#1
|
||||
|
||||
Bachem BA-349 'Natter'
Work has been chewing up most of my free time.
But I was able to squeeze in some "real work" whenever I can. Unfortunately, progress was very slow and hardly worth writing about. But I've eventually reached a point that I can write about. I've attached preview pictures. I'll do the write ups of the creation process when I get more free time. |
Google Adsense |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
So far so good, crazy German idea........Rich
__________________
F-1 Rules |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Welcome back again. You have been somewhat quiet for a while in the design arena.
Best of luck. Are you also designing the launch rail? Isaac
__________________
My gallery [http://www.papermodelers.com/gallery...v-r-6&cat=500] Recent buildsMeteor F1, Meteor F8, Mig-Ye8, NA Sabre, A-4E Skyhawk,Mig-15 red, Mig-17 repaint |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah, work has been taking a huge emotional and cognitive toll on me.
When I get home, I just want to lie down and stare at the tube. Anyway, yeah, I plan to make the launch rail -- the telephone pole version. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
I know the feeling. However, for me building is a great stress reliever. You get to cut things. Designing may be different though.
Isaac
__________________
My gallery [http://www.papermodelers.com/gallery...v-r-6&cat=500] Recent buildsMeteor F1, Meteor F8, Mig-Ye8, NA Sabre, A-4E Skyhawk,Mig-15 red, Mig-17 repaint |
Google Adsense |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
It's the same with designing too. It's a great stress reliever.
But the problem is that I'm so exhausted when I get home, and it takes a while to reboot my brains. By the time I get started, it's almost time for bed. Anyway, as promised, here's the first part of my design log. In the past, I've always relied using the 4 window panel system of Metaseq: top, front, side, free. I'd take an image from the 3-view diagram and use it as the background image for the top, side, and front panels. But though it gets the job done, it gets a bit difficult to get the exact shape of the model. This time around, I took the 3-view, and then I created a new flat shape by tracing the outline of the plane like so: I then 'traced' the other parts - the wings, rudders, tail fins, and fuselage side views. Once done, I rearranged the parts to create a crude skeleton of the Natter: With the framework completed, I proceeded to "skin" the skeleton by creating a subd surface, using the "skeleton" as the guide. I started skinning the fuselage: And after that, I worked on the wings and rudders: Okay, based on the image above, you'll notice the canopy is wrong. I tried as hard as I can but I just can't seem to get the boxy canopy correct using subd surfaces. So instead, I did the canopy manually after converting the subd surface into an actual wireframe: |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
I would really love to learn how to do this. Great work, you make it look so easy.
All the best and happy (designing?) modelling Bernie |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Nice to see You Eric making a new design!
I remember this "aircraft" from video game "Return to Castle Wolfenstein", when one bad guy escaped on this strange thing ... Thanks for detail explanation of how you work. Just one question: do software is able precisely to join surface mesh to formers? Do those separate parts have direct relation, for example if I modify surface mesh the former would change as well?
__________________
Finished projects: RMS Mauretania 1/250; SS Canberra 1/250; Toyota Hilux Overdrive; Current projects: SS Michelangelo 1/250 |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Granted that getting started is the most difficult part, the modeling part is not that complex relative to the whole process. Once you get familiar with the modeling software (in my case, Metaseq), creating the wire frame is pretty much straightforward. The difficult part is transitioning from wire frame to the 2d cutouts, and making your test build. It is in this phase that you realize that you've either under or over-modeled a component, which prompts you to redesign that part. Under-modeling a component makes it very boxy. On the other hand, over-modeling produces too much details that cardboard cannot handle at the chosen scale. This forces you to discard some parts. This is what happened to me in my FW VTOL design. I've accidentally under-modeled some parts to a point that they were already unsalvageable. To be safe, I'd rather discard parts than re-design. Quote:
RE: Join surface mesh to formers I'm using Metaseq. Technically, it does not have that function. But there are plugins for creating a mesh from two cross sections. But that plugin is for an older version of Metaseq and I've yet to try it again. So what I'm doing right now is just visual estimation. The formers/frames that I created initially have no direct connections with the skin or outer mesh of the model. I wish it had though. It would have made things much simpler. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Wait, no cockpit? I saw former right in cockpit...
|
Google Adsense |
Tags |
bachem, metaseq, natter, pepakura |
|
|