how tightly you get the parts to fit.

Not sure if any of this is your problem, but maybe its a model that has its limits ...and thats it...?

Post some pics, so we can see whats happening.

[Vermin_King]

Originally Posted by umtutsut

I consider myself a fair-to-middling builder of card rocket models, but I’ve yet to finish a card aircraft model. My latest nemesis: the FG Douglas D-558-2 Skyrocket.

No matter how I cut out and assemble the fuselage parts, I can’t get a smooth joint. I’ve tried making my own joining strips from card and from white vinyl tape. I tried the technique of keeping the integral tabs but cutting a bit into the fuselage part itself, a la Nikischutt. I’ve cut the pieces inside the black lines, outside the black lines, on the black lines…but I always get a slight mismatch between the parts that looks nothing like the real aircraft.

I can totally relate. Aircraft drive me bonkers. I finally went on an aircraft spree, building, building, building, until I got a few that are passable.

My best recommendation is to keep building the same model over and over again, making adjustments from the last failed attempt. And frankly, if I see a plane with a petal nose, I delete it from my harddrive. I've never gotten one of those to look remotely right. That goes straight back to your inside, outside, on comment. I have come to realize I am destined to never build a model with a petal-formed nose.

[umtutsut]

Originally Posted by Vermin_King

I have come to realize I am destined to never build a model with a petal-formed nose.

Nor do I. I've used plastic rocket nose cones and plastic shapes from the spares box, even made at least one from Sculpey!

Les (The Voice of Authority)

[umtutsut]

Originally Posted by airdave

Another problem is that a limited number of fuselage sections results in more extreme angles at each seam.

The tubular sections of a fuselage are generally straight walled,
and multiple connected sections are how we create the curves and angled shapes of the fuselage, but the fewer parts you use, the less "steps" involved to create a curved surface, resulting in more extreme angles at each connection.

This is sometimes hard to hide, no matter how tightly you get the parts to fit.

When you look at the real aircraft in the National Air & Space Museum, it's virtually free of joints and panel lines. I'm thinking seriously of using the paper parts as templates for sheet styrene pieces so I can fill and sand the seams.

Les (The Voice of Authority)

[rockpaperscissor]

Many Fiddler's green models can be much more difficult than they appear, expecially If you are a modeler who is driven crazy by results that may be less than what you expect of yourself. FG fuselages are almost always designed with overlapping sections. Therefore the leading edge of one part, has to be slightly larger than the trailing edge of the one it fits over (or vice versa). If you intend to cut off the tabs and use internal glue strips, you must take this into account when cutting out the parts (been there, done that), and will have to trim accordingly before forming your tubes. At one end of the part you may have to cut on the outside of the line, and on the other end, you might find yourself cutting on the inside of the line. You have to see what part fits over what, and plan ahead. I almost always build with internal glue strips and have pretty good luck this way. Sometimes, the joint on the fuselage underside has a line that comes and goes, but at least the most visible areas are seamles.

[willygoat]

When you made the joiner strips, did you use the heavy card or lighter paper like 20#? I've found that using the lighter paper makes for a smoother seam. I have started making strips for every model, and they are a lot smoother. Also, it helps to precurve the part after the strip is on, that way the joiner and the parts have the same curvature.

I've looked over the model, and it should be fairly straight forward.