Model aircraft "in-flight" on display stands.

seadude · October 04, 2017, 07:32:52 AM

Got into a bit of an argument last night with a fellow modeling friend.

The gist of the conversation was that my friend believed that if you put a model aircraft on a display stand, then the model should ALWAYS be represented as if it's "in-flight". Not represented with landing gear down and so forth. To him, it just looks weird. If you're going to put the landing gear down, then the model should be sitting on the table, runway surface, etc. on it's landing gear.

See my two models below as examples.

The reason I put my two models like so is because I want spectators to see as much detail as possible, especially under the aircraft. There are times when I like to open up the weapon bays, landing gear bays, etc. so people can get a better look at them. Granted, I could have used mirrors instead. But mirrors can be tricky because when a person takes a picture of the model, the camera flash might reflect off the mirror and ruin the picture. Plus, I like having the model a bit "higher up" on the display stand and/or positioning it at an angle for better viewability.
So what say others? Is it wrong to display my models like so on the stand with landing gear down? Should I switch to mirrors instead? What have other people done for models in the past or currently?

Joe C-P · October 04, 2017, 08:13:29 AM

Remind your friend that planes do have their gear down for some time just after takeoff and just before landing.
Then do whatever you durn well please - it is your model, after all!

sandiego89 · October 04, 2017, 08:33:29 AM

I would not state it as a right or wrong question. You can display it any way you want. I would agree that most display or desk top models are shown in "in flight" mode with wheels retracted- so perhaps there is some convention in that, but like with most modeling issues, there should be no absolutes.

I prefer stands over mirrors.

I prefer most of my models to be gear down, canopy closed and no pilot figures. Just a preference.

PR19_Kit · October 04, 2017, 08:40:47 AM

A few years ago at Telford one guy showed a 1/48 F-5 in the Turkish Stars scheme mounted on a stand where the support consisted of the smoke trail of the aircraft. It had its landing gear down and it was INVERTED!

A superb idea and it worked. Not only that, it was wholly realistic as I'd seen the real aircraft do exactly that earlier in the year at the RIAT air show!

Rheged · October 04, 2017, 09:50:26 AM

You are a citizen of Whiffworld. This means that however YOU choose to display your model is correct.

I will admit that I prefer models with everything dangling down and on show , but that's my right way and it doesn't have to be yours. If you can invent a display method that looks good AND confuses JMNs, you earn an extra cheer from us all.

Old Wombat · October 04, 2017, 10:05:20 AM

The only jarring feature for me is the open cockpit of the Warwolf, other than that they're fine.

How often do you see aircraft taking off or landing with their wheels up?

ChernayaAkula · October 04, 2017, 10:24:04 AM

There!
You can display it any way you want to. I'd echo sandiego89 in that's it's not really a question of right or wrong. You display them on stand to adjust the angle, allowing people to see a bit of the underside. Fine.

There's your reason and it's as right or wrong as anybody else's.
Also, how is the stand a problem when the aircraft's being displayed on a huge version of the squadron's patch? Surely that wouldn't be accurate either, right?

I like mine in-flight, wheels up. I like a stand going through the fuselage better than an acrylic rod going through the nozzle. But that's just me.

As for in-flight and wheels down, well, to be perfectly accurate, you'd have to extend the landing gear oleos to show their unloaded state. On some aircraft that's pretty involved cutting and splicing. Can look really good, though. Looks really cool on Hornets, especially with the flaps and hook down.
What's also a neat idea is to show the landing gear while it's being tucked in shortly after take-off. Looks rather weird on some aircraft.

But, yeah, long story short: no rights or wrongs, just different preferences.

NARSES2 · October 05, 2017, 06:02:54 AM

To my mind there's no right or wrong. You display it as you want to, it's your model.

Quote from: Old Wombat on October 04, 2017, 10:05:20 AM

How often do you see aircraft taking off or landing with their wheels up?

Well I suppose they land with them up more often than taking off with them up, even if inadvertently

Although there was a British proposal in the late 40's to have a "rubber" aircraft carrier deck whereby aircraft could land on their bellies and thus dispense with the weight of their undercarriage. There were even some trials conducted at Farnborough with Eric Brown involved. I assume they took off on a jetisonable "trolley" ? As for taking off with them up ? Something like a Walrus being catapulted I suppose ?

