I wana get into aircraft, but An issue I am having is know what seams are suposto be there, and what arent. Should there be gaps/seams where the wings meet the fusilage? and in places like that?
There should be a panel line in some cases, depending on the aircraft.
As far as a gap/seam that you can actually see into or stick something into, no. Things like that are not good for aerodynamics so they wouldn’t be present.
A: Sometimes
Airplanes that have “fillets” (smoothly contoured sheet metal that blends the wing root into the fuselage) would only have a seam around the fillet. Airplanes such as the F4F Wildcat, F4U Corsair have no fillets and wings butt fit to fuselage with an obvious seam there.
In modeling, any gap in that area usually is way out of scale and should be eliminated or reduced (in my opinion)
At the scales we make models, no seam would be very evident, but models look simplified if we do them that way, so the present style is to emphasize panel lines. On a full size aircraft with butted skin joints and flush rivets, the gap between skins is seldom over .040, but your eye will see it as larger because of differences in reflectance. With lapped skins, it is the sheet thickness and any gap between skins at the edge that is visible, maybe a bit more so than with butted joints between skins. Wing roots often have fillets that are attached with screws are are almost always a lapped joint, so a line will usually but not always be evident there. Only on a WW I or a fairly crudely finished more modern airplane would have any gap at the wing roots or tail surfaces.
John is correct. Even in 1-1 scale not all the panel lines are visible unless you’re within an arm’s length. Some panels, typically the access panels that get opened regularly such as to do a daily or turnaround inspection or maintenance/service will show even a distance. From the island on a CVN I can spot the access panels and lines quite readily on modern aircraft. But those are the ones that are accessed often.
What makes them stand out is the grease/grime on the hands of the servicing personnel. Over time the outer edges of the panels start to show the collection of grease that collects on maintainers’ hands when they put them on the flight deck to get under the aircraft. Most of the grease/grime is cleaned off during the washdowns (for protection from salt spray) but some always remains.
For shore based aircraft, such as the USAF I don’t see as much grease or grime. I attribute that to a cleaner environment; not as much grease on the concrete ramps at our bases.
During WWII aircraft got dirty in a similar fashion when being serviced from forward operating bases. I personnally think some of the weathering we put on our models is way overdone; as a maintainer of aircraft I would never tolerate that much on the aircraft, unless it was while the engine was cooling down after the last sortie, or during a turnaround for another sortie with no time to wipe the aircraft down. All that dirt/grime can actually affect the aerodynamics.
HTH
GS
What I usually do to find out if something should be there or not is to find as many pictures as I can either in books, on the web or by looking for similar models in these forums.
If you’re still not sure, posting a picture of the area in question might help too. The people on this forum are a great group - you will usually get a knowledgeable reply.
Regardless, the best technique for me when joining wings to fuse is to join the top hlaves FIRST. This technique violates the instructions but results in maximizing the fit up and saves countless time in putty and anding IMHO.
regards,
Steve
The problem I have is, atleast, I dunno how it is on other kits, the wings went into the fusilage, (my 1/72nd corsair the wings and body part are on one piece) it left a LARGE gap, I see pictures, some have it, some dont, im not sure what is right, im not a big aircraft guy
References references…photographs, line drawings, walk around books all are vital to answering just such a question.
I’m not sure what seam you’re talking about, but in 72nd it must be a shadow in the photos you’re seeing. Can you be more descriptive? Which kit; and what part numbers? I’ve built a lot of 72nd Corsairs and my be able to help.
GS
Hold on. I didnt say the corsair had the problem.
I was workong on a Zero. Where the MAIN WINGS attach to the BODY of the plane there are massive GAPS I cant tell in any reference photos if they should be there or not
Most Zero kits attach the bottom half of the wing as a single part, with the left/right top halves as separate pieces. Typically with that type of construction the gaps may appear on the top, where the top halves should butt against the fuselage; or on the bottom where the front rear of the bottom half should fair into the bottom of the fuselage.
In both cases, there should be no gaps. As one poster mentioned, attaching the top halves to the fuselage first, then attaching the bottom half of the wing to the fuselage/top wing would solve the first gap problem, the second is solved by filling/sanding.
Which kit are you building?
GS
Revell Zero, ‘smithsonian edition’ a crappy little kit, didnt fit that well, and there were nice details, right up to the gaps, so, gaps or detail, its missing detail.
IIRC the Revell Zero is just as I described below (I don’t have any more of those, built the last one quite a long time ago; all my current Zero kits are Hasegawa). There should be NO gap where you are describing. File/fill…
GS
An interesting solution to some gaps is to use Gunze Sanyo Liquid Putty by putting it on the gaps and running a rag or paper towel soaked with Acetone or alchohol over the putty to smooth it out then repeat. So doing so will fill the gap and lessen the need to sand.
Yea, I had read something about doing that with putty and nailpolish remover. But right now, I have no putty and no cash for putty, so im stuck doing it the whole, use alot of glue, and sand sand sand method. The kit is scrap, just a trial template now, the canopy is ugly, one of the MGs broke off, its just a pain kit