nikischutt's oddball-o-rama entries - Page 2

**Vermin_King** · #11 03-07-2012, 02:48 PM

Thanks. I know that I have issues with wheels myself. I have 'in-flight' models just because I don't want to do the wheels and landing gear. There's nothing wrong with that. Are you going to put these on stands?

**Wilfried** · #12 03-07-2012, 04:38 PM

Nice clean builds and razorsharp pics - thank you Nik!

With lovely greetings
the Wilfried

**cMags** · #13 03-07-2012, 04:55 PM

Wow, very nicely done. Got any closer pics of the tail end of the Comanche? I"m about to start cutting mine, and saw that there are some concerns about the tail connection.

The F-105 is really nice too. I've got a repaint in the works for one of those...

Zathros · #14 03-07-2012, 05:02 PM

Superb graphics and colors, really excellent, but the Thunderchiefs fuselage's distinctive style was due to a serious problem incurred at high speed. It is worthy of reproducing. It would be nice to see reproduced in a paper model. As seen in the picture below.

**murphyaa** · #15 03-07-2012, 05:17 PM

I hate wheels, and engines. I'm looking for a seaplane glider to design.

**ashevilleangler** · #16 03-07-2012, 06:07 PM

Niki, Do you build with white gloves? Seriously I wish I could come close to that level of clean precision, especially on the Thud.

Zathros am I correct in assuming that you are referring to the aerodynamic drag associated with Mach 1+ speeds? And the area rule fuselage shape that the 105 shares with several other hard-to-model birds like the 106 and F11?

Curt

Zathros · #17 03-07-2012, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ashevilleangler

Niki, Do you build with white gloves? Seriously I wish I could come close to that level of clean precision, especially on the Thud.

Zathros am I correct in assuming that you are referring to the aerodynamic drag associated with Mach 1+ speeds? And the area rule fuselage shape that the 105 shares with several other hard-to-model birds like the 106 and F11?

Curt

Yes, it was a special bird for that reason. It also flew some incredible missions. The body could be designed, Rhino certainly could model it. This would be a different level aircraft, and ome would not expect such a detailed plane to go for the couple of dollars that some seem willing to pay. Still, because of it's unique shape, and that of some other aircraft, there seems to be a trend of simplifying aircraft to extremes and they really aren't the planes, by shape, which they are called. This is not only in reference to this models, but to many others I have seen lately. It seems that the older WWII planes are getting more response,even though, in many ways, the shapes are more complex.

I'm not sure why this is the case. I think if some designers started working with panels longitudinally, they would overcome this issue. I could get into technical aspects of the software but that is beyond the scope of this thread. By your comment, I see I am not the only one noticing it though.

**murphyaa** · #18 03-07-2012, 07:24 PM

I included the Thud's wide hips in the model. I guess they came out too subtle.

**nikischutt** · #19 03-08-2012, 05:51 AM

Hey guys, thanks for the words, much appreciated.

Zathros as for the area-ruled fuselage, it's there on the model, not pronounced, but it's there. Also the T-Bird colours hide the contours.

Niki

Next up... Piaggio P.180 Avanti and Nord Griffon.

**nikischutt** · #20 03-08-2012, 08:14 AM

Piaggio Avanti

IMG_0899 by nikischutt, on Flickr

IMG_0897 by nikischutt, on Flickr

IMG_0896 by nikischutt, on Flickr

Niki