Old Wombat · October 05, 2017, 06:38:46 AM

Quote from: NARSES2 on October 05, 2017, 06:02:54 AM
To my mind there's no right or wrong. You display it as you want to, it's your model.

Quote from: Old Wombat on October 04, 2017, 10:05:20 AM

How often do you see aircraft taking off or landing with their wheels up?

Well I suppose they land with them up more often than taking off with them up, even if inadvertently Although there was a British proposal in the late 40's to have a "rubber" aircraft carrier deck whereby aircraft could land on their bellies and thus dispense with the weight of their undercarriage. There were even some trials conducted at Farnborough with Eric Brown involved. I assume they took off on a jetisonable "trolley" ? As for taking off with them up ? Something like a Walrus being catapulted I suppose ?

Not that often, in other words.

NARSES2 · October 05, 2017, 06:41:58 AM

Quote from: Old Wombat on October 05, 2017, 06:38:46 AM

Not that often, in other words.

Absolutely

PR19_Kit · October 05, 2017, 07:23:17 AM

Quote from: NARSES2 on October 05, 2017, 06:02:54 AM
To my mind there's no right or wrong. You display it as you want to, it's your model.

Quote from: Old Wombat on October 04, 2017, 10:05:20 AM

How often do you see aircraft taking off or landing with their wheels up?

Well I suppose they land with them up more often than taking off with them up, even if inadvertently Although there was a British proposal in the late 40's to have a "rubber" aircraft carrier deck whereby aircraft could land on their bellies and thus dispense with the weight of their undercarriage. There were even some trials conducted at Farnborough with Eric Brown involved. I assume they took off on a jetisonable "trolley" ? As for taking off with them up ? Something like a Walrus being catapulted I suppose ?

Eric did it on a carrier too, on HMS Warrior with a Sea Vampire. There's even a Youtube vid of him doing it.

It doesn't say how he the aircraft off again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7Lu6LEQ0zo

strobez · October 08, 2017, 05:22:24 PM

Quote from: Rheged on October 04, 2017, 09:50:26 AM
You are a citizen of Whiffworld. This means that however YOU choose to display your model is correct.

I will admit that I prefer models with everything dangling down and on show , but that's my right way and it doesn't have to be yours. If you can invent a display method that looks good AND confuses JMNs, you earn an extra cheer from us all.

That's right... this is all just preference. For me, I like the idea that my models are on display in a tiny museum (I must have latent dollhouse tendencies). So I usually prefer them sitting on wheels, or on a display stand that looks like a museum display (I usually add tiny little plaques too). That's why I have (so far) never used pilot figures.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would really argue that there's a "right or wrong" way to display... but then people's capacity to confuse fact and opinion never ceases to amaze me.

BtW... what does "JMNs" stand for? I suspect it's a term I will enjoy using...

Weaver · October 08, 2017, 10:02:38 PM

Quote from: strobez on October 08, 2017, 05:22:24 PM
BtW... what does "JMNs" stand for? I suspect it's a term I will enjoy using...

JMN = Joyless Modelling Numpty, i.e. the sort of person who comes up to the What-If stand at model shows and complains that the models arn't accurate to real life and we're therefore doing it all wrong...

Thankfully getting rarer with every passing year it seems...

strobez · October 09, 2017, 12:40:46 AM

Ahh... I suspected it was something along those lines. I was pretty much convinced that was the sum total of the scale modelling community until I ran across this site...

zenrat · October 09, 2017, 01:48:41 AM

I found this definition here on Urban Dictionary. Interesting attribution.

JMN is a term coined by speculative modeling extraordinaire "The Wooksta!" It is an acronym for Joyless Modeling Nazi.

A JMN is (almost always)a grown adult who dares take plastic models seriously; having forgotten what was fun about it to begin with. They have all the resources and knowledge in the world to become respectable hobbyists, but have the creativity of a free-range garden slug.

JMN behavior can be broadly described as anal retentive, and can stem from insecurity resulting from having a small p***s.