Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 4  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 »
Author Message
Western_1
Post subject: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: May 31st, 2015, 8:32 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 122
Joined: October 19th, 2014, 2:49 am
Hello, was a bit torn between posting this in beginner drawings (as I haven't done much shipbucketing) or in the big planebucket thread. I figure beginning drawings wouldn't hurt.

Here I have a pair of seaplanes, one acting as a fighter and meant to be launched via catapult from a large battleship I am designing or launched from inland lakes and rivers in areas with poor infrastructure. The second is a large, conventional seaplane meant to simply have improved aerodynamics. Note that all these planes are for an AU I am working on.

[ img ]

For armament, the fighter is able to carry 3 20mm cannons in the nose in an arrangement similar to the I-185 Russian fighter.

The larger plane primarily serves as a sea-scout, but is able to engage in commerce raiding using 4 20mm cannon and a rear firing single 20mm mount for defense along with a relatively small bomb or rocket load compared to land based planes.

I based these planes off the Blackburn B.44 and B.20. I made some changes though, including adding in bubble cockpits, scaling down the B.20 somewhat and giving it an observation blister on the side.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
theminer220
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: May 31st, 2015, 9:39 pm
Offline
Posts: 11
Joined: May 30th, 2015, 10:14 pm
Very nice drawings!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Oberon_706
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 1st, 2015, 12:31 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 207
Joined: April 1st, 2014, 12:17 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Good start Krases - and welcome!

As a seasoned planebucket contributor, can i make a few well intentioned suggestions;

First, try to use real images to facilitate the adding of details like ailerons/flaps, sheet metal joins and access covers etc, as often when you scale down your reference drawings to SB scale you loose the vast majority of that. Detail and accuracy adds credibility.

Second, adding minimal amounts of shading effects can create a heaps better result and give your drawing tons more realism - and its not hard! Take my drawings of the B.20 and B.44 prototypes below.

Yours;
krases wrote:
[ img ]
Verses Mine;
[ img ]

As to your weapons choices;

A single engined, monoplane fighter like you've drawn wouldn't have the room in the nose for 20mm Cannons like the WW2 Hispano - it's all engine and props up front with little room for anything else - you could perhaps mount them in the chin of the aircraft, directly below the engine, or on the flanks of the fuselage just forward of the cockpit, but the best option is in the wings/wing roots. The only WW2 single-engine Allied fighters i can think of off the top of my head to successfully carry nose-mounted armament was the Bell P-63 AirCobra/KingCobra series fighters, and then only because the engine was mounted behind the cockpit in the fuselage, allowing the cannon to sit on the center-line and fire through the prop-spinner itself.

Nose-mounted 20mms on the B.20 analogue is quite plausible, but a rear-facing 20mm is a bit rich. Most crew-served armaments on night-fighters and bombers were rifle calibers, with some mounting up to 30 cal or 50cal MGs. If you want heavy-metal, maybe go for a quad 30cal turret in the tail, and single 50cals for each of the broadside observation blisters/turrets. 20mms in the nose is great but their practical utility in attack would be limited. Planes like the B.20 were designed as big, lumbering patrol bombers, they used bombs, rockets and depth charges as their primary offensive weapons against U-boats and surface targets - far too slow and vulnerable to AAA flak to make strafing with MGs and cannon a reasonable offensive option. If you're looking for an attack aircraft for surface targets, I suggest you play around with the Bristol Beaufighter, De Havilland Mosquito, A26 Invader or A20 Boston/Havoc.

Practice makes perfect - keep up the good work champ :) Look forward to seeing more of this AU in due course.

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________

[ img ]
____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Western_1
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 1st, 2015, 12:56 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 122
Joined: October 19th, 2014, 2:49 am
Thanks for the input Oberon! I am a long time browser, but don't post terribly often and very rarely post my own stuff.

But lately I have been working on a large battleship project, but needed a break to do something less ambitious. For your planes, do you typically start without much color to get the shading right, then do the shading from there? I have some shading under my wings, but I don't think its very visible.

