A Lockheed "Rounder"

I don't know if it's been considered yet, but I understand the British flew the aircraft as the Ventura. It's quite possible this won't require any detail changes to the aircraft, but a totally new paint job would be in order. Is one of these being considered?
 
Sunny9850 said:
Comparing it to the two pictures I showed in the prior post I would agree that the lower one is the better one. The clarity in the one by Wijm on the prior page is better but I guess you want to have the three views from the same template to make your magic easier.

Would a vector drawing make things easier ? I only found one for the PV-1 but I'd be glad to get that for you as a contribution to the project.

http://www.the-blueprints.com/vectordrawings/show/3130/lockheed_pv-1_ventura/

Cheers
Stefan
Click to expand...

Stefan,

I agree that Wim's are nice vector drawings however they suffer from the same issue with the door and wings, maybe the nacelles and cowlings as well.

I also agree that the lower of the two I posted appears more accurate. I have now made the fuselage, bomb doors, tail, observation dome, turret adjustments, belly, and windows adjustments to agree with that drawing. I should be back in business after tonight to move on to other modeling needs with this aircraft.
 
Here's a 3d view... note the small quarter window missing. Some subtle difference in the window placements. Not sure the accuracy of the drawing. PV-1 version thou.


lockheed_ventura_3v.jpg

​
 
SSI01 said:
I don't know if it's been considered yet, but I understand the British flew the aircraft as the Ventura. It's quite possible this won't require any detail changes to the aircraft, but a totally new paint job would be in order. Is one of these being considered?
Click to expand...

The British ordered PV-1's to their specs that were significant enough that the aircraft was called the PV-3 with a one man cockpit.

The PV-1/3's were different (from the PV-2 Harpoon) in fuselage, wings, cowlings, nacelles, vtail, htail, undercarriage, and loadouts. From a modeling standpoint, pretty much everything was different.
 
TuFun said:
Here's a 3d view... note the small quarter window missing. Some subtle difference in the window placements. Not sure the accuracy of the drawing. PV-1 version thou.



​
Click to expand...

Thanks Tufun, I will save that in case I get the urge to do a PV-1. :wiggle:
 
Modelers Can Serve But One Master

I have many versions of side views and there is little they all agree on it seems. :-/

I have changed the model to accommodate the 3-view shown at the top of the attached, but the latest, seemingly more precise drawing has me baffled with things that just do not look right, like the nose and the angles of the vstabs and rudders. {{{shaking head}}} LOL Such is life of a discerning modeler. :)


NOTE: I am showing the fuselage and tails modeled here in "see-through mode" so you can compare the model to each drawing.
 
I couldn't help but watch the viddies of "Tanker 101's" restoration, and then go and look up pics of the PV-2 online as well as from my aviation book collection. After looking at the two drawings, and seeing all that I was able to look at from references, the model on the top looks a bit closer to the real Harpoon. JMO.

The video of the left engine start-up during the restoration process was epic! I love seeing and hearing those things when it comes to bringing an old bird back to life.

BB686:USA-flag:
 
Milton,for all the frustrations you are having with the "proper" shape your work still looks great.:salute:

Joel
 
Thanks; I usually balance the 3-views with lots of reference pictures to get as close as possible. One has to be relentless in pursuit of "the right look". :)
 
I agree, however it turns out... it will look great!

Hey Milton, I noticed that too with the round nose and confused about the tail end of the fuselage panel lines sweeping up.
 
When I compare the drawings to the color profile posted above I see the shape of the VS in the profile resembling the "more precise" drawing.

The profile's fin seems to have a swept leading edge with a noticeable "straight" section, rather than the constant curve the other drawing seems to have.

I agree there seems to be enough difference that it's not a perfect match.
 
It seems to me that the lower drawing, he uses dark pattern for the glass, and if that's true... glass nose?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top