Chronic's Research and Aeronautics Project (C.R.A.P.)

[NARSES2]

Other stuff was gel and non gel CA... I'm not out of it, but one can't have too much. At a dollar a piece why not.

To be honest I find the £1 Store super glue packs - 4 for a £1 - as good as the more expensive propriety brands when it comes to thin super glues. For medium, thick and  gel I still use the on-line place I found however.

[TheChronicOne]

Other stuff was gel and non gel CA... I'm not out of it, but one can't have too much. At a dollar a piece why not.

To be honest I find the £1 Store super glue packs - 4 for a £1 - as good as the more expensive propriety brands when it comes to thin super glues. For medium, thick and  gel I still use the on-line place I found however.

I saw a pack of them like that at the grocery store yestersday and almost bought them but didn't know what the price was. Had either 4 or 6 tubes in 'em. Probably were just a dollar but I don't buy things that don't have a price on it. If you have to force me to ask you what the price is I'd rather just leave it on the shelf. Reminds me of high pressure sales where they don't list a price so you have to call or talk to a sales person and next thing you know you're in an awkward, upsetting situation with some clown trying to get you to pay more than you should for something.  It's the principal of the matter.      That said, these were up at the register, I bet the aisle that contains that type of stuff probably has more of it and has a price listed. 

[Rick Lowe]

Other stuff was gel and non gel CA... I'm not out of it, but one can't have too much. At a dollar a piece why not.

To be honest I find the £1 Store super glue packs - 4 for a £1 - as good as the more expensive propriety brands when it comes to thin super glues. For medium, thick and  gel I still use the on-line place I found however.

I saw a pack of them like that at the grocery store yestersday and almost bought them but didn't know what the price was. Had either 4 or 6 tubes in 'em. Probably were just a dollar but I don't buy things that don't have a price on it. If you have to force me to ask you what the price is I'd rather just leave it on the shelf. Reminds me of high pressure sales where they don't list a price so you have to call or talk to a sales person and next thing you know you're in an awkward, upsetting situation with some clown trying to get you to pay more than you should for something.  It's the principal of the matter.      That said, these were up at the register, I bet the aisle that contains that type of stuff probably has more of it and has a price listed.

Yeah, we have the same sort of thing here. You often find one or more tubes are set solid, but at that price even the few that are still ok are cheap enough.

[TheChronicOne]

I've recently began dipping my toes into the pond that is buying things directly from China. I bought a flush side cutter to use as a sprue cutter for a mere $1.50 shipping and all and if it makes it here I'm going to start making other small purchases until I get comfortable with it. I imagine I could buy like 500 tubes for $3 or some crap of CA(probably not, but you get the point, things are drastically cheaper straight from China!) and I've been looking at other stuff. Of course the quality isn't going to be top notch but depending on what it is and what it's used for I can pick up a great many modeling supplies and tools for DIRT cheap if I don't mind the wait and if it doesn't get outright lost.

I've ordered things from the "far east" before and never had any problems aside from two TINY packages that never made it.   1 penny deals.. little tiny clips or some such. I was just having fun finding stuff for one cent, which you certainly can!! It's amazing this day and age you can buy something for one penny and have it shipped across the planet for free. But still...  it was only 5-6 things (One being a big tube of widow tint from... Korea I think it was???) Still weary though but I probably have nothing to worry about.

BUT ANYWAY.. Speaking of shipping and the like, I just a got a brand new Playstation 4 in the mail. I half assedly opened it up and made sure there was no obvious damage or anything then just set it back down. WHY?! What in the blazes? Because I want to work on models instead.  LOL   

I'm about to make a nice hot cup of coffee and get back to working on the Tucano. I need to so some filing and sanding on the fuselage then I can take them outside and prime (tan, matte finish 2x "camo" by Rustoleum). If I let them dry a few hours I can probably start painting my acrylics on.

I primed the tailplanes in black and that was a mistake. I'm trying new red paint and MY GOD it may as well be water.  I might not have it thinned enough (leaves "hills and valleys" of lighter and darker spots; it sets down flat enough but the light and dark variations are unacceptable).  I put 5 friggin coats on, switching the strokes at 90 degrees and there's STILL black showing through (although not much). So, two things... I bought another slightly different shade of red to try, and I'm going to prime in TAN and not black.  Should be better for the white, too, right? I'm not going to use my white rattle can this time, I want to brush the entire thing so the white paint will need to work well and I think it will be better atop TAN than BLACK.

