1/200 Tu-160 Blackjack Design

[paperengineer]

Thank you everyone!

More work on prototype 2 and i fear there are still changes needed, i am not satisfied with the canopy and the swinging mechanism for the wings provides too much articulation. Also the nacelles seem to exaggerate the slight bulge of each engine on the underside—a quick enough fix but annoying nevertheless. Progress isnt always linear though and i am intent on finishing this bird for you all

I also made the fuselage thinner in a way that i think blends with the strakes a little better, do any of you strongly agree/disagree? Still not convinced if i like the new or old fuselage more...

[juan angel 747]

the new fuselage looks better but if you are not satisfied it is because you feel that you can improve more

I encourage you that we have all faced bad things in the hobby but we can always overcome them

[Rata]

IMHO, I think you're getting closer with the new one PE.

[Siwi]

Calculating the curved aerofoil shape of a wing, particularly a tapering swept wing, has been one of the barriers to designing models for me, so hats off for your patience in going through this long trial and error refinement process.

[Tyler Durden]

Originally Posted by Siwi

Calculating the curved aerofoil shape of a wing, particularly a tapering swept wing, has been one of the barriers to designing models for me, so hats off for your patience in going through this long trial and error refinement process.

I just taught myself how to do that and it has greatly increased my appreciation and respect of those who have designed all these models!

Designing a model forces you to think about all those little details you had never previously given any thought to.

[bkensky]

Originally Posted by tigertony100

Well, there is another small scale Tupolev Tu- 160 designed by Bkensky from Nepal. A colored scheme exist but I don't have it. Various designs makes this hobby be very nice. Gregory I hope that you'll soon fix your printer problems. Go ahead man!!!!

Thank you @tigertony for the recognition. I designed this using Bruno's technique and did it in MS Word. The drawings are simple. New design coming from @paperengineer looks promising. All the best.

[Tyler Durden]

Originally Posted by paperengineer

More work on prototype 2 and i fear there are still changes needed, i am not satisfied with the canopy and the swinging mechanism for the wings provides too much articulation.

I once built a 1/33 scale model of the B-1; I think it might have been Fly Model but that's not important. Anyway, it had the swing-wing mechanism, but as designed it was very sloppy and had the same issues with allowing too much articulation.

I ended up redesigning that section so that it was a box-type structure that had the holes for the wing pivots accurately located, and on the wings themselves I made heavy cardboard gears but with large rounded or lobed gear teeth. They were probably a quarter inch thick. I remember drawing one side of the gear and then just flipping it and tracing it for the other half. They had to be located with a half tooth advanced on one of the wing sides and half tooth lower on the other wing side. It worked better and was much stiffer but still had a problem with too much slack. Eventually I solved that by putting a length of cardstock in between the gears so that there was no longer any backlash and to take up the slack. It worked well enough that pushing one wing back would cause the other to instantly move back so that the angle of sweep was the same for each side, and the box that held them was stiff enough that the long wings didn't droop even after several years.

It worked well enough, and I left the model hanging in the 5th MUNS squadron training center breakroom along with quite a few other military aircraft models when I transferred from the USAF into the Army.

[tigertony100]

Originally Posted by Tyler Durden

I once built a 1/33 scale model of the B-1; I think it might have been Fly Model but that's not important. Anyway, it had the swing-wing mechanism, but as designed it was very sloppy and had the same issues with allowing too much articulation.

I ended up redesigning that section so that it was a box-type structure that had the holes for the wing pivots accurately located, and on the wings themselves I made heavy cardboard gears but with large rounded or lobed gear teeth. They were probably a quarter inch thick. I remember drawing one side of the gear and then just flipping it and tracing it for the other half. They had to be located with a half tooth advanced on one of the wing sides and half tooth lower on the other wing side. It worked better and was much stiffer but still had a problem with too much slack. Eventually I solved that by putting a length of cardstock in between the gears so that there was no longer any backlash and to take up the slack. It worked well enough that pushing one wing back would cause the other to instantly move back so that the angle of sweep was the same for each side, and the box that held them was stiff enough that the long wings didn't droop even after several years.

It worked well enough, and I left the model hanging in the 5th MUNS squadron training center breakroom along with quite a few other military aircraft models when I transferred from the USAF into the Army.

That was a very good solution applied to a large scale kit, but the method of making the wings variable has already been worked out by Gregory and others on small scale models as shown by this same Paperengineer design which is the Sukhoi 24 of which More than 20 units were built by my students in my Facebook group. The late and endearing Lorenzo Martínez designed a mechanism to make the wings movable simultaneously to the 1/100 scale models. This Tupolev design is going very well and we look forward to more progress and the final product.


Best Regards, José Antonio Rodríguez aka Tigertony100.