Kb-50j

[APA-168]

Thought I had started a thread here already, guess not. Here is my progress on the B-50 series. I am starting with the KB-50J since it is my favorite. The KB-50J had two turbojet engines mounted under the wings for improved performance as well as other slight differences pertaining to it's role as an aerial refueling tanker. All the guns, of course, were removed and there was an extension added on the tail for the refueling gear. All versions also had underwing fuel tanks equipped for refueling.

I'm making great progress, not so long ago it was just a fueslage, wings and incomplete engines. Now looks almost finished, but we still have a ways to go. Landing gear wells, cockpit/interior, wingtips, turbojets, refueling gear, etc.

[John Bowden]

Alright Avery........... did I miss the design scale?

[APA-168]

Oops, my bad, 1/32nd, like all my other bombers.

[rickstef]

Avery, question, why 32, and not 33, when the rest of the hobby uses that?

[APA-168]

To be honest, it's a holdover from being a plastic modeler. Used to build some 32nd scale kits, but of course you never could build something like a YB-49 or a B-50 in that scale, unless for RC or from an expensive cottage industry kit. So when I started designing, I figured "why not design some big kits to go along with my existing builds?" and so I worked in 32nd, unaware that 1:33 is the norm in paper modeling. Even once I realized that, I figured it's such a tiny difference it shouldn't really matter. However, if people prefer it, I can start working in 33. I just figured it didn't really matter, since they're so close and if you're really OCD you can scale it down that .3 % to make it fit with the rest of your collection. That's the reason, no particular preference, just a holdover from the other half of my hobby life.

Actually, if you look around, a lot of much more experienced and popular designers than I use 1:32, including Ken West and Nobi.

[rickstef]

ok, works for me

[APA-168]

I think it's actually interesting that two scales so close together have thrived in two separate hobbies. You'd think eventually one or the other would cross over and become dominant.

Anyways, enough about scale, here's an update with the turbojet engines mounted. Pretty neat looking, huh? :D

[rickstef]

I remember some discussion on the scale variances was based on the basic unit of the countries producing models, but I could be wrong

[shrike]

Originally Posted by rickstef

I remember some discussion on the scale variances was based on the basic unit of the countries producing models, but I could be wrong

That combined with a scale that is inherently 'right' for the subject. A 'Platonic Scale' if you will

1:48 / 1:50 is a good scale for aircraft. Big enough to have some detail on a WWI scout, small enough for large bombers to the manageable. 1:48 is four feet to the inch, which works well if you are used to imperial measurements. 1:50 is easy with a decimal unit.

1:32/ 1:33 - Impressive for small aircraft, bloody imposing for large ones. 1:32, I think is easier for imperial unit users. 1/32 of an inch is the smallest of the 'everyday' units in use (1/64 in modelling but where else? I have an ancient set of calipers that do 1/256, but why?) 1:33 is a more logical division for metrics, but leads to all kinds of unwieldy repeating decimals.

1:35? You got me.

1:24/1:25. Close enough that American car kit makers never did settle on one or the other. 1:24=2 feet to the inch for the imperially challenged.

1:72 is an interesting one. Six feet to the inch. I don't think I've ever seen a 1:75 scale anything.

1:100 is the metric equivalent of 1:72, but just enough smaller to lose something if you ask me, but the maths are very very easy.

1:200, 1:250 etc are all pretty self explanatory. Rods(or perches) to the inch are unwieldy


OTOH, lets not even start with model railroading where the scale is often based on the metric width between rails, that is prototypically and anciently based on the width of a horse's arse.

[Wyvern]

Avery, your KB-50 looks really interesting. Are you rendering in vector graphics so it will scale up/down easily? I'd love to build it in 1/144 or 1/100.

Wyvern