wesley
New to the Flightline
Currently: Offline
Posts: 3 
Location:
Joined: October 2013
|
Post by wesley on Oct 24, 2013 19:44:39 GMT 9
Dear All:
My company are planning to make a all new tooling 1/48 F-106A model.
I am now going to begin the CAD of the shape. It is welcomed you all provide me with every kind of data about this plane.
Thank you very much in advance for your help.
Best regards
Wesley
Director
AMK hobby
facebook fans page:AMKhobby
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Oct 24, 2013 23:59:41 GMT 9
Wesley,
I'm sure you are also seeking input from modellers on all the top sites such as ARC, Modeling Madness, Britmodeller, et. al. A new-mold F-106 has been on the wish list of many for several years. If it is just pure data on the Six you need you came to the right place. I suggest you search the main F-106deltadart.com web site for detailed photos, as well as refer to the many books published on the Six of which, most are listed on this site, and are still available.
If you wish to get a feel for what the modeler wants in a new, F-106 mold I would advise seeking the input of the modellers on their forums. I suspect I am not telling you anything you do not already know, however!
The famous Monogram F-106 will be a tough act to follow as it is well known for it's detail, but we sure could use a new kit. I wish you success with the new kit, and if you have specific requests for data on the Six - this is the place!
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Oct 26, 2013 10:28:39 GMT 9
Wesley, If you need some good drawings of the Six there are some excellent ones -- including cross sections -- in this book. www.amazon.com/F-106-Delta-Dart-detail-scale/dp/1888974265?tag=533643275-20I believe they are drawn to 1/72 scale in the book, but scaling up to 1/48 is just math. Should be simple enough in a CAD program. This will probably be just what you need. Mark Oh yes, got a personal request. If it's financially viable, when your company produces the kit adding an M-61 cannon with the appropriate weapon bay doors as an option would be GREAT!!! Of course you would have to add a cockpit with the vertical instruments as well since the "round-eyes" did not carry the gun. www.f-106deltadart.com/weapons_20mm_cannon.htm |
|
|
|
Post by Diamondback on Oct 28, 2013 3:53:43 GMT 9
Wesley, ditto Mark's request.
As a researcher who's done some informal consulting for model and miniatures projects before, the first thing I would suggest is getting every photo and diagram you can and developing a "parts matrix"--the Six is going to probably see less variation than between the Kfir and its parent the Mirage, so basically you're looking at two canopies (framed and bubble), two door sets (with and without hole for gun), two instrument panels as a start. I'm not a Six expert, just a novice student, so there may be more differences that would require "alternate option" tooling that I don't know about.
And a request of my own: maybe tool interchangeable spines to model an A or a B-model?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 28, 2013 6:51:42 GMT 9
Wesley, ditto Mark's request. As a researcher who's done some informal consulting for model and miniatures projects before, the first thing I would suggest is getting every photo and diagram you can and developing a "parts matrix"--the Six is going to probably see less variation than between the Kfir and its parent the Mirage, so basically you're looking at two canopies (framed and bubble), two door sets (with and without hole for gun), two instrument panels as a start. I'm not a Six expert, just a novice student, so there may be more differences that would require "alternate option" tooling that I don't know about. And a request of my own: maybe tool interchangeable spines to model an A or a B-model?  ?? come on snake, document this statement.. It first flew 17 Nov 1956. The first prototype of the Mystere-Delta, without afterburning engine or rocket motor and with an unusually large vertical stabilizer, flew on 25 June 1955.[2] After some redesign, reduction of the fin to more rational size, installation of afterburners and rocket motor, and renaming to Mirage I, in late 1955, the prototype attained Mach 1.3 in level flight without rocket assist, and Mach 1.6 with the rocket First flight of the F-106- with that designation was 26 Dec 1956, however the F-106's legitimate parent the F-102 first flew 24 Oct 1953, but was conceived much earlier......
