Merged: Old Shapeways-related announcements

[uncletony]

cheers guys

I think      a round of applause is needed for your pioneering efforts in expanding our modelling horizons!!! I dont know you personally sir,but I salute you.I am contemplating buying your wonderful creation and wondering if I can make it fly.If the all up weight is below 16 grams it might   fly?

Maybe? Weight-wise it will be very close. A painted (6 coats of Krylon), skinned & decalled wing panel comes in at 3g on my (not extremely precise) kitchen scale -- the bare structure for one wing panel is 1g. All the bare parts piled on are about 15g. There are some you could leave off...

The covered wing panel is actually pretty strong -- obviously I haven't tested in to destruction but it certainly seems rigid and strong enough for flight.

But certainly no guarantees from me that this would work or is even a good idea!

[Thumbs up]

Thanks Bo for the reply.It may well get of the ground but its flight characteristics may well be fast and eratic,so maybe not such a good idea.Thank's anyway.

[Borsos]

Hello,
incredible work! I followed these developments for a while and I'm blown away. Are there any possibilities to reduce these 3D graphics for 1/48builders too? I'd print me a Fokker, if it were possible

[uncletony]

A printer-friendly version of the assembly manual is now also available online here

[uncletony]

Hello,
incredible work! I followed these developments for a while and I'm blown away. Are there any possibilities to reduce these 3D graphics for 1/48builders too? I'd print me a Fokker, if it were possible

It's possible, but I'd have to redo the entire thing as wall thicknesses and wire sizes are already on the bleeding edge for 1/32. If there is sufficient demand, maybe I will do it.

[dtomko]

Seconding the request for 1/48, although I can see how the wings and fuselage might be tricky in a smaller scale.  Again, I'd be happy with just the cowlings sprue to use to convert the Gavia/Special Hobby D.II.  I wouldn't need you to try to match the 1/48 kit; I'd be happy to make whatever corrections are necessary to fit your parts.  As it is, your instruction manual is already an invaluable asset so thank you, Bo!

Drew

[uncletony]

I may have mentioned this already but the Fokker D.II & D.III are actually different in many areas besides the cowlings:

-wing span (D.III is longer)
-wing chord (D.III is deeper)
-wing stagger
-strut positions
-fuselage (lower longerons are deeper and curved differently on D.II)
-landing gear
-wheel size
-fuel tank/ammo bins/gun mounts (probably not much of a concern in 1/48)

etc...

Is there a good Oberursel U.III in 1/48?

[Borsos]

I see those problems too. Sadly... I 'd be happy to get my hands on the cowling etc. There's already aguy out here who made quite a good conversion out of SH's D II into a D III:http://www.aeroscale.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=SquawkBox&file=index&req=viewtopic&topic_id=180220&page=1

Besides of that your parts might be also a good start to convert eduards Fokker E III into a E IV...

As far as I remember there's a fine Oberursel Ur III in 1/48 made by SmallStuffModels.

[dtomko]

Yes, Brad Cancian did a fine conversion.  You can see that he modified the wing tips and lower fuselage and rescribed the rib tapes. All of the converting is doable.
The SmallStuff engine is a work of art.

Bo, another question, though.  Most photos of D.IIIs show a prominent stringer running lengthwise mid fuselage.  Udet's machine for example.  I don't see this on the model's frame. 

Drew

[uncletony]

Bo, another question, though.  Most photos of D.IIIs show a prominent stringer running lengthwise mid fuselage.  Udet's machine for example.  I don't see this on the model's frame. 

Drew

Yep, it appears that the (non-structural) stringer was added after the first production batch, to both D.IIs and D.IIIs which were produced more or less concurrently (shortage of U.IIIs maybe?). Maybe an attempt at some streamlining or possibly just to prevent the fabric from flapping or both -- it's unclear.

 I'm doing Boelcke's 352/16, which didn't have the stringer. Ivo and I talked about this a bit and he agreed that it is easy enough to add with a piece of brass or styrene.  However I have prepared a "late" fuselage with the stringer. I'm also experimenting with a few other refinements based on the feedback I've received from the early adopters (for which I am most grateful)...

[IvotB]

Having had the fuselage in my own hands, I prefer a brass stringer. It will strengthen the fuselage and prohibit warping a little bit. I haven't rigged the fuselage and that might make a difference though. I just need to find the correct distance from the welded fuselage frame tubes, but I guess that will have been minimum. Perhaps it was welded just to these frame tubes. I'll check the pictures.

regards,
Ivo

[uncletony]

 I'm pretty sure it would not have been welded -- Fokker was known to be careful about avoiding extra welding to avoid introducing stress points. Accessories were always attached with brackets -- and I think this non-structural stringer falls into the category of an accessory.

[ermeio]

Is there a chance to have the late fuselage during this free shipping week, Bo?
I understand that the anular ties that support the fuselage tubes where They meet are added for stength since They were not there in the real aircraft: is there any chance to have a fuselage without them?
Er me

[15badcats]

Hi I'd be interested in the late fuselage also Where would one get decals for this? I'll order as soon as the late fuselage is availible

[uncletony]

Is there a chance to have the late fuselage during this free shipping week, Bo?
I understand that the anular ties that support the fuselage tubes where They meet are added for stength since They were not there in the real aircraft: is there any chance to have a fuselage without them?
Er me

I can make the experimental version available,  but only with the understanding that I myself have not had a chance to build it  -- nor will I before the week is out. I have though had it printed and it appears to have come out ok.

Besides having the extra longerons, I have removed the corner hoops that you alluded to and have replaced them with a single, fairly tiny hoop with a hole just large enough (hopefully! --again, no chance to build it yet) for the three strands of rigging necessary. I have also made the firewall a separate piece, and have added a floor and a rudder bar as well as experimental parts to make the ends of the control stick as well as a compass.

I must say the original version with the overscale hoops and fixed firewall is considerably less flimsy -- and that's not saying a lot!