As for forward firing armament, don't forget the Bf 109, some of which had a 30mm gun mounted in the nose. Some Yak9's also recieved 37mm and 45mm guns in the nose. One Yak3T even got itself a 57mm crammed into the nose. But the armament on my plane is laid out differently, here is a good image that illustrates this:

[ img ]

That is an I-185, a plane that didn't see mass production due to engine troubles and resources being diverted to other projects. But you can see the idea I had for how its guns are laid out. The 20mm for the bomber probably is a bit much and should be scaled back, I looked a lot at the B-25/PBJ-1H for inspiration for its armament and gun layout. I figured if it had 2 rear firing 12.7mm guns, why not replace that with a single 20mm gun.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Oberon_706
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 1st, 2015, 1:34 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 207
Joined: April 1st, 2014, 12:17 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Fair call on the Bf109 and Soviet types, my original comment was in reference to allied designs. But as you can see on the I-185, there only seems to be one gun on the top of the engine cowling, the others are almost protruding from the wing root. Gun fairings on the top of the engine will obscure the pilots forward vision.

As far as shading and detail goes, yes, start with gray/white shades then add colour later - and always go lighter than the true colour you want because when you view it at true SB scale it will appear darker than it is, and you will loose detail. For example; if it's meant to be black, better to go for a dark grey - see the lancaster and P-61 below;

[ img ]

[ img ]

Cheers

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________

[ img ]
____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Western_1
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 1st, 2015, 2:10 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 122
Joined: October 19th, 2014, 2:49 am
Awesome, thanks for the advice. I look forward to making some of my own unique planes.

One of the things I like doing is making planes not perfect, adding some sort of error in the design or having to make concessions. Like I have this idea for a plane not unlike the P-47, which was huge in size. This plane would have all of its guns exclusively in the prop cowling like the P-63, but due to its size would mount multiple guns in the prop. I even went to the point of doing massing studies to figure out how to fit things into the prop and came up with a whole series of gun combos ranging from 8 7.7mm guns or four 20mm guns and four 7.7mm guns or a single 30mm cannon, two 20mm cannons and three 12.7mm guns. One variant even had a single 57 mm gun and a pair of .50cal gun pods on the wings.

I kinda planned to make it look like a J2M, a p47 and a Bearcat had a baby. I should revisit that project at some point.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 1st, 2015, 7:39 am
Offline
Posts: 7150
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Nice concepts. I've always thought it was a pity that the Blackburn types never got a chance to show their advantages, although I guess in hard service the hydraulics for the pontoon bottoms might not have lasted that long in service.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Western_1
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 1st, 2015, 9:10 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 122
Joined: October 19th, 2014, 2:49 am
This is not a seaplane, but I tried to make a fighter similar to the advice Oberon gave me. It is a large heavy fighter similiar to the P-47, but with a gun/engine layout like the P-63.

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Oberon_706
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 2nd, 2015, 12:46 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 207
Joined: April 1st, 2014, 12:17 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
I must be a good teacher :lol: :lol: :lol: , you're catching on pretty quick! Good follow-up effort, but now to improve this further;

1. pay closer attention to detail i.e. sheet metal joints, wing and tailplane profiles etc. Use real images of aircraft or previously drawn SB planes as points of reference. Put in the research and time required to get it right, its worth it for the quality and credibility of the end result.

2. Think about how different elements of the aircraft interact i.e. bubble canopy immediately in front of air intake cowling... Where does the canopy slide back to in order for the Pilot to be able to get out if there's an air intake in the way? If the Guns are buried in the nose, where's the access hatch to reload the ammo etc? can it be seen in your drawing?

3. Again on the detail (don't take it personally, just trying to provide some constructive feedback) but look closely at the way you've drawn that cockpit and see if it looks right, might need some small refinements.

Just out of interest I've quickly mashed up what i think a P-63/P47 hybrid would look like as a comparison (i used a previously drawn P-47 as a starting point).

[ img ]

Keep it up Krases!! looking good :)

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________

[ img ]
____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Oberon_706
Post subject: Re: Aerodynamic seaplanesPosted: June 2nd, 2015, 12:56 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 207
Joined: April 1st, 2014, 12:17 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
I'm with you on the Blackburn planes Hood - the B.44 would have been fantastic in the Island-hopping pacific fighting and would have solved the problem of convoy air protection without having to resort to one-way mission CAM hurricanes. Such an aircraft might have done good things for Battleship/Cruiser anti-air protection as well - better to have two or three b.44s to scare the Zero's and Betty's away than a pair of supermarine walrus amphibs!

_________________
"Come to the Dark Side... We have Cookies!"
____________________________________________

[ img ]
____________________________________________
Current Worklist;

DCFI (Falkland Islands) AU Nation


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 4  [ 36 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page 1 2 3 4 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]