The F-106 emerged from the USAF's 1954 interceptor program of the early 1950s as an advanced derivative of the F-102 known as the "F-102B", for which the United States Air Force placed an order in November 1955. The aircraft featured so many modifications and design changes it became a new design in its own right, redesignated F-106 on 17 June 1956.[3] The F-102 had to be redesigned with an area ruled fuselage to achieve supersonic speed in level flight. To exceed Mach 2, the largely new F-106 featured a more powerful Pratt & Whitney J-75-P-17 afterburning turbojet with enlarged intake diameter to compensate for the increased airflow requirements and a variable geometry inlet duct, which allowed the aircraft improved performance particularly at supersonic speeds, as well as permitting a shorter inlet duct. The fuselage was cleaned up and simplified in many ways featuring a modified, slightly enlarged wing area and a redesigned vertical tail surface. The aircraft's exhaust nozzle featured a device known as an idle thrust reducer, which allowed taxiing without the jet blast blowing unsecured objects around, without adversely affecting performance at high thrust levels, including afterburners. The fuselage was also slightly longer than that of the F-102. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_F-102_Delta_Dagger#Design_and_development.............. But I don't want to confuse you with facts..... The Old Sarge |
|
|
|
Post by Diamondback on Oct 28, 2013 8:18:48 GMT 9
Jim, I was saying the Israeli Kfir (not the Six) is an evolution of the Mirage, I seem to recall it's a derivative of the IAI Nesher which is a straight-up unlicensed copy of IIRC the Mirage V. Trying to use one of his company's past projects to say that even if they tooled every single variant option, an F-106A/B toolset would be simpler than some other things they've already done or could start from existing tooling. --from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_NesherWith apologies for not being clearer. |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 28, 2013 9:26:16 GMT 9
No sweat snake, I should have read your sentence a fourth time to understand................. The Old sarge
|
|
|
|
Post by Diamondback on Oct 28, 2013 9:43:15 GMT 9
I've also been doing some rep-checking on AvantGarde Model Kits, trying to get a feel for what the critics think, and for me that process starts with looking at past products and how they've been received.
|
|
wesley
New to the Flightline
Currently: Offline
Posts: 3
Location:
Joined: October 2013
|
Post by wesley on Oct 28, 2013 19:48:58 GMT 9
Hi Mark
Thank you very much for your comments.
In my plan, I am going to include the cannon.
Is there any new concept you think to be added in this model according to nowadays standard. For example the parts breakdown compared with the decent Monogram kit. I built couple of that and I think we need to improve the assembly of the model.
Regards
Wesley
|
|
wesley
New to the Flightline
Currently: Offline
Posts: 3
Location:
Joined: October 2013
|
Post by wesley on Oct 28, 2013 19:54:58 GMT 9
Jim, I was saying the Israeli Kfir (not the Six) is an evolution of the Mirage, I seem to recall it's a derivative of the IAI Nesher which is a straight-up unlicensed copy of IIRC the Mirage V. Trying to use one of his company's past projects to say that even if they tooled every single variant option, an F-106A/B toolset would be simpler than some other things they've already done or could start from existing tooling. --from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_NesherWith apologies for not being clearer. it is just a good idea to make a variant of F-106B. I am just wondering are there many people want to hand this twin seater? |
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Oct 29, 2013 3:18:14 GMT 9
Wesley,
I would do away with the Monogram-style "top-bottom" split of the fuselage. Everyone hates those seams. More of a traditional design like the Hasegawa 1/72 Six.
The intakes on the Monogram kit (and the Hasegawa kit) are a pain too, as they leave big seams. I don't have the answer to that, but hate filling them!
Having an option to build the speed brakes open, or closed would be great too. As I recall, the Monogram kit only allows one to build them open. They did a good job giving one an option to build the weapons bay open, or closed, however. (By the way, the Monogram weapons bay is highly regarded for the detail inside the weapons bay, so that will be a standard hard to beat, but expected on any new kit.)
I'm sure I'll think of more stuff later!
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Diamondback on Oct 29, 2013 4:20:24 GMT 9
Wesley, I don't know how much demand for a B there is, historically there've only been resin conversion kits. (I myself would probably only buy one along with several A's.
Brief tangent to go back to one of your part-breakdown questions: maybe break the aircraft's parts down so the joints are at panel edges as much as possible? Going back to the B, that would then suggest maybe just designing the spines so that IF warranted it'd be easy to design, tool and drop in a B canopy/spine later.
As it is, you're looking at tooling at least two spines on the A alone, with and without in-flight refueling receptacle--the B would add two more, same difference between its pair.
Mark's giving you good advice--I'd venture to say he's probably our guru of the Monogram kit, both its strengths and weaknesses, and if I were tooling up a set of Six molds I'd be asking his advice myself.
I know this is putting the cart before the horse a little, but have you given any thought to how you'll handle decals since most of the aftermarket 106 decal sets are slated for "No Future Reissues"?
|
|
|
|
Post by pat perry on Oct 29, 2013 6:57:39 GMT 9
Wesley, There have been some good ideas in this thread. I'm not sure that a B Model F-106 has ever been offered in the 1/48 category - I could be wrong since I am not a modeler.
I recall some 6-7 years ago when Revell put out a F-106 1/48 Model. I have one that a modeler friend of mine built for me. He said it was a pain to assemble, especially the fuselage halves. I think Revell built 5000 units. It happened to be a 456th FIS model and I was a member of that squadron several years after that particular tail number. I got involved with a decal maker who constructed a decal set that would fit that model with decals that were used in the 1966 - 1968 configuration. I think he made 1500-2000 decal sets for distribution.
One thing I noticed is that Revell and other F-106 model makers selected a certain tail number, squadron and F-106 vintage to make their models. Decal makers joined the marketing effort (some probably uninvited) to make squadron colors decal sets for those modelers who wanted a different decal set for their finished model. This helped to promote more sales for the model manufacturer which formed a symbiotic relationship between model and decal manufacturers.
I also noticed that individuals bought cases of model sets when they first came out and held them for several years until the manufacturers production run was sold out. When the supply was exhausted, these individuals began to list the unopened kits on eBay and sell them for a higher price - the old supply versus demand trick - free market capitalism at its best. I bought 2 dozen kits from Squadron Models in Dallas and gave some away at our 456th FIS reunions and donated the rest to our Castle air museum gift shop to sell and keep all the profits. Revell was happy because they sold their entire production run and the individuals who bought cases of them were happy because you see fewer of them on eBay these days. Of the three major 1/48 kits of the F-106 (Hasegawa, Monogram and Revell) the reviews always said Monogram was the most popular among modelers for detail and ease of build.
Revell sold their kits for about $13.99 MSRP at introduction which meant their unit manufacturing cost was probably around $2.80 to $3.00 per kit. After cost of sales was added they probably made 50% net profit margin and went on to the next model. I mention all this because I have questions for you. I looked at your website and the two models you have produced look very nice. So this F-106 must be better and more unique than any that have come before from the major manufacturers.
I like to think that the F-106 website and this forum have made the F-106 a much more popular aircraft for modelers than in previous years because so few of them were built compared to other U.S. fighters. So, I would really like to see yours become the most popular F-106 model as well in terms of detail, buildability and options. I think options will be the key! The more modelers you can satisfy with your kit, the bigger your production can be which drives unit manufacturing cost lower and gross profit margins higher and you can have a higher MSRP as long as the detail and buildability is there. If you can incorporate the A or B Model spine, appropriate air refueling doors or none, Gun mod or none, framed or bubble canopy, vertical or round instruments you will present kit options that have not existed before. The 1/48 decal makers already have your back with many, many squadron decal options so my suggestion is use an existing one that is most popular to include in your kit and include a listing of all others available.
You don't have to answer these especially if they are proprietary information.
So question number one is why build another model of the F-106?
2- Who is your target audience?
3- What is your planned first production unit run?
4- How will your product be any different from any other F-106 1/48 model?
5- What price point are you shooting for?
6- How will you distribute your product?
7- What other "goodies" will you include in your kit?
These are just questions that you have probably already considered and don't require answers.
That's all for now. I wish you every success with your project and we'll provide all the help we can. Keep us posted.
Pat P.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Oct 30, 2013 0:36:54 GMT 9
Good post Pat P. Just FYI -- and I certainly don't want to get off the subject -- the currently available Revell F-106 kit is the exact, same, original Monogram kit. It has been re-issued several times since the first issue with the 87th FIS markings, and box art in 1983. (The first website listed below indicates 1988, but the kit was released in 1983.) These websites will help. www.scalemates.com/products/product.php?id=153519 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogram_modelsA review of the kit... modelingmadness.com/scott/korean/us/f106preview.htmIn the first site I listed they do not have the Revell/Hasegawa boxing of the kit which I believe was originally intended as a Japanese domestic release in 2000. (Gonna have to send that one in to that site.). That release has 159th FIS markings, and an actual photo of the aircraft on the box, and I'll find one of my pics later. EDIT - Here's one, and looking at it closely I believe it is a subsequent boxing as my version does not have the logos on the bottom of the box as this one does. item.mobileweb.ebay.com/viewitem?sbk=1&nav=SEARCH&itemId=360762902510 So, regardless of the boxing, or the name on the box, there has only ever been one version of the Six in 1/48 scale. Modelers have been screaming for a new one for years, and for most of the reasons already mentioned. As far as I know two companies made the B conversion. Falcon had one that was part of a three aircraft set, and Airwaves made one. Both can usually still be found. No one has ever released a B-model as a standalone kit. www.scalemates.com/products/product.php?id=121656 www.scalemates.com/products/product.php?id=206849I'm sure marketing experts can explain better than I can as to the process when deciding what markings will be included in a kit release. Fortunately for modelers, the aftermarket decal business covers us. Also fortunately, the aftermarket decals generally are more complete than the kit decals, and that's why we get the occasional request for information on maintenance stencils, and the like. (Modelers are notoriously anal about their research!) When I can I'll finish scanning my rather large collection of F-106 decals, and share them. (A page under the modeling section maybe?) Happy modeling! |
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Oct 30, 2013 3:29:06 GMT 9
This may be more of an aftermarket item idea, but since we were asked about a wish list for the F-106 kit, here is a long-time want of mine.
Original subsonic, external tanks, and original-style main wheels with the spokes. Both can be seen in this photo of 59-0089 in 11th FIS markings. Notice the pylon for the subsonic tank is different as well, so those would have to be included. (You cannot use the supersonic tank pylons!) It is also important to note that although the tanks are the same* (or VERY close) to the external tanks used on the F-102, the pylons are not. Also notice this is pre-ARR (air refueling receptical), so that has to be considered.
Just for the cool factor, please note the crew names painted on the tail. This would be an aircraft I would model!
(I told you modelers were anal about research!) 
*Does anyone know for sure if these were the same tanks used on the Duece? I've always thought they were, but have never heard for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 30, 2013 4:56:15 GMT 9
This may be more of an aftermarket item idea, but since we were asked about a wish list for the F-106 kit, here is a long-time want of mine.
Original subsonic, external tanks, and original-style main wheels with the spokes. Both can be seen in this photo of 59-0089 in 11th FIS markings. Notice the pylon for the subsonic tank is different as well, so those would have to be included. (You cannot use the supersonic tank pylons!) It is also important to note that although the tanks are the same* (or VERY close) to the external tanks used on the F-102, the pylons are not. Also notice this is pre-ARR (air refueling receptical), so that has to be considered.
Just for the cool factor, please note the crew names painted on the tail. This would be an aircraft I would model!
(I told you modelers were anal about research!)
*Does anyone know for sure if these were the same tanks used on the Duece? I've always thