Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
July 20, 2018, 10:44:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 22   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build  (Read 27449 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
old fitts
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 1
Online Online

United States United States

Posts: 15




Ignore
« Reply #275 on: July 30, 2016, 06:29:35 PM »

Does this mean that the cat's in/out of the bag? 
Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 82
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,208




Ignore
« Reply #276 on: July 30, 2016, 07:00:07 PM »

I'm still not quite convinced either way on the tip sweep question. Found a couple of quite interesting Nieuport factory pics whilst looking though. You might well have found these already but I'm just adding the link before I forget where they were: http://www.historim.fr/2015/11/les-etablissements-nieuport-issy.html
Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 82
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,208




Ignore
« Reply #277 on: July 30, 2016, 07:16:42 PM »

Also, these German marked photos seem to back up the parallel tip theory, assuming the white square's edge ran along the rib line.
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 47
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,010



Ignore
« Reply #278 on: July 31, 2016, 02:01:52 AM »

Rich, you are in the same situation as I was with a Hannover ClIII. Everyone knew the wings were swept back a degree or two - after all, all the drawings since 1918 showed it. But once I dug deeper, no. I spent years trying to sort it out but eventually you have to make a decision. In this case, you can find evidence either way, and i wouldn't be surprised if there was variation. The best approach would be to queue up at Dover for a day, go to Paris, stand underneath the thing and take a photo. Otherwise you need to decide which to go with and choose your photos accordingly, including your subject.
If you go with the straight tips, you will need to alter the three view and get it authorised by the STC. Given that most judges would expect some taper, they might take some convincing! As you are going to compete with this, I would suggest you assemble the photos you intend to use now, and review. Don't include photos that contradict, eg if you go for taper, don't include the captured one with the German crosses that Pete just posted!

Just going back to the Hannover; in desperation, I threw together an Airfix kit to see how it looked with and without sweepback. In the end, I built it as a ClII, which definitely has straight wings.
Logged
Mefot
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 226




Ignore
« Reply #279 on: July 31, 2016, 07:36:07 AM »

I think the answer to this lies in the shape of the wingtip in side elevation. Because of that shape it will, from some angles, give the illusion of taper. In this image borrowed from the interweb the starboard wingtip appears to be almost parallel, and I'm sure if the aircraft was viewed from directly underneath it would be. However looking at the port wingtip it would appear to be tapered.
My rather uneducated guess is that the tips are parallel but, if they don't have the correct curve in side elevation they won't look right from every other angle  Smiley
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
danmellor
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 50
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,138




Ignore
« Reply #280 on: July 31, 2016, 11:05:54 AM »

After squinting at all the pics, I'm convinced the tip is not tapered relative to the last rib. All you have to do is prove it...!

Cheers,

Dan.
Logged
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 35
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 823




Ignore
« Reply #281 on: July 31, 2016, 11:39:22 AM »

OOOOOH FUDGE!! and good find BTW! Shocked

Mefot's photo appears to show slightly tapered. I measured on my screen ("assumption" and all that comes with that!) with pencil nicks on paper, at rear spar tip and farthest forward point of Stright tip bow to center of last rib. I'm guessing slightly more than an inch narrower at front. Ditto for lower tip shape.

The internal diagonals (upper) would indicate the tip bow shape is tapered in the build and not a result of later fabric tension. However the ,  the aileron tip looks to be out of line with the rake of the tip bow and is probably as drawn by Macchi, despite the obvious fabric pull. If the photo submitted by Pete in #5 is indeed authentic, then it sure looks like there were at least two shapes produced and we still have Macchi drawing configuration, as a third possibility.

Image in Post #279  is the one I'd go with for a model or a full scale reproduction.

Traditional scale rules here in US allowed ( not familiar with current FAC rules) for contestants to draw one's own scale drawings and submit to a member of AMA scale contest board for approval. The other requirement was that the scale drawing be "published" in say a book, magazine, or commercial source etc. However, there seemed no strict interpretation of what published actually meant. I often wondered if it could mean as little as two copies of my own scale drawing, just given away?? Then, there's the other extreme, that suggests just because a drawing gets published, it is deemed to be "accurate".
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 37
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,393


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #282 on: July 31, 2016, 11:58:09 AM »

If I am going to get the 3-view alteration authorised by the STC, ideally I'd like to take Mrs Moore on a romantic trip to the Musee de l'air in Paris and 1. see for myself and 2. take lots of pictures of my own for evidence. Unfortunately, I'm not going to manage that anytime soon. So, I must either build it with what the judges expect to see, in keeping with existing 3 views, or I use existing photos to get the 3-view altered. Fortunately, there are plenty of photos of the Paris example and that last shot from Mefot illustrates the issue brilliantly. I could probably build my case well enough without traveling to Paris. I should also probably model the Paris machine, which wasn't my original intention, but it would seem sensible just for the existence of colour photographs. I am using them quite extensively.

I don't think that I'm one to build something 'wrong' just to please someone else, so the decision becomes - get authorisation on the alteration or accept a markdown for building the wing tips differently from the 3-view.

Anyhow, thank you all for your invaluable input, once again. I attach a colour profile with 'correct' wing tips, and a normal 'wrong' one for comparison. Could I use that colour one as my 3-view?
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged

It wasn't me
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 37
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,393


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #283 on: July 31, 2016, 12:04:48 PM »

Hey PP. I don't know. The fact that each wing tip from the same photo looks different, makes it difficult to really know how parallel something is or not. This wing tip issue is hurting my brain a bit. I need to go through my whole collection of photos yet again. Maybe I'll go with just a smidgen of taper. Or not. Maybe exaggerate it. I dont know. I thought this model would be straight forward, with all the available info on it...
Logged

It wasn't me
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 82
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,208




Ignore
« Reply #284 on: July 31, 2016, 12:49:57 PM »

One more for the mix...
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 37
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,393


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #285 on: July 31, 2016, 12:55:55 PM »

Oo, that's a lovely photo! Not got that one. I'd say that is one for the parallel tip argument.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2016, 01:10:40 PM by Rich Moore » Logged

It wasn't me
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 82
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,208




Ignore
« Reply #286 on: July 31, 2016, 01:14:28 PM »

I agree. Just to confuse things further though, here's a Euler DII which was a Nieuport copy essentially, but maybe not an exact copy- so possibly best to ignore the previous German Nieuport pics I posted in case they're Eulers too! Sorry.)
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
Mefot
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 226




Ignore
« Reply #287 on: July 31, 2016, 01:16:48 PM »

Two more. Note the lens distortion on the bare bones shot. Could be easily mistaken for taper  Smiley
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 37
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,393


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #288 on: July 31, 2016, 01:37:34 PM »

Thanks Pete. I have been thinking the tip shape insonsistency may be due to the camera lens distorting the image. But it is probably better explained by the fact that the wing tip follows the upper surface. When looked at from below at an angle, which is most often the case, comparing the tip with the base of the end rib will give the illusion of non-parallelness. Your bare bones photo is another great one...where are you finding these?? I am almost completely convinced to go for parallel tips now, but there is always that element of doubt - I wonder how many people will comment on the lack of expected taper?
Logged

It wasn't me
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 47
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,010



Ignore
« Reply #289 on: July 31, 2016, 02:57:24 PM »

but there is always that element of doubt - I wonder how many people will comment on the lack of expected taper?
Halfway down this page is a more-or-less underneath shot of the genuine 11 in Paris, to save queueing in Dover
http://canadainairmodels.blogspot.co.uk/
That, together with Pete's bare bones shot, is pretty conclusive, although I still suspect some variation.
I doubt people will comment but who cares - you please yourself and have the evidence. And judges are instructed to go by the documentation, not their own views or preconceptions
Logged
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 37
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,393


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #290 on: July 31, 2016, 03:49:11 PM »

Thanks Bill.
Logged

It wasn't me
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 82
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,208




Ignore
« Reply #291 on: July 31, 2016, 03:55:56 PM »

That bare bones shot is here: http://albindenis.free.fr/Site_escadrille/escadrille057.htm
Can't quite remember how I got there, but I found that putting a few French words, rather than English, into Google along with Nieuport brought up extra photos. For instance encrase (crashed), escadrille and ailes (wings) all turn up various pics. Then, as I suspect we all do, I filter out the non-WW1 shots by only bringing up the black and white search results. By the way, have you found those few shots of the Paris museum's Nieuport on the floor and then without its wings during restoration work? Somewhere there might be a full on photo of the top wing propped against a wall but I haven't found it yet!
Logged
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 35
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 823




Ignore
« Reply #292 on: July 31, 2016, 04:34:04 PM »

 Grin This whole photo interpretation episode indicates how often we  let our eyes convince us to accept easy answers. They, in effect lie to us. Things thought/percieved to be rounded, are more often than not,  actually  straight, or series of short straight lines (Spitfires and Bf 109's!) etc.. but it takes a bit of extra interest and a bit of discipline to really see (appreciate) what's being shown.

Hey! I'm as guilty as the next guy, as this interesting thread, is revealing. THANKS ALL. Shocked
Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 82
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,208




Ignore
« Reply #293 on: July 31, 2016, 04:58:04 PM »

Rich, have you found this set (which I've only just come across)? Could be just the ticket if you do decide to do the Paris example. They are here: http://www.museeairespace.fr/actualites/verdun-guerre-aerienne/
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Re: Nieuport 11 Bebe - Build
Logged
Mark Braunlich
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 64
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 965




Ignore
« Reply #294 on: July 31, 2016, 05:06:48 PM »

I'd be wary of the uncovered wing photo at reply #287.  I think there's a good possibility that's a photo of one of the two N.XI replicas built by Walt Addems in California in the early 1960s.   Note the shiny cowling for example.

You can see the Addems Nieuports on Flickr here :  https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/sets/72157633102796263/
These replicas have steel tube fuselages built without the trapezoidal cross section shape.  They may have been largely based on the Joe Nieto N.XI drawing done for Model Airplane News.
Logged

Mark
Rich Moore
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 37
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,393


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #295 on: July 31, 2016, 06:00:10 PM »

Not found those Pete - another great find. Lovely photos with lovely parallel to end rib tips!

Thanks for the word of caution Mark.
Logged

It wasn't me
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 35
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 823




Ignore
« Reply #296 on: August 01, 2016, 01:14:07 AM »

Mark,

Back when I was a boy of 11 or 12, I got introduced to the Phieffer/Addems Nieuports, rather close up. They were my first look at a real ratory engine.  IIRC, these came a bit before Joes Phieffer's Sopwith Pup, which also had steel tube contruction. It was quite the subject of much tongue wagging as the tubing was "square". Quite inovative for the day, although there is a weight penalty.  Anyway, I asked about the addition of the false ribs at leading edge on the Nieuports. Nobody listens to a kid!

Anyway, if you'll note, the Addem's Nieuort shows the upper wing rigged  farther back than even the Nieto drawings show!The forward cabanes slant back noticeably and the rear vee, less so. Think about what that does to the interplane strut layout, snd possibly lower wing placement or sweep. If it was fairly accurate in Nieto's drawing, it was built certainly less so! I suspect this was an attempt to make those Nieuports less tail heavy. Steel tubing(even round) is generally heavier than a same structure in wood/wire.

Meadow Lark field was over near Livermore, some what North of certain Modesto based Great Lakes and a Knight Twister.  Any luck on GL research?

Logged
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 35
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 823




Ignore
« Reply #297 on: August 01, 2016, 01:17:51 AM »

Pete-

That 3/4 front view of Paris  Nieuport  makes me all week in the knees! Grin THANKS!
Logged
Mark Braunlich
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 64
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 965




Ignore
« Reply #298 on: August 01, 2016, 09:31:33 AM »

Packard,
Thanks for mentioning the false ribs on the Addems Nieuports, hadn't noticed them for some reason.  That's a good indicator that the uncovered wing photo in reply #287 is NOT an Addems Nieuport.  Good that you pointed that out. 
Logged

Mark
packardpursuit
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 35
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 823




Ignore
« Reply #299 on: August 01, 2016, 10:48:57 AM »

Gotta say this thread has me uprooting long held ideas, establishing new ones, and then tossing those away!
 
First of all, I'd like to thank Rich, for posing such interesting questions, AND THE BUILD. The appropriate questions come when one is concerned about getting the model or other representation right.

Mark, Mefot, and Pete have provided additional visual data that is priceless.

Mefot's 2nd photo in #287  have convinced me there is indeed a tapered tip!

If anyone ever  does definitive scale drawings of the  type, the wingtip footnote will be LARGE and scrap views many.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 22   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!