SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Do X finished

1858 views
25 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November, 2009
  • From: Twin Cities of Minnesota
Do X finished
Posted by Don Stauffer on Wednesday, October 26, 2016 10:53 AM

Finally got my seaplane  mounted to a base, anchored in the water.  It would be a bit hard to take my photo backdrop pictures like I usually do with a model mounted on a base, but I do have some water scenes photos that I use with my ship models, so may do something like that later.

 

Don Stauffer in Minnesota

  • Member since
    March, 2008
  • From: Charleston, SC
Posted by kg4kpg on Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:26 PM

Looks sharp Don. The base looks great as well.

I'd like to pick one of those up down the road.

 

Chris

  • Member since
    December, 2002
  • From: Northern California
Posted by jeaton01 on Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:37 PM

What a monster that was.  Looks real nice, Don.

John

To see build logs of my models, go here: http://goldeneramodel.com/mymodels/mymodels.htm

  

  • Member since
    November, 2009
  • From: SW Virginia
Posted by Gamera on Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:39 PM

Ohhhhhh, nice work! Aways thought this was a neat looking aircraft and you did an excellent job with her. Love that you put her on a water base too. 

"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children that dragons can be killed." -G.K. Chesterton

 

  • Member since
    March, 2013
Posted by patrick206 on Wednesday, October 26, 2016 1:49 PM

Hi, Don -

Beautifully done, excellent detailing and finishing. I notice you even have it secured to an anchor line. I had seen photos of the airplane, but never realized it had such a complex strut arrangement below the horizontal stabilzer. Aerodynamic streamlining was not one of the engineering priorities of this old queen of the skies, but it sure did it's job well.

Thanks for the post, nice to see.

Patrick

  • Member since
    February, 2003
  • From: Cameron, Texas
Posted by Texgunner on Thursday, October 27, 2016 6:36 AM

Well done Don!Yes

Gary


"All you mugs need to get busy building, and post pics!"

  • Member since
    April, 2016
  • From: Parsons Kansas
Posted by Hodakamax on Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:02 AM

A nice one Don, what a machine! Good work!

Max

PS--more pictures!

  • Member since
    November, 2009
  • From: Twin Cities of Minnesota
Posted by Don Stauffer on Thursday, October 27, 2016 8:50 AM

patrick206

Hi, Don -

Beautifully done, excellent detailing and finishing. I notice you even have it secured to an anchor line. I had seen photos of the airplane, but never realized it had such a complex strut arrangement below the horizontal stabilzer. Aerodynamic streamlining was not one of the engineering priorities of this old queen of the skies, but it sure did it's job well.

Thanks for the post, nice to see.

Patrick

 


They paid a price for all that parasitic drag.  Even with all those engines, the plane never was able to fly out of ground effect- or is it water effect for a seaplane :-)

 

Don Stauffer in Minnesota

  • Member since
    July, 2014
  • From: Meridian, ID
Posted by modelcrazy on Thursday, October 27, 2016 8:53 AM

Gawd that's a lot of engines! Looks great Don. Yes

A seaplane belongs in the water.

ON THE BENCH

1/25 Monogram 57 Chevy Bel Air

Completing a kit is like cutting the head off a Hydra. Two more replace it in the stash.

  • Member since
    January, 2010
Posted by CrashTestDummy on Monday, October 31, 2016 12:27 PM

Don Stauffer

 

 
patrick206

Hi, Don -

Beautifully done, excellent detailing and finishing. I notice you even have it secured to an anchor line. I had seen photos of the airplane, but never realized it had such a complex strut arrangement below the horizontal stabilzer. Aerodynamic streamlining was not one of the engineering priorities of this old queen of the skies, but it sure did it's job well.

Thanks for the post, nice to see.

Patrick

 

 

 


They paid a price for all that parasitic drag.  Even with all those engines, the plane never was able to fly out of ground effect- or is it water effect for a seaplane :-)

 

 

 

Surface effect.  Frankly, I'd be surprised if they ever had all engines running at one time!!  Nice job, Don!  I have a soft spot for seaplanes, for some reason, and have always thought about doing one of these beasts.

Gene Beaird,
Pearland, Texas

  • Member since
    October, 2006
  • From: Lakewood, CO
Posted by kenjitak on Monday, October 31, 2016 9:37 PM

Very nice build! I love those gargantuan planes from that, well, any era!

Ken

Ken

  • Member since
    April, 2005
  • From: Baton Rouge, LA
Posted by T_Terrific on Monday, October 31, 2016 10:05 PM

Kinda makes me wonder why they called it the Do-X (X=10 in Roman numerals) when it had 12 engines, which woulda been "XII"?

Tom TCowboy

“Failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.”-Henry Ford

"Except in the fundamentals, think and let think"- J. Wesley

"I am impatient with stupidity, my people have learned to live without it"-Klaatu: "The Day the Earth Stood Still"

"All my men believe in God, they are ordered to"-Adolph Hitler

  • Member since
    November, 2009
  • From: Twin Cities of Minnesota
Posted by Don Stauffer on Tuesday, November 01, 2016 9:23 AM

T_Terrific

Kinda makes me wonder why they called it the Do-X (X=10 in Roman numerals) when it had 12 engines, which woulda been "XII"?

 

The X apparently stood for experimental, as in our X planes, according to a German friend of mine who is quite into that aircraft.  They only built three of them, and did a lot of development changes on them, and it never went into production nor airline service.  But it must have provided good info for the future, since Germany was big in flying boats in later years.

 

Don Stauffer in Minnesota

  • Member since
    April, 2005
  • From: Baton Rouge, LA
Posted by T_Terrific on Tuesday, November 01, 2016 11:16 AM

I see, not unlike Boeing's B-15, which was not adequately powered, but later led to the very famous B-17. Thanks. Cowboy

Tom TCowboy

“Failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.”-Henry Ford

"Except in the fundamentals, think and let think"- J. Wesley

"I am impatient with stupidity, my people have learned to live without it"-Klaatu: "The Day the Earth Stood Still"

"All my men believe in God, they are ordered to"-Adolph Hitler

  • Member since
    January, 2006
  • From: Pineapple Country, Queensland, Australia
Posted by Wirraway on Tuesday, November 22, 2016 3:36 AM
Nicely done Don. I built the old Matchbox kit last year. Those engines are finicky arent they ?

"Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional" GIF animations generator gifup.com
GIF animations generator gifup.com

  • Member since
    November, 2009
  • From: Twin Cities of Minnesota
Posted by Don Stauffer on Tuesday, November 22, 2016 9:27 AM

Wirraway
Nicely done Don. I built the old Matchbox kit last year. Those engines are finicky arent they ?
 

Not only the engines, but the struts that connect the engine nacelles!  Some of my struts were too short and would not reach between the nacelles.  I used strene rod, drilled clear through the nacelles, and connected all the nacelles with just two rods.  The struts from the wing to the nacelles were also finicky.

 

Don Stauffer in Minnesota

  • Member since
    June, 2014
  • From: New Braunfels , Texas
Posted by Tanker - Builder on Thursday, November 24, 2016 1:02 PM

Don ;

 Tha first time I ever saw this beast was a group of line drawings and a pile of wood my shop teacher laid on my desk . All the boys had to build something and all thirty of us had a different project .

  I felt flummoxed , Why ? I was the only one with this beast as a project ! The teacher had already cut out the patterns and contour pieces and he guided me as I shaped the parts .

   When it was right then he would say finish , sand , and seal it . Then after all the sanding ,sealing , then there was painting , then assembling. Decaling and finishing out with a stand .

   The whole project was extended out to last six months . Well , after all the plane worked out to 1/72 scale . It was used to grade my skills . Needless to say I aced it ! Shoot ! it was not only a Wingy Thingy it was a Floaty Thingy too ! 

 Sure beat the other project , A jewelry box with inlaid surfaces ! Got the final grade on both gee only an " A+" . Oh , That's right ! They don't have shop in school anymore do they ? Well , it was an all trades high school anyway . 

  • Member since
    December, 2015
  • From: providence ,r.i.
Posted by templar1099 on Thursday, November 24, 2016 3:56 PM

Wow Don,nice crisp clean build.Beautifully done.

"le plaisir delicieux et toujours nouveau d'une occupation inutile"

  • Member since
    November, 2009
  • From: Twin Cities of Minnesota
Posted by Don Stauffer on Friday, November 25, 2016 8:40 AM

When I first started modeling, it was before plastic kits.  Wood was the material you made models from.  There were two kinds, flying models of balsa and tissue, sticks formers and ribs, covered with tissue.  Then, there were the "solid models," non-flying scale models equivalent to todays plastic models.  The kits contained blocks and sheets of either balsa or pine.  The fuselage was bandsaw-cut to profile, and in the more expensive kits, to planform (top view).  Wings and tail surfaces were cut from sheet wood stock, either by kit mfg or by modeler (pattern provided) in cheaper kits.  Then you went to work carving fuselage cross-section and wing airfoil.

I believe those who built those kits are far more ready to do scratch modeling, or major conversions, than those with no wood model experience.  Basically, those old kits were boxes of raw material.

 

Don Stauffer in Minnesota

  • Member since
    June, 2014
  • From: New Braunfels , Texas
Posted by Tanker - Builder on Friday, November 25, 2016 11:30 AM

Amen To That !

 I do believe that is why many of us older folks have the gumption to do scratch built stuff . That's the way we learned . I think the generations since have somehow been cheated . T.B.

  • Member since
    June, 2014
  • From: New Braunfels , Texas
Posted by Tanker - Builder on Friday, November 25, 2016 11:33 AM

Gene ;

  Can you say a early version of the Ekronaplane ! I think I said that right . The Soviet version did get the surface effect though . I wonder if one of their engineers saw the old paperwork and said ,Da, Ve kin do That !     T.B.

  • Member since
    September, 2012
Posted by GMorrison on Saturday, November 26, 2016 11:02 AM

Don Stauffer

 

 
patrick206

Hi, Don -

Beautifully done, excellent detailing and finishing. I notice you even have it secured to an anchor line. I had seen photos of the airplane, but never realized it had such a complex strut arrangement below the horizontal stabilzer. Aerodynamic streamlining was not one of the engineering priorities of this old queen of the skies, but it sure did it's job well.

Thanks for the post, nice to see.

Patrick

 

 

 


They paid a price for all that parasitic drag.  Even with all those engines, the plane never was able to fly out of ground effect- or is it water effect for a seaplane :-)

 

 

I think they got it up to about 1500 feet, and made a flight from Berlin to New York, with a LOT of stops.

 

  • Member since
    March, 2013
Posted by patrick206 on Saturday, November 26, 2016 2:27 PM

Don Stauffer
That rings a bell for me, I got started in the late 40's, I think the name of the wooden kits was "Strombecker." I built many, a float plane, a Convair, a bi-plane, etc. Glue came with the kits, some sort of powdery stuff to be mixed with water, and that held them together well. Wish one of them was still here, good memories.

Patrick

When I first started modeling, it was before plastic kits.  Wood was the material you made models from.  There were two kinds, flying models of balsa and tissue, sticks formers and ribs, covered with tissue.  Then, there were the "solid models," non-flying scale models equivalent to todays plastic models.  The kits contained blocks and sheets of either balsa or pine.  The fuselage was bandsaw-cut to profile, and in the more expensive kits, to planform (top view).  Wings and tail surfaces were cut from sheet wood stock, either by kit mfg or by modeler (pattern provided) in cheaper kits.  Then you went to work carving fuselage cross-section and wing airfoil.

I believe those who built those kits are far more ready to do scratch modeling, or major conversions, than those with no wood model experience.  Basically, those old kits were boxes of raw material.

 

 

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Sunday, November 27, 2016 10:41 AM

Nice work, Don.

 

  • Member since
    March, 2015
  • From: Streetsboro, Ohio
Posted by Toshi on Friday, December 02, 2016 4:04 AM

Very imppressive on such a unique subject!

Toshi

 

Retired due to work related injury

Married to the most caring, loving, understanding, and beautiful wife in the world.  Mrs. Toshi

 

ON THE BENCH:

Revell B-17G Flying Fortress 

NEXT BUILD:

Mrs. Toshi just purchased for me a Tamiya 1/48 Ki-61 via eBay, when it arrives, as always, I’ll do a WIP.  Thanks to M.Brindos and Model Maniac for the heads up and the inspiration in obtaining this kit for my next build.

  • Member since
    February, 2006
  • From: Boston
Posted by Wilbur Wright on Saturday, December 03, 2016 3:12 PM

It looks good Don, very unique.  I think the props would drive me nuts.

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS

SUBSCRIBER-ONLY CONTENT
FREE NEWSLETTER