Lockheed Electra Model 10 - Page 7
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 177

Thread: Lockheed Electra Model 10

  1. #151
    Hello Smilo,
    It happens to me all too often too - getting something done apparently very well, and then it doesnīt fit - and Captain Obvious with his Club bangs you on the head... because you forgot the... whatever it is at that given moment...
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  2. #152
    Hello Folks!
    After a while busy with other things, Iīve got the Electra 10A back on
    the converyor belt, this time with AF99, then to be finished off with
    SCASM, and
    Udo wants to do metallic textures for this one too!

    Iīm currently getting the dimensions and shapes. Hereīs some

    eye candy, just to show itīs going again! ...Should be fun!

    No engines yet!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Electra.jpg  
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  3. #153

    More progress

    Hello all!
    Hereīs a few shots of the current progress.
    Experimenting with full structure engine nacelle bodies to try and keep things
    simple for the moment, I dicovered that slanting glue templates to correspond
    with the viewing angles, to separate inner-wing, nacelle body and outer wing,
    this slant keeps bleeds to the surprising minimum.

    Interesting... See the blueprint!
    Without slanting the glue templates youīd get nacelle-body bleeds through the wing sections.

    Anyway, as Ivan says... Itīs getting the look!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Electra3.jpg   Electra2.jpg   Etectra4jpg.jpg   Electra1.jpg  

  4. #154
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,756
    ...and a very nice look it has.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  5. #155
    Hello Smilo,
    Thanks!
    Iīm working on the transparent cabin now...
    Letīs see if I can get it.
    I was thinking about a military version to start off with,
    with the striped tailfins. Would that be OK?
    Cheers,
    Sleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  6. #156
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,756
    as always, whatever you want to do
    is fine with me, Stephan.
    ...as long as you do it well
    and you don't seem to have a problem with that.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  7. #157
    Hello Smilo,
    Thanks... Hopefully!
    More progress: Better shapes all-round now.
    There was a bad corner at the top of the windscreen-side
    that looked like a DC-3. On this model that place is much
    more rounded - difficult, though, but it came out OK.
    Hereīs some more eye candy!
    Now Iīm going to try and populate the flight deck.
    P.S. Let me know if you would like to have a WIP model!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Better_shapes3.jpg   Better_shapes4.jpg   Better_shapes2.jpg   Better_shapes1.jpg  

  8. #158
    SOH Staff
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    State of Confusion..... -8GMT
    Posts
    3,756
    i love eye candy...
    i just can't seem to get enough of the stuff.
    yes please, i would like a WIP,
    but, there's no rush.
    i'll be tied up for the next few days.
    sometimes the magic works.
    sometimes it doesn't.

  9. #159

    Electra Model 10A WIP-1

    Hello Smilo,
    Well, then youīll probably like the WIP!

    Hello Ivan,
    This is also for you, of course, as you have been coaching me along
    for a long time now!

    Iīve already started trying out and putting in some textures.
    They are on tail surfaces, wheels, engines and engine nacelles.

    All cabin bleeds have also been eliminated. I was getting interaction
    between windows, nose, lower cabin and fuselage. Parts count is still
    at a very discrete 102.6%.

    I had so far finished the .air file quite some time ago, so if you like,
    that can be tested - should you be so inclined! It has Ivanīs 2-bladed,
    2-pitch position propeller again, to which it seems Iīm getting addicted!

    The panel for the moment is the Do-17 panel I had made last year.
    So, all in good fun!
    Of course, any observations or comments will be welcome,
    even if it is only WIP.

    Cheers,

    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  10. #160
    Hello Aleatorylamp, Smilo,

    My apologies. I had not been following this thread for a while.
    Thanks for the credit for "coaching".
    Recently I have been getting some coaching myself on another project which is what I did not want to set aside.
    I have finally had some successful results which is why I am taking a short break to see what I might have been neglecting recently.
    Anna Honey is also back from her trip, so someone else can yell at my Son when he needs it. Besides, the quarter is over and grades are in. We don't have the results yet, but nothing we can do about what is already in.

    The Electra looks very interesting! It seems like your use of Structures may allow you to get this project done within AF99 limits, but at this point, you know enough about SCASM to address things even if you exceed the limits.
    It does seem to be getting "The Look".

    I haven't had a chance to flip the model around in the simulator to take a closer look, but I can tell you that for me, the area that bothers me the most on one of these aeroplanes is around the windscreen and nose sections.
    To get the shape to something satisfactory with the P-3 Orion took me about 50 tries.

