Project Dornier Do-17z2

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Ivan,

My memory plays tricks on me, it can´t have been 1/32 - that would make it a 2 ft. wingspan for the model, which is impossible. The Ju-88 must have been 1/48 scale, because that would be 16 inches, quite big, but not huge, which is more in accordance with my visual memory of it.

Talking of big models, my brother built a B-70 Valkyrie, which was over 2.5 ft long - that was huge for a 1/72 scale!

The Ju-88 had no messy edges, and a distincly clean and shiny finish, so it may have been Monogram after all. Revell had more advertising in comics at the time (early 60´s?), so that may be why that name rings more.

I also remember how easy I kept the Ju-88´s prop-axels free of cement so the props would turn blowing at them. The 1/72 models gave greater problems there, and you needed a pin to apply the cement.

Anyway, since the advent of computers, I never built any more physical models...

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

[smilo]

my do17z box has no shrink wrap
and the edges are taped.
heck, it could be full of scraps
and i wouldn't be the wiser.
i have several kits,
sitting on the shelf.
just waiting.
my painting skills were also,
to be kind, lacking.
i remember an amt '62 pontiac.
the baby blue paint was so thick
the intricate moldings were gone.
my last build was a 1/72 mosquito.
i don't know where the model is,
but, i still have the box with paint in it.

speaking of huge models,
my uncle had a couple very cool ones.
a b-52 and a b-36...wow.
the wing spans had to have been 3 feet.
after he died, i really wanted that b-36,
but, felt it would be inappropriate to ask.
i wonder what ever happened to it.

a Do17z side note:
my apologies for not finishing
the bomb aimer panel.
i seem to be a little distracted.

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Smilo,
Distracted? I wonder with what... Not to worry, there is no hurry.
There are more days and more pots of soup, as they say here!
Anyway, I´m distracted too. I wonder with what...

The real hurry to speak of, was to make an a-good-as-possible model
for you or any other intetested parties to try out, and that is done.
It is available on the thread - granted, not in the library, but it will be
there as soon as the panels are done, for which, I repeat, there is
absolutely no hurry at all.

Re. Models: The last models I put together, (as it wasn´t really building) were all
the vintage car collection of Burago. Excellent quality chromed parts, nice details on
the suspension, under-the-bonnet engine, no glue to put together and a pleasure to
look at. They´ve been out of production for years and would be worth mint now.
They were collecting dust on the second surface under the glass table in the living
room so I gave them away about 15 years ago. Such is life! I still have a lifttle
collection of WWI fighters (also skiving-type no-glue put-together builds), and
they´s sitting on the top shelf and looking good.

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

[Ivan]

Hello Aleatorylamp,

I have a few Burago (For a long time I thought the brand was Urago) car models also but none are built yet. I should build a couple.
I don't do badly in painting up large parts as found in 1/24 and 1/25 scale cars because they are so much larger than a typical 1/72 scale aeroplanes.
The engine detail is generally not anywhere near the standards of a typical plastic model though.
I haven't built a plastic car model in over 20 years and I knew a lot less about cars back then.
The last model car I built was given to a friend of mine who was moving away.
I always liked the steerable front wheel kits but those are not too common in plastic which is why I started buying the metal body kits.
Every year I try to take the kids out to a local "Modelfest" event (will be April this year) and give the kids a chance to build a kit or two.
I buy a few kits and such for my own amusement at those events.

Hello Smilo,

I actually have an aeroplane kit that is a pretty fair size though not to the scale of a B-36 or B-52; I have a 1/48 scale B-17G by Revell-Monogram.
If you are really interested in those large kits, they can still be found with very little effort.

Since you also have a Dornier 17Z kit, you can easily confirm what I have been saying about the Canopy, Nose Frame and Cheek Windows all being asymmetrical.
I actually have hundreds of kits in the closets in the basement.......

- Ivan.

[smilo]

i'm sure that with a little effort,
i could acquire a large B-36 model.
but, i won't just to have one on the shelf.
my uncle's model was special. it belonged
to a man that actually flew in one
when it dropped a nuke on Bikini atoll.
my uncle was a USAF history book.
he worked on the x-1 project at Edwards,
early ICBMs on railroad cars in Wyoming,
NASA for NASA in Houston until his retirement.
there was a letter of commendation
on his wall thanking him and his team
for their efforts during the Apollo 13 mission.
having that particular B-36 model
hanging from my ceiling would be a testament
to my Uncle Billy Michael.
Rest in Peace, Billy

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Guys!
I forgot to mention the steerable front wheels on the Burago models that Ivan pointed out.
Similarly to the retractable landing gear on the 1/48 Ju-88 I´d forgotten about too, I think these features add to the attraction of model making - even if some insist on saying it turns them into toys, so what? Freedom of speech.

Also, this was what must have made me always insist on having ALL the moving parts possible on my AF99 models.
But of course, at the cost of a few transitory bleeds here and there... Now on quite complicated models, doing away with moving control surfaces allows improvements elsewhere, so there´s always some attraction somewhere, isn´t there?

Toys or models... Philosophically speaking, there is a similarity between a Flight Sim and a toy anyway, (a very complex one), and maybe the reason I like CFS1/FS98 is because it looks a little more like a toy than the newer sims.

Anyway, I just had another look at the cheek and chin windows of the Do17Z2, and these assymetrical windows, as textures and not transparencies, are the best I can do to get as near as possible to what there was on the real aeroplane.

SCASM could make them transparent, but it´s too abstract for me. So, it looks a little like a toy, but a nice one, at least!
No offense meant to myself or anyone else, it´s just a philosophical observation.

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

[smilo]

under the circumstances, ie, af99 limitations,
i believe the Do17 is an excellent model.
i have seen none better in almost 20 years of cfs.
it has always baffled me, that a Do17
was never built for cfs.
we were always stuck with the stock model.
thank you, Stephan, for an excellent job.

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Smilo,
Well, I suppose that the difficulties and complications involved in different areas of the aeroplane must have put more than one builder off, and they didn´t have Ivan to counsel them to make the best of AF99´s limitations - or an acute observer for testing either! I wouldn´t have been able to make it come out so well without help!

Maybe in general they were afraid that after lots of work, chances weren´t high enough for a good enough upload.
But then, as I like building in itself, I really didn´t mind if it hadn´t come out so well, so I gave it a try, although the ultimate objective in effect, is the upload.

OK, then.
Must rush off for a few hours.
Cjheers,
Aleatorylamp

[Ivan]

under the circumstances, ie, af99 limitations,
i believe the Do17 is an excellent model.
i have seen none better in almost 20 years of cfs.
it has always baffled me, that a Do17
was never built for cfs.
we were always stuck with the stock model.
thank you, Stephan, for an excellent job.

Hello Smilo, Aleatorylamp,

Smilo, You are absolutely right of course.
I know I could never have built as good a model within AF99 Limitations.
You both saw the struggle I had with the P-38 Lightnings a couple years ago and the shape isn't quite as complex as this one.
Aleatorylamp does things with Structures that I simply would not have thought about.

Our design choices are all different. I am glad things worked out here.
If things work out, perhaps I will have a chance to finish a couple twins myself.

- Ivan.

[smilo]

that would be very nice.
i would love to see your P-38 and B-25
out there for others to enjoy.

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Ivan, Hello Smilo,
On the thread on AI Props I noticed the picture of the Ju88 model with a curious way of doing the glazing for the Cabin and Nose. Unless I am mistaken, the glass surfaces seem textured, and in a quite ingenious fashion. At least on the screenshot it looks quite good.
Is this an old-fashioned idea which would nowadays be considered a cop-out, or would it be considered as a viable option, for example for the Do-17z2?
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

[smilo]

i, honestly, don't remember where i got this model.
maybe, simviation..can't say for sure.
maybe it came with the texture package,
by Arno Brooks, circa 2003.
in the read me doc, he states that the model
is an early offering by Herve Devred for FS5.
this might explain the textured windows.

as for using the technique on your Do17...
i wouldn't recommend it, unless the model
will be used as an AI, were there will be
quick passes and no close up visual inspection.
of course, if you used the technique,
you would free up parts used for the crew.

[Ivan]

.....
quick passes and no close up visual inspection.
of course, if you used the technique,
you would free up parts used for the crew.

....Except that there would be no need to free up Parts for the crew because the crew would not be visible from outside.
If you want to see them only from inside, you can do it via SCASM and it doesn't cost any more AF99 Parts.

Personally, I think that this is a pretty well done texturing job but the fancy Canopy textures are inferior to actual transparent pieces.

Just my opinion....
- Ivan.

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Smilo, Hello Ivan,
Thanks for your opinions. One could say it was an elegant way of doing things for AF5.
Perhaps Smilo meant freeing up parts coming from the crew for other things.

With your progress on the precision-manufacture of multi-engine RPM gauges, (you do have very specialized personnel - watchmakers, Ivan?), my deduction would be that once ready, their bitmaps could be conveniently turned into U/Min ones and used for the Dornier Panel under construction by Smilo´s craftsmen.

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

[Ivan]

Hello Aleatorylamp, Smilo,

The quote feature seems to be broken again.

The technicians working on the multi-engine gauges are the same ones who worked on them before.... unsuccessfully.
The big difference and the main reason for the apparent successes now is that the tools are different and they actually have a manual to go by now.
The manual is not great so progress is slow, but at least there is progress now.
The problem is that so many other parts of Ivan's Workshop are not useable that other important tasks do not get done.

Regarding German gauges, we shall see where those can be fitted in.
My technicians need to finish up at least ONE set of useable gauges before beginning on anything else though, so we shall see....

- Ivan.


P.S. These technicians are probably closer to Electricians rather than Watchmakers, though they do seem to do some pretty precise work with the needles and backgrounds. With the new very specialized Gauge shop, there are all kinds of plans in the works but they are all centered around pushing a couple Twins out the door in a satisfactory manner. There are all kinds of missing gauges as you probably already know.

BTW, What did you do for your earlier Twin Engine aeroplanes? The lack of Gauges pretty much stopped mine completely.

[smilo]

granted, i have not uploaded a twin engined model,
but, if i had, for example, uploaded the a20,
i would not let the lack of proper gauges stop the upload.

as we are all well aware, there are no german multi engine gauges.
so, should that stop Stephan from uploading the Do17?
of course, the decision is up to him.
my advice would be, make the best out of what is available.
if that means, doubling up with stock gauges,
so be it. i'm sure users will understand.
if they don't, well......let them make their own gauges.

finally, about the smilo craftsmen working on the Dornier Panel.
umm, i hate to disillusion everyone, but,
even though i may have a multi faceted personality,
there are no smilo craftsmen working on the Dornier Panel.
it's just me and i've been distracted lately.

[aleatorylamp]

Ha ha! Hello Ivan, Ha Ha! Hello Smilo,

Yes, I know the feeling. Distractions... but they are interesting, hmmmm. How did they start? But that´s the fun, isn´t it?

It´s great that Ivan´s technicians and specialists have managed to find a better way towards getting some good engine gauges underway. I hope my comments in no way convey any sensation of hurry or pressure towards that goal!

What my technicians usually do with engine controls for twins, is simply set up a corner on the main panel with default FSFS gauges per engine. The small ones are dual-needle, so there are only 4 in total per engine.

I have found the annoying RPM gauge mis-read disappears and corrects itself once you cycle through window-view and full-screen view.

As regards the Dornier Schnellbomber upload, I just didn´t know whether to upload it now or wait for the panel, and because there was no hurry, I just didn´t ask.

Perhaps then, I think the best idea will be to upload it with my existing, simplified panel. I´ll perhaps just doctor up the bomb aimer´s one a little to get to look a bit more like the Dornier´s nose with more transparencies in it.

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

[Ivan]

Hello Guys,

Sorry to be the hang-up here.
Smilo's and my choices are different.
I actually finished the visual model for the B-25C Mitchell about 8 or 9 years ago.
The current paint job was done about three years ago.
The flight model was probably done about 5 years ago.
I use its release as an incentive to myself to get to learning how to build the missing pieces.
Learning something new is usually my goal for doing a Project.
The problem as Smilo has found over the years is that my primary goal is the learning and experiments and not necessarily a public release.

That is why things get stuck for so long in Ivan's Workshop.
I didn't want to release the Mitchell without either stock gauges or a gauge set of my own.

There is still one more bit to learn on this project (and that is what stopped the BV 141B release: How do I do a proper panel?

Regarding German Gauges. The BMPs are going to be a pain.....
But they have to come after the US Twin Gauges or it would make no sense.

- Ivan.

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Ivan,
Nothing to be sorry about - no worry - and no hurry!
I just couldn´t decide whether to upload the aircraft now or not.

The only hurry, or better said, real objective with Do17z2, was
to get Smilo a nicer machine than the default one, and that´s done.
It´s posted here on this thread. Another objective here was to see
what AF99 was capable of for this machine, and I was actually quite
surprised by the results. I´m not the only one, I suppose! That was
very gratifying in itself, and I got a lot of help.

So, an upload for the sake of an upload is not the goal here. To make
an upload more attractive, 1) an improved panel, 2) a corrected
bomb aimer´s panel, and also 3) a more detailed panelling pattern
would be nice, but I´m not very good at panelling.

So now, with the simplified panels and panelling:
To upload or not to upload, that is the question!

Shakespeare never answered Othello´s question...
and I think I´ll wait and see. There´s no hurry anyway!

P.S. As regards the German RPM, i.e. U/Min gauge-bitmaps, if you like,
I could lend a helping hand for them whenever you want. This does not
mean I´m in any hurry to get at your new gauges! I´m only offering...

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

[smilo]

i was looking through some Do17 drawings,
and noticed some of the earlier version, Do17 M/P.
in particular, the nose appears to have
a glazed round center section.
i'm thinking the bomb aimer bmp,
could be for an M/P.
be that as i may...i'm not much of a panel builder either.
most of my projects have just been
modifying the panels others have drawn
and adding keyboard activated or mouse switched
pop up panels for things like radios,
auto pilot, bomb aimer, adf and the like.
i also like sizing and moving gauges around,
but, historical accuracy is not my strong suit.

as i've said, i have the basic glazing layout for the do17z,
but, have not added details and paint.
at the moment, that's as far as i've gotten.

[smilo]

i suppose i could show a rudimentary view
of what's been accomplished so far
with the bomb aimer glazing bmp layout.

i just noticed, the three center,
vertical pieces are not done.

[Ivan]

Hello Smilo,

Keep in mind that the framing on the lower section of the nose is NOT symmetrical.
I have been trying to point this out for quite some time.
Please review the attached images.


- Ivan.

[Ivan]

Here is a less detailed photograph from head-on.
(These shot are hard to find!)

Please note that the nose gun mount appears to differ between all three aircraft.
So much for consistency.

- Ivan.

[smilo]

yes, sir, i can clearly see
the lower section of the nose is NOT symmetrical.
i always have. i also know
you have been trying to point this out for quite some time.

please believe me, i honor and respect you opinion.
after all these years, i am more than well aware
of your meticulous attention to detail.
i both admire it and find it aggravating.

unfortunately for me, at this point in time,
i am not as interested in a gnats ass accurate
Do17z bomb view bmp as you are.
i, honestly, would be happy with
the clear view i've used on other bombers.
i am only doing this one as a favor to Stephan.

my main interest here is to provide a panel,
with a roughly realistic view of the glazing,
for users to direct bombs accurately to a target.
i believe they will and should be concentrating
more on alignment to the target,
as oppose to checking to see,
whether the window glazing is symmetrical, or not.

if i was really that concerned with historical accuracy,
i doubt there would be gauges like, gps, adf,
auto pilot, my bomb aimer and so on and so forth.

as far as i'm concerned,
i've waited for nearly 20 years for this model for cfs.
granted, i have mine and now, i think it's high time
for the rest of the cfs community to enjoy their copy.
i need to get on the stick and finish the bomb panel,
so Stephan can release, asap.

as i tried to state at the top,
i mean no disrespect for your opinion.
i simply disagree and am merely stating mine.

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Ivan,
Thanks for the clear photos!

Yes, the assymetry is clearly visible on the pictures, and looking closely also on the three b/w photos I posted some weeks ago, it is also to be seen when you know what you´re looking for! I realize you´ve mentioned it several times, but I couldn´t see it until now. Sorry!

Possibly the reason for building the canopy that way was the cheek and chin window frame on the right, together with the gun mount...

Well, as Smilo is making such a good panel view, I don´t know to what extent it will be needed to adjust the model´s canopy frame and glass. Maybe it´s too much of a bother just for the sake of accuracy, if such acccuracy is not so warranted.

Smilo! What shall I do? I really don´t mind leaving it as it is OR trying make the adjustments, but above all, I don´t want to complicate your side of things. I am, as it were, quite non-plussed by this issue, and I´d also be quite happy to upload the machine asap, so that the rest of the community can enjoy it.

P.S. See the Skull and Crossbones on the staircase panel in the photo!

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp