UH-1E /C/M project

Randie....you don't know Polly....we ain't tell'n.

Steve

NC_Rotorhead wrote:

Never liked the term "Decimate"......until now.  Sounds like a GOOD THING...to "Decimate Pollys".    Regards Steve

Who is Polly and why do these guys want to decimate her?

Never liked the term "Decimate"......until now.  Sounds like a GOOD THING...to "Decimate Pollys".   

Regards
Steve

Michael,

  Glad the dimensions helped. I know someone who can decimate the polys down to a very reasonable level with little or no loss of resolution.  If I get the laser scan data, i'll get him to decimate them for me.  I've seen him take 20 MB files down to a few hundred K with no noticeable effects!  Keep up the good work and please post your progress pics.

     Ray

Ray,

Thanks, l took your diimensions and added them to the model and rescaled, it looks much better now and much more in proportion.

 Steves in the driving seat and he wants the M157 mount so thats what l'll add for the initial model, maybe a M158 later if l can squeeze a little more from the model.

 I use Max8 and can export as DWF, DWG or DWX so thats a head start, laser scanning is the way to go but it tends to generate large meshes which are too large for flight sims, though there very good for renders and such.

 Great work ?, not quite yet, l'll accept good but l've a long way to go before it becomes great :).

Kindest

Michael

Michael,

    Autodesk Inventor would really be the way to go to make some of those parts, I think. Since Autodesk owns Max now, most of their files will work across programs.  I agree that it would be good to make 3D models for others to use as refs.  If you have Max 9 you could save them a DWF files and anyone could view them.  Ultimately, I want to laser scan the smaller parts and get them decimeted down so I can put together accurate 3D weapons systems, but that's a ways down the road for me.  By the way, I never even told you, GREAT WORK!

   By the way, I hate to see those M158's go, but I guess you need to save Poly's.   

    Ray
 

Ray,

 Hope it helps !, your not kidding :), it helps a lot, its all very easy to model, 3D or plastci by eye but you cannot beat a few good solid dimensions to keep you on track, l'll apply those to model and see what it turns up.

 l'm begining to wonder if theres milage in making these parts as higher detail sections and then render and offer up here for other modelers so they can get a good 3D view of such parts with out having to go and visit museuums and measure themselves. The M156 mount being a good example.

 Currently l'm looking...from your excellent descriptions above...the M156 mount ( with out jettison ), M157 rocket pod and M21 mini gun. I think the M6 Quad 60's will kill my budget on parts for the game, certainly for FS2004 but maybe not for FSx, it certainly wont for a high quality render so that would only really be an option for 3D renders and not simming.

 The TK-2 is the other mount to be modeled but this is the most intensive so if it goes with in budget then the TK-2 should fit easily.

Thanks for the info, more than l can digest in such a short while :).

Kindest

Michael

Michael,

  This post is going to get long.  I would have just sent you this info offline, but I think it may be of interest to the rest of the Huey modelers here.  The diagrams are from 3 sources:

TM 55-1520-219-20 HU-1B ORG MAINT MAN'L_30 JUN 72

UH-1B MECHANICS MANUAL_1 JUN 1965

UH-1C-M TM 55-1520-220-10_8 SEP 1980

First let's start with the layout for the XM-6 (quad 60) armamant system:

A closeup of the M6 system:

[img]http://

Far more common early in VN was the M16 system which is the M6 quad 60's with either M157 or M158 rocket pods.  Here is a diagram of the M156 mount, M157 pods and rocket pod rack:

[img]http://

A better view of the M156 universal mount with jettison device installed:

[img]http://

more rocket mount detail (rocket rack is dashed here, but i think you get the gist of it):

[img]http://" border="0" />

Another view of M156 mount, M158 pods, Intervelometer (control panel for rockets and guns), and reflex sight stowed:

" border="0" />

M157, M158, M200 rocket pods:

 M60 reflex rocket sight.  this sight was folded out of the way on the pilots side (right) when not in use (see above):

[img]http://" border="0" />

 The M21 gun system (M134 minigun+ M157 or M158 rocket pods):

M21 system with M158 rockets:

[img]http://

Details of ammo boxes, ammo chute, etc.:

[img]http://" border="0" />

M21 sight.  This sight was stowed on the co-pilots side (left) when not in use:

" border="0" />

I hope that this helps with some of the nitpicky details.  i have good pics of most of this as well, but I think the diagrams do a better job.

    Ray
 

Michael,

   I personally measured the M158 tubes at the Army Aviation Museum.  

    Tube length:  57.5 in.  Diameter of Rockets is 2.75 in., tubes are slightly more

    M156 Mounting plate: 27.5 in. long x 7,5 in. maximum width.  The plate is tapered at both ends.

   Rocket mount itself: Legth:~33 in., Height 5.5 in at the ends and 12.75 inches max height in the center where gun pylon attaches.  Thickness 2in. except at the front end where it tapers to a point.

   M16 ammo chute: 3.25 in. wide x .75 in. thick

   Gun pylon: 18 in. long and 11.5 inches in diameter where it meets rocket mount.

   I'll post pics of these later tonight.  E-mail me with specific question if you'd like.

   Ray
 

I'm working on the weapons mount at the moment and for scaling have added a seven shot open tubed affair, does any one know the length of these tubes and the overal diameter of the assembly please ?, the same applies to the other seven shot can type launcher.

 l'll probably add the gatling gun on the end of the mount, rather than the twin mount some times seen, l'm not sure how much space l'm going to have once the main rotor is added and figures etc.

 Thanks in advance

 Michael

Here is an Update on the Short Body project.  This screenshot is a conglomeration of a Charlie and an Echo.  There will be some cut and paste later to get the correct configurations.

Michael put his attention to the tail rotor all right.  Darn...missing the 90 deg GB oil cap retension chain!!!!!

Regards
Steve

Hi guys,

 Thanks for all the comments, l'll try to take them all on board and work through it, as Steve says its all a mish mash of parts now, the priority is to get all the bits on the model to make sure the poly counts doesnt go over the limit, then we hive them all off into specific Mks, so if you see an antenna thats wrong, thats probably because l havent moved it to the specific Mk layer in Max yet.

 Overall l'm looking at the shape right now and the placement of major components, l'm concerned on the fuselage length issue, it matches the drawings exactly, but somewhere something isnt quite right, is it the overall length or door size/locations, height etc etc ?.

 The other problem may well be the view l selected in Max for the renders, l can change the lense and focal distance and maybe do a broadside orthographic render with out perspective if that helps any one ?.

 As Steve says, he's been pouring over the model and adding his valuable personal experiance and yes theres issues still to be fixed, but l tend to wander all over the model doing bits here and there...in no particular sequence :), but l'll get to all of it.

 The model is aimed at FS2004 so the poly count is the overiding factor, that means some small parts will be pared down or not as smooth as others, espcially really small parts link rotor linkages and such, but were sitting at 34,000 polys so far and that leaves me about 30,000 to play with for the FS9 model, so its looking good from that perspective.

 Must dash, the tail rotor requires my attention.

 Kindest

Michael

Hey Mel, Absolutely correct-a-mundo!

But if you notice, I said, there would be jockeying of antenna and hoist for the different models.  Only the UH-1E is shown.  Got to get all the little pieces made first. 

Looking for your eyes on the thing..........

Regards
Steve

AH HA....gotcha Chopperfan.    There is ALWAYS a "gotcha" lurking around the corner in the modelling business.  Thats whats so enthralling about this stuff. 

I can't specifically give you the history of that particular bird.  It was in VN but not when the photo was taken.  It's 153765 on Okinawa.  Both Marine Huey squadrons had been pulled back out of country at this time. 

Regards
Steve

Steve,

  Any info on that bird?  Was the photo of a VN bird?  Thaks for the pic!

    Ray

Hey Chopperfan,

No-one is an expert.  LOL.  Don't worry about it.  looking for those eyes to pick up on things.  As for the Towel Rack.......well here is one with it.  Different location though.  I've flown some with it in one of 2 locations and without all together on others.

As for the length of the fuselage.  I agree with you on that....but all major points on this model were taken from specific WL and FS deminsions from a Bell document.  Will recheck though.  Thanks.

Regards
Steve

Thanks Ray.

E-mail enroute to you.

Regards
Steve

Steve,

  This is the best I can do on the TK-2 right at the moment:

" border="0" />[img]http://

I  hope that helps.

    Ray
 

Yes Ray, the versions that will be able to be done with the basic model will be UH-1C/M, UH-1E, UH-1L, HH-1K, TH-1L.  Mostly antenna and hoist "jockeying". 

Still weak on documentation on how the M-60s mount on the TK-2 system.  Any photos of those in your stash Ray?

LOL, that towel rack may be "history". 

Regards

Steve,

  Cool!  My knowledge basically drops of precipitously after Vietnam.  No plans to do a Bravo?  Won't the M be the same as the C except for a more powerful engine.  I can't wait to see more updates!

   Ray 

Hey Fitter,

With a new update due for FSX this fall, i think too much is changing for FSX right now.  I think the primary direction is going to be FS9, but Michael just may want to get involved in FSX more also.

How's that for a definative answer?  LOL

Regards
Steve

I believe the horizontal stabilizers look that way because of the angle. Just my opinion.

The towel rack is not present on any of my reference photos either. Also, and I am NOT an expert by any means, but the fuselage seems a little long. Appears to be between a B/C/E/M and a D/H in length.

Other than that? Looks good so far. 

Hey Ray

the Stab....yes, that is one thing I've been badgering him about.  The chord will be widened.

The FM towel rack is on many of the "E"s as is the hoist.  Yes, getting rid of that "junk" allows carring more ordnance.  This will be a Slick and Gunship.  I really need to get some more info on the TK-2 kit.

It will also be modeled as a C and or M.  The hoist will go on those.

Right now he's working on making the rotor controls a working model.    I've got to "Splain" how they work. 

He's using 3DMax for the modelling.

Help Keep me "honest" on this thing.  It's going to have more avionics than was really used, and the radios will be more 70s than 60s.  There was a time when the cockpit was really rather sparce.  It will also be a 540 head.

Thanks again Ray.  I'll keep you updated.

Regards
Steve

Looks good so far.

Is this going to work in FS2004?

Steve,

  Awesome!  I model dinosaur limbs in 3D as part of my research, and I figured you were involved in some project like this when you made the virtual control panel.   It looks great!  For some reason the horizontal stabs look a little narrow in the top pic.  Also, as far as I can tell from pics, there is no towel bar antenna in front of the air intake on any Echos. At least the Squadron books don't show any.  Will this bird be configured as an armed Echo?  If it is going to be a gunship, I would remove the actual rescue hoist and just leave the housing on the cabin roof as that is the way every echo gunship I have seen is configured.  What program is your friend using for the project, 3D Studio Max?  Great stuff!

    Ray