Hello all
Just a question
There are two ways of building aircraft models, one by making segments with wrapping and formers and then connecting them and another is making skeleton frame and then covering this frame with "panels"
To be honest, I almost hate the skeleton method.
I thought that skeleton method could help building difficult surfaces like in F-16, Su-33, F-22 and such.
Simple, round and oval shaped bodies cab easily be made from sections. And then I saw a model of MiG-9 designed in skeleton frame. But this plane has plain simple oval and round shaped fuselage. Is there a reason why need to design skeleton frame for such simple planes?
Also, Yoav Hozmi showed that even intricate shaped plane like F-16 can be designed in sections. Is there really a need to use a skeleton frame method?
Just a question
There are two ways of building aircraft models, one by making segments with wrapping and formers and then connecting them and another is making skeleton frame and then covering this frame with "panels"
To be honest, I almost hate the skeleton method.
I thought that skeleton method could help building difficult surfaces like in F-16, Su-33, F-22 and such.
Simple, round and oval shaped bodies cab easily be made from sections. And then I saw a model of MiG-9 designed in skeleton frame. But this plane has plain simple oval and round shaped fuselage. Is there a reason why need to design skeleton frame for such simple planes?
Also, Yoav Hozmi showed that even intricate shaped plane like F-16 can be designed in sections. Is there really a need to use a skeleton frame method?