#271
|
|||
|
|||
I'll probably just use the transtage from the Lars Folmann kit, but i welcome any info you can pass along.
Thanks, erik |
#273
|
|||
|
|||
Mark you rule man! How about some modern Indian IRBMs, some classic US short range nukes such as Davy Crockett or Pershings, some Chinese models and anything that has the Minuteman booster built on it!! Love your stuff on ecardmodels.
|
#274
|
||||
|
||||
That would be more something for the armoury section, imho. Let's not forget this is about spaceflight and all its thereabouts. That Davy Crockett thing really was an insane idea, by the way...
|
#275
|
|||
|
|||
But PK, don't forget that almost every space launch vehicle was based on a military device. For me, rocket is rocket. I also like the shape of the A4 (better known as V-2), and as it was one of the most important rockets in history, why not add it to a rocket garden?
I'd be happy to see all kinds of rockets! Thorsten |
Google Adsense |
#276
|
||||
|
||||
Hi Thorst, yeah you're right in some ways.
It's an interesting question. Where does rocketry stops being "Aeronautical and Space" designated and begins the "War and Ordnance" category? Although there are many military rockets that became space launch vehicles, I feel that not all ICBM's (and IRBM's for that matter) belong in this place. To just throw everything with a rocket engine in PASA just would be unfair, I guess. In my opinion it has to be connected with spaceflight and not directly with warfare. As an exception to the rule, the A2 for me is allright, being the godmother of all rockets great and small, even the A2 and A3 are allright in that historical perspective. Of course there also are several ICBM designs that aren't out of place here, like Minuteman (later used as part of Orbital's Minotaur) or the well known ones like R7, Dnepr, Proton, R14, Thor, Titan and Atlas. They actually developed from ICBM into space launchers. That doesn't make just any ICBM or a Sidewinder or a Davy Crockett a good entry in this category. -Just my two eurocents. (-; |
#277
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I've seen that model-well, the pictures anyway, and it is truly inspirational. It is also quite beyond my capabilities at the moment. I'm still working on consistent fundamental building techniques-not ready for any kind of design work yet-just don't have the time. Heck, it took 2 weeks and several attempts just to match the print scaling on the two kits so the tubes are the same diameter. I'd love to take a crack at scaling down Mr. Hanners design for the adapter and transtage if he were to make them available, but replicating his design on my own is not feasible currently. The spaceplane concept is a favorite of mine, particularly the X-20, so I'm certain that there were be additional iterations in the future. Thanks, erik |
#278
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting issue about where the line for space paper models stops. I'll throw in my opinion for what it's worth...
I'm currently working on Russian missiles, but I wasn't going to do the complete "SS-x" series. I was going to skip the shorter range missiles like the Scaleboard and Scarab, and stick to the bigger ones. I guess I'm seeing this as a evolutionary line into Russian space boosters and space technology, that's where my interest comes from. I considered doing a Scud for that reason, but I'm still undecided on that. Of course, I also did a series of USN SLBM missiles, so there goes consistency right out the window. -Mark |
#279
|
|||
|
|||
Don't care where he puts them as long as he does them
|
#280
|
||||
|
||||
When I was a plastic modeler (and even after I started entering card models in IPMS contests) this issue would come up from time to time at competitions, at least here in the Twin Cities. I got tired of shuttles competing against camouflaged V-2s. Because the "real space" entries were usually few and far between, some folks would sometimes enter their V-2s and Scuds, etc, in the category in hopes of an easy win. I have raised the issue before with judges and had them moved. Things like V-2s, ICBMs, etc., are intended as weapons so they are considered artillery, which is a sub-category of "Military Vehicles" under IPMS rules.
And don't even get me started on how the contest judges would group "real space" and "sci-fi" into a single category.... |
Google Adsense |
Tags |
icbm, peacekeeper, slbm, titan iiic, trident |
|
|