Also, I'd like to get some more work done on the Tu-4 Bull bomber. I got the guns all built a couple days ago and have been studying the instructions. Other than that, nothing, as I am at an impasse. I need to decide what colors to paint the bomb bay. I'm thinking just a super light grey or even white just so it'll be brighter in the enclosed space, and of course the bombs will be green.  I think I'll want to paint the gear doors green as well, same color as the floor in the interior. I need to visit some photos and do a touch of research before I get all this underway but I'd like to get it rolling today. If I can just settle on what colors to use, I won't even be disappointed if no actual work gets done. I just need to get over this deadlock.

Friendly reminder:

[TheChronicOne]

Wow, been a number of days since I stopped by.  So busy lately.... I won't bore you with the details.

ANYWAY, I got a tiny amount of actual work today in that I painted two bombs that I missed painting for the Tu-4 for the GB. I also did a small amount of sanding on the RAF Tucano where I applied some putty. I also organized my space a little bit and... that's about it.

BUT, I got my new kit in the mail today!!  OOooh yeah, I love this weird little thing.



Pics of the plastic will be inbound.

I know it was mentioned in the current "stash has grown" thread that this has been talked about here before but I'm not sure how much has been actually shown or done with the kit itself so I'm hoping people may be interested in having a look.  I suppose I could have a go at the search feature here and see what has already been said, and I plan on it, it's just that, hell, since I bought the damn thing I may as well give it a whole new spin with my own take and perhaps we can get a whole new conversation going?  What fun!

[zenrat]

Here's one on Britmodeller.
http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234969250-172-moskalyev-cam-23-by-mikr-mir/

[Captain Canada]

What a crazy idea !

The cheap glue sounds good. Pay a fortune for CA glue and the stuff dries up after you open it.....

[TheChronicOne]

Never had a problem with my CA drying up, well, that is, after I developed a stringent practice using it! I have damn near OCD tendencies when it comes to it... I neaver leave the cap off for more than seconds. I mean.... I don't even apply the glue or move the parts together first.. the split second after I get done either grabbing some w/ a toothpick or letting it drop out (gel versus thin) the cap goes on.  The problem Ive had is the applicator bit getting clogged with dried up glue. Usually by the end of a run with the gel I can no longer use it and have to unscrew it along with the cap to get down to the opening in the actual metal then I get it out with a toothpick. SO FAR.... knock on wood, since I've addopted this approach of "crap or get off the pot" I've not had any go teets up. (now watch that I said this every tube on the property will turn to concrete) 

Back to the "tankette" ,  I found some info!  A friend found it and gave it to me on Facebook, which in turn came from a message board (link at the end, I haven't gotten that far yet, but there appears to be a discussion that took place after the OP so that may be worth a look):



It turns out that during the Great Patriotic War did other things besides design airborne assault gliders. The Novosibirks branch of TsAGI has preserved a project of an original flying tankette/CAS plane designated LT with an M11 motor (initially designated SAM-23, but later this name passed on to a glider). Work on the vehicle on factory #499 was overseen by designer Nekrasov. By the end of May 1942 the design was finished and passed on to TzAGI for conclusions on September 14th. It's not clear what caused the three-month delay, but the consultative note on the project uses the words "testing of the vehicle's movement on the ground...", suggesting that a prototype has been built duiring this time.

The plane itself consisted of a single-sea, high-wing-mount aircraft, using a twin-rudder system as seen in the SAM13. The fuselage was a truss-design covered with duraliminium. The wing has an R-II-S profile of a single-spar system, using sheetwood and cloth covering, with wingslats and slit-type flaps. The landing wheels were fixed, using 470x210mm balloon-type wheels. The motor was rear-mounted, using a pusher-prop.


The pilot's cabin was protected by all sides with 3mm armor plating (4-5mm out front) and had an armored set, like the IL-2. The front of the cockpit shell was equipped with armor-glass. The pilot got into the cabin through the an automobile-type door on the left.

For an aircraft weightng just over a ton, the armament was very powerful: Two ShVAK guns with 200 shells each (500 when overloaded), two ShKAS guns with 1500 (2000) rounds each, four (six) RS-82 rockets or 400 kilograms bombs (removing the RS and overlodaing the plane). Calculation tated that usig a more powerful engine (e.g. an M34) would allow improving the armor and armament, and increasing the combat load to up to 1500 kg.

The most amazing thing about this aircraft was the method of its use. It was to fire on the enemy from a strafing run at an altitude of about 4-5 meters! This was to be accomplished using a trailing vomer that would touch the earth and trace bumps and holes in the ground. The momentums and angular speeds created by the vomer hitting the ground was expected to be within the pilot's limits of physical capability, and could be parried by him in a timely manner. It was believed that at this altitude, and a speed of running/flight of 150-180 kph, the plane would be difficult to hit. The flying tankette could bounce or fly over obstacles, and - having a flight ceiling of 1210 meters - also attack ground targets like an ordinary plane. The small size of the aircraft, the designers argued, would allow SAM-23 to start from ordinary roads, or taxi along them as needed, approaching the locations of sudden attack with stealth.




Moskalev considered the main targets of his CAS aircraft to be enemy personnel, vehicles and fortifications on the opponent's front line. The tankette's tail/vomer was to be strengthened with a steel pipe and equipped with a shock-absorber, and it was, according to the designer, to have a dual-function of destroying light fortifications and wire obstacles.

The project was denied TsAGI approval due to light armor and insufficient thrust. The main drawbacks noted included the necessity for the pilot to constantly parry the diving momentum created as the vomer moved along obstacles, and the threat of nosediving the aircraft as the vomer demolished fortifications and wire obstacles.

Length: 7.2 meters
Height (parked): 2 meters
Height (vomer deployed): 5.6 meters
Wingspan 5.57 meters
Wing area 7.75 sq. m.
Wing instalaltion angel 4°30′
Wing V-angle 8 degrees
Engine installation angle +2 degrees
Horizontal tail installation angle -6 degrees

Parking angle 14 degrees
Vertical tail area 0.75 sq. meters
Design eight: 534 kilograms
Payload weight (overloaded) 494 (594) kilograms
Takeoff weight (overloaded) 1028 (1128) kilograms
Average Aerodynamic Chord: 1.35 square meters
Average Aerodynamic Chord of the Vertical tail: 0.555 square meters
Max speed: 188 kph
Flight ceiling: 1210 meters
Ascent to ceiling: 36 minutes
Flight time: 2 hours


http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=11851&view=getnewpost

Like I told her... I wouldn't want to be the guy that had to fly this nutty contraption.   

[TheChronicOne]

Here's one on Britmodeller.
http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234969250-172-moskalyev-cam-23-by-mikr-mir/

Oh I love it!!! This is going to be fun... I usually save up reading material to look at while I have lunch and today is going to be glorious. Not only that, but I'm having lasagna so it's going to be a good lunch all around. Thanks, dude!!

In addition to that, someone last night also provided me with this... a Scott Aiken build and write up of similar nature I do believe...  once again, I haven't really gotten to the meat of the content but will dive in when I have lunch.

http://modelingmadness.com/scott/allies/ussr/sam23.htm

[NARSES2]

That's fascinating, especially this bit. I assume they thought the opposition would be so astonished they wouldn't be able to fire back ?

The most amazing thing about this aircraft was the method of its use. It was to fire on the enemy from a strafing run at an altitude of about 4-5 meters! This was to be accomplished using a trailing vomer that would touch the earth and trace bumps and holes in the ground. The momentums and angular speeds created by the vomer hitting the ground was expected to be within the pilot's limits of physical capability, and could be parried by him in a timely manner. It was believed that at this altitude, and a speed of running/flight of 150-180 kph, the plane would be difficult to hit. The flying tankette could bounce or fly over obstacles, and - having a flight ceiling of 1210 meters - also attack ground targets like an ordinary plane. The small size of the aircraft, the designers argued, would allow SAM-23 to start from ordinary roads, or taxi along them as needed, approaching the locations of sudden attack with stealth.

[zenrat]

Why shoot back when you could just make a brew, light a fag, sit back and watch it fly into a crater?

The name Bloody Stupid Johnson springs to mind...

[Old Wombat]

The name Bloody Stupid Johnson springs to mind...

Oh, yeah!

[Rick Lowe]

The name Bloody Stupid Johnson springs to mind...

Oh, yeah!

+1 agree! 

[TheChronicOne]

[zenrat]

Having said that, I can see the height controlling boom having an application for agricultural work where it could be ensured the ground was free of obstacles.
Seed spreading on a large collective farm out on the Great Steppe for example.