    Glad you like the two pitch propeller.
    What amazed me when reading about this aeroplane was how really slow it was.
    It looked like it should be fast but wasn't.

    - Ivan.

  11. #161
    Hello Ivan, Hello Ivan,
    Ivan, I hope your sonīs grades will reflect the effort that has gone into preparing him for his tests. Good Luck!

    Right now Iīm trying my luck at the metallic textures, adapting, changing and fitting some existing ones. Most of the plane is textured now - at least provisionally.
    I also got the crew in, with a rather complicated glue sequence that also involved the nose, the roof and the windows, apart from the cabin body, back and floor. But it worked!

    What was really difficult was the windscreen and the cabin roof shape, and also the nacelle shapes with relation to the wing.

    The fuselage in this case has no structures - itīs all components except for the nose. The engine nacelle structures are now 12-sided. Fins and wheels are also structures, and now parts count is still at a modest 129%. Perhaps adding parts with SCASM wonīt be necessary this time.

    With the available power, I suppose itīs difficult to get this kind of plane any faster.
    This Electra 10A does 202 mph top speed, with 2 x 450 Hp engines and a 55 ft wingspan.
    The similar Beechcraft 18 with the same engines and 7 ft less wingspan, did 225 mph.
    Amelia Earhartīs Electra Model 10E had 2 x 600 Hp, so it must have been a bit faster.
    Remember the Curtiss Fledgling? That one only did 197 mph, but had less power with its 2 x 300 hp engines, but compensated for it with its shorter 31.8 ft wingspan.

    Well... I still have to add the tail-wheel strut, and generally clean up the build, get rid of cracks and so on, so itīll be a while yet until itīs ready - but of course, thereīs no hurry!
    Anyhow, hereīs a bit more eye candy, Smilo! The tucked-in wheels, visible when retracted, are also on now.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Textured5.jpg   Textured3.jpg   Textured2.jpg   textured4.jpg   Textured1.jpg  

  12. #162
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    Unfortunately, I believe his grades will reflect the effort he put in. He spent more time gaming and watching you-tube videos than actually studying. Tonight is one of the few night he is actually studying. He has a subject he is interested in. Most of his classes bore him but not because he knows the material.

    When combining a Nose Cone Structure with a Component Cockpit / Cabin, you need to be really careful or the result starts looking too much like a C-130 Hercules.

    This may surprise you, but if I remember the articles I was reading, Amelia Earhart' Electra was about the same speed as the Fledgling. The extra weight probably reduced performance from a standard Electra.

    On my own project, just as I having a little success, I encountered a bug that I can't seem to fix.

    - Ivan.

  13. #163
    Hello Ivan,
    I see what you mean about nose-cone structures!
    I think Iīll have to put in a component there too, because the
    12-sided cross-section causes a narrowing-deformation where
    the cabin component at the moment adapts its vertical sides to
    the rounder nose.

    Update: Corrected! I took away a slice of the nose-cone structure,
    adding it to the cabin component but giving a more gradual transition
    for the cabin sides to the rounder nose. See the sacreenshots!
    Funny how just a casual comment leads to an improvement!


    Regarding the Electraīs rather slow speed:
    With all the fuel tanks Amelia had, and for fuel economy, she never
    flew over 175 mph. As there are no specs referring to the maximum
    speed of the Electra with a 600 Hp engine and a CV propeller at
    normal weight, I decided to experiment a bit:

    Adding 3 cylinders gave me 600 Hp, and with the 8.25 ft 2-position
    20-30 pitch propeller, the engine went at 2500 RPM at S.L., (obviously),
    with a speed of 231 mph. Then I put in a 8.5 ft FW190a-type CV propeller,
    and I got 592 Hp at 2200 RPM, which is most probably more correct for
    this engine, and a speed of 232 mph.

    The simulator seems to give quite a good approximation here.
    Anyway... still on the slow side, I suppose! But, as it was not a fighter but
    really a passenger
    airliner, this must have been intentional because of the
    lower fuel costs.
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails oldnose.jpg   newnose.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; April 19th, 2018 at 03:33.

  14. #164
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    The C-130 nose wasn't really a casual comment. It was really the second time I was trying to hint at what I was seeing without offending. Normally I would be a lot more direct but I haven't followed this thread for the last few months and didn't go bacj to read how it got here. I had thought it was a AD2000 project and I am not qualified to discuss those at all.

    A couple points to make about performance:
    You need to know what the actual limits were for the engine.
    There are Take-Off ratings of very minimal duration (Typically one minute).
    Military Power which might be a 5 minute or 10 minute limit (or whatever the equivalent term was for Civilian engines)
    Climb Power typically around 30 minutes
    Maximum Continuous - As long as there is fuel and operating temperatures are not exceeded
    Economical Cruise....

    You need to determine why these limits exist: Whether the limits are written in the manual so that the engine will have a sufficiently long time between overhauls or whether the engine really could be damaged by the high power operation.

    I am sure you get the picture.
    That 600 HP rating probably wasn't available for long enough for a maximum speed run or could not be maintained high enough to where the aeroplane would go its fastest in thinner air.

    I had the same kind of issue to deal with when working on the AIR file for the Ki 61 Hien.
    The engine could make 1175 PS or around 1160 HP at 2500 RPM, but that was only for Take Off
    Manifold Pressure was +330 mm but it was in theory only good for one minute.
    Essentially this was pretty much a short duration WEP rating which is how I handled it in the AIR file.

    Its "real" military power was more like 1080 HP @ 2400 RPM with +240 mm Manifold Pressure and all performance testing that I recorded was at the lower RPM and manifold pressure.

    These numbers are from memory, but they should be pretty close and hopefully provide a good illustration.

    - Ivan.

  15. #165
    Hello, Ivan,
    Iīm afraid I found AD2000 too complicated to be able to continue with it, and
    Iīve switched the build over to AF99. Despite its shortcomings, specially when
    topped off with a bit of SCASM, I find AF99 more pleasing to work with.

    Anyway, you can be more direct without me getting offended - no problem!
    The whole point of my writing and illustrating my building progress on the
    thread is not only to ask for advice in case I get stuck, but also to leave the
    door open for comments related to possible improvement I havenīt noticed.

    I agree with your comments on the maximum power ratings for the two P&W
    radials in question. Obviously, for the standard Model 10A with 2 x 450 Hp, it
    would mean that 450 Hp is the limited-time take-off power, and that its
    specified 202 mph max. speed is also only allowed only for a limited time.

    Cruising is stated between 150 and 190 mph, so most probably 190 mph is
    for maximum continuous power, and 150 mph for standard cruise.

    Similarly, the 600 Hp engine on the 10E would provide 600 Hp for a certain
    limited time, and would have a certain maximum speed. The only specification
    Iīve found is that economical cruising was 175 mph - 25 mph higher than for
    the 2 x 450 Hp engines.

    Musing on the performance of Ameliaīs Electra 10E under maximum throttle with
    its 2 x 600 Hp engine, I wanted to see what 300 extra hp would do on the sim. I
    got 232 mph, i.e. an extra 30 mph, which would perhaps tie in with the 25 mph
    cruise increase mentioned above. I wonder...

    It suppose itīs plausible, but I just donīt know enough to be able to judge this.

    Anyway, Iīm not worried, as Iīm building the standard 10A, for which Iīm getting
    the specified 202 mph (limited time) top speed, with the 1000 fpm specified RoC.

    Anyway, you know that your comments are always interesting and welcome!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  16. #166

    Further Progress

    Hello Gentlemen!
    Hereīs a second WIP model for you to try out at the weekend, if you wish!
    Most parts have now been completed, some shapes have been further improved.
    We now have a crew too!

    The engine nacelles are back to 10-sided cross-sections as the upper curvature
    was a little higher than on the 12-sided cross section. I even managed to get
    in the exhaust pipe on the outside of the nacelle-body.

    The model is now completely textured, at least with provisional ones,
    although the registration number is fictitious. Itīs slowly looking better, I think!

    Iīve
    adapted a panel too, and the model also has the propeller-blurs, but the
    military stripes arenīt on the tail fins yet.

    Hereīs some eye-candy.
    If anyone feels like having the AFX, do let me know and Iīll post them.

    I hope you like it! Feel free to point out any glitches and/or suggestions.

    Ooops! - I missed the flaps...
    ...and Iīm doing the military Army Air Corps colour scheme.


    Cheers,

    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Image1.jpg   Further2.jpg   Further.jpg   Further3.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; April 20th, 2018 at 14:31.

  17. #167

    Flap complications

    Hello Folks,
    I got the flaps in now, although it isnīt perfect.

    Without them, the well-working mid-wing sequence was:
    >>inner wing, glue, nacelle, glue, exhaust pipe, outer wing

    There are inner and outer flap-halves, but, only the inner half
    can go into the mid-wing sequence:

    >>inner-flap, glue, inner wing, glue, nacelle, glue, exhaust pipe, outer wing.

    The lower engine nacelle and/or the exhaust always bleed through the outer half-flap
    if it is placed in this sequence, in any position. Even duplicated at the beginning, glued
    to the inner flap-half and at the end of the sequence, glued to the wing, wonīt work.

    Update:
    No success yet, by any means!
    There are also interferences with the retracted
    wheel-halves when seen from the front. Innumerable tries included a different
    approach with
    the outer flap-half in tail left/right, but it interfered with the fin
    halves glued to the tailplane...
    So, itīs back to square one!

    Update 2:
    The complete flap in Wing-low turned out to be unnecessary, and deleting it did
    away
    with the flap/retracted wheel bleed. Now the only bleed left is a momentary
    one with a portion of the
    rear-lower nacelle through the deployed flap, seen from
    the aft-side.
    Itīs not terrible, so it may be acceptable if it were impossible to eliminate.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; April 21st, 2018 at 04:40.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  18. #168
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    I hope you realise that most of us here probably do not have any idea what the arrangement of Flaps on the Model 10 Electra is supposed to look like. That factor is very easy to forget when one spends a lot of time working on a model, but please remember that others may never have seen this aeroplane before.
    It might be a good idea to post a photograph of the underside of the real Electra with the Flaps deployed.

    - Ivan.

  19. #169

    Momentary bleed

    Hello Ivan,
    Oh dear, Iīm so sorry! Yes, youīre absolutely right!

    They are split flaps, and thereīs only 1 pic I found, but
    and itīs from an FSX model,
    although the exhaust on the
    model is a bit small. (The first picture on the left).


    The only other reference I have is a 3-view drawing,
    one which also shows the underside - a rare thing too!

    Then here are two screenshots of my model. From a certain
    point on the rear side, the nacelle bleeds through the flap
    (the second picture on the left). From further back, it
    doesnīt (bottom picture).

    Cheers,

    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails flaps.jpg   No-K here.jpg   bottom view.jpg   OK here.jpg  

  20. #170
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    Now comes the "20 Questions" or perhaps it is really 20 Guesses....

    Here is what I am assuming:
    1. The Nacelle in Orange is a Component.
    2. The Inner Wing in Light Blue is a Component
    3. The Outer Wing in Light Blue is yet another Component
    (I wish you had coloured either the Inner or Outer Wing a different colour to confirm my assumption.
    4. The Cowl is a Structure
    5. The Spinner is a Structure
    6. The Propeller Blades and Propeller Blur are each single Parts.
    7. The Flap is a single Part and represents the DEPLOYED Flaps
    8. The Landing Gear and possibly the Gear Doors are in a separate Group.

    I don't know what you have for extra Parts, but I believe I can edit the sequence to make everything EXCEPT possibly the Landing Gear completely bleed free. It would cost about 8 to 10 additional Parts per side depending on how your Glue is arranged now.
    (Some Parts would need to be doubled up and a few additional Glue Parts would need to be added.)

    - Ivan.

  21. #171

    Colours

    Hello Ivan,
    First of all, thank you very much for your cooperation and help!
    What Iīve got at the moment, with corrected colours, is:

    1. The Nacelle in Orange is a Structure, not Component.
    2. The Inner Wing now in Green, not Light Blue, is a Component.
    3. The Outer Wing in Light Blue is yet another Component.
    4. The Cowl is a Structure in yellow.
    5. The Spinner is a Structure in yellow.
    6. The Propeller Blades and Propeller Blur are each single Parts, grey and transparent light grey.
    7. The Flap is not a single Part but two parts, inner in brown and outer in dark brown and represent the RETRACTED Flaps (which I always tag Speed Below 195 for Aircraft Animator) - but I can make them into one, and as DEPLOYED if you like.
    8. The Landing Gear (no gear Gear Doors) are in a separate Group - Gear Left/Right.
    9. The yellow triangle on the outer wing is an panel insignia panel that covers a bleed of the outer flap through the top of the rear of the wing. Obviously it can be removed if unnecessary!

    So, it is almost the same as your assumtions, except for the nacelles being structures and the flaps being done in two parts each, and being etracted. Shall I proceed to change the flaps?

    Here are new untextured pictures! In the botrtom picture, from this viewing position, there are no bleeds.
    If you would prefer to have the AFX, I can gladly post them - no problem!
    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails colours1.jpg   colours2.jpg   colours3.jpg  
    Last edited by aleatorylamp; Yesterday at 06:24.
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  22. #172
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    Thanks for the clarifications.

    I was thinking over how this would fit together and have a slightly revised comment.
    I think there will be a slight bleed between the extended Flap and the Retracted Main Wheel, but I can't be sure without checking out the angles in AF 99. I downloaded your model but haven't loaded it on the Game Machine to flip it around the simulator yet. I probably should do that, but there is actually quite a lot that can be gathered from your screenshots.
    (I am at a good breaking point in my project because I got a bit stuck. I know what I want to do but don't know how to do it. Lack of knowledge has that effect sometimes!)

    Here are a couple more questions:
    There actually are no "Gear Doors" as such except for whatever fairings might be attached to the Main Gear Strut.
    Are you planning on adding additional parts around the Nacelle?
    Wheel Wells or additional bracing or anything? If so, add them now, because what I am thinking of will most likely move some pieces around to different Groups and adding them later might be harder.

    Your construction of the Flaps as "Retracted" actually makes things simpler in some ways and slightly more complicated in others.
    I can't really tell without doing a fair amount of experimenting.

    If you want to send me some files to experiment with, the AFX, and Aircraft Animator Files would be good. I suspect I would need to do quite a few changes to the animation because the Parts would change enough behind the scenes even though nothing really would change in appearance. Texture files might also help confirm that nothing has changed in the final appearance.

    When you see what I have in mind, you might be pleasantly surprised. If not, you can always just stay with the original version.
    ....Let's hope that my Development Computer chooses to behave well. I have a minor update to another model that I also want to do.

    - Ivan.

  23. #173
    Hello Ivan,
    Thanks for your reply and your interesting offer for improvement!

    Re. wheel wells: I was doing them with the lower nacelle textures,
    but itīs a bit messy. Their shape below at the back is too sharp a "V"
    to allow clean lines. Even making corrections on the under-wing
    texture,
    it looks blurry.


    The cleaner solution is to flatten the rear nacelle-bottom, making it as
    wide as the wheel, and then add black insignia rectangles.

    As soon as Iīve done it, Iīll send the AFX and the model. Iīm very curious
    to see the improvements you can provide!


    Thanks again! Cheers,

    Aleatorylamp
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

  24. #174
    Hello Aleatorylamp,

    My suggestion there is DO NOT flatten the back of Nacelle on the underside just to apply an Insignia Part.
    If you apply the Insignia Part "below flush" with the surface of the Nacelle, it will look just fine because even on detailed examination, it will be difficult to tell that it isn't even with the bottom of the Nacelle.

    If you flatten out the Nacelle, you will cause more texturing problems when texturing the Nacelle.
    You will be unable to properly texture it Right-Left without having a single pixel extend across the entire Structure.

    (Just my recommendation.)

    - Ivan.

  25. #175

    WIP-3 plus AFX

    Hello Ivan,
    OK, thanks for the suggestion.
    I only widened the rearmost nacelle part a bit so that the insignia wheel-well parts wouldnīt portrude on the sides - but youīre right, there was no need to flatten it.

    Well, It looks surprisingly clean now. I had discarded my "texturing manouever" for the wheel wells because it needed a "top/bottom" texture type, and caused lots of blurry contours.
    What is still a bit iffy is the flaps issue, which I hope your modifications can cure!

    You will see an insignia part called "w-panel-x" a top-rear panel which extends throughout the whole wing, to cover an upwards flap bleed, but it only works when viewed from the rear. From up-sideways, the flaps still shine through the wings!

    Here is the current model, with the corresponding .AFX, .PCX and .R8 files.
    Thank you very much for offering to look into the model!

    Hello Smilo:
    Iīd have a question for you about the military Air Army Corps markings that several of the Electra 10Aīs had when they were used by the military.

    Apart from the vertical blue stripe and the horizontal red-and-white ones on the fins with the numbers, are the old-fashioned stars with the red circle in the middle on both wings, or only on the left above and the right below?

    Then, I saw that they didnīt have any stars on the sides. The few photos Iīve seen are not all too consistent either. What would you suggest? At the moment I have the stars on both wings, above and below.

    Cheers,
    Aleatorylamp
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails wip-3-2.jpg   WIP3.jpg  
    Attached Files Attached Files
    "Why make it simple if you can also make it complicated?"

Members who have read this thread: 77

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •