Subject:
|
Re: Of ABS and Lego Hinds
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build.military
|
Date:
|
Thu, 18 Jul 2002 07:12:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
929 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.build.military, Bryce Rollins writes:
>
> Chris, you did that nice looking Spetnaz SOF Hind that was posted a while
> back on brickshelf right? That MOC, along with the afore-mentioned canopy
> parts, were my primary inspiration to try and tackle the Hind. The 5 bladed
> rotor mounted no your MOC really puts my 6 bladed one to shame.
It's really much more fragile than it looks, though: forming those plate hinges
into inward-pointing Vs around the blades makes the shape flexible when attached
but incredibly sensitive to knocks against any of the blades. Even an
accidental tap is usually enough to knock the entire rotor off its head and
sliding down the fuselage side.
> Did you
> ever come up with a way to center mount that thing so that it could rotate
> freely?
Not that I can figure, at least...it'd be relatively easy to glue the 4x4 radar
dish down to the individual rotor bases and fit a cross-axle to the dish's
underside, but that'd be cheating. :(
> I didn't really think about the interior cabin that much, as all of my MOCs
> are really only accurate when viewed from the exterior. The total usable
> hollow space within the fuselage is 4 units wide (not counting the walls or
> the panel pieces), 16 long and 16 plates high,
Not far off my own dimensions, I think, especially after I retrofitted that
angled wing box into the original design.
> but I'm not sure if this
> reflects the actual proportions of the real Hind's cabin. You seem to know
> more about this than I do, so I'll ask you where the cabin ends with regards
> to the rest of the airframe.
Sickly enough, the cabin seems to end right where the wings begin. That amount
of space in either of our models would be more of a phone booth than anything
else, though, so taking liberties with it seems almost necessary. Sealing up
all that space aft certainly does make room for rear wheels, but it's not worth
the price to me at least.
> My version of the Hind could really do with a redesign before its ready to
> be tried out in ABS. I'm not particularly pleased with the integrity of the
> wings in relation to the fuselage, so I'm pretty sure that these would
> require a redesign.
Trouble is, I don't think there *is* a meaningful redesign to be had there.
Perhaps you can stabilize the wings like I did with car roof pieces (), but the
hardpoints themselves? I ended up ignoring them completely because the only way
to do it was with brick hinges, and they looked bad on my 2-wide weapons.
> Building entirely in MLCAD does sometimes make me feel
> like a bit of a smoke and mirrors charlatan compared to people like yourself
> who do it for real.
Not true in the slightest; I submit your F-14 as proof. There's a level of
detail in that thing which is every bit the equal (and often the better) of my
Hind, and as the assembled version shows it holds up perfectly fine in real
plastic. My own model's shortcomings aren't nearly so much the result of brick
limitations you magically circumvent as simple laziness on my part: the engine
block still needs work, and the tail depresses me. Probably why I spent so much
time on the relatively easy soldiers, honestly...
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Of ABS and Lego Hinds
|
| Chris, you did that nice looking Spetnaz SOF Hind that was posted a while back on brickshelf right? That MOC, along with the afore-mentioned canopy parts, were my primary inspiration to try and tackle the Hind. The 5 bladed rotor mounted no your (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.build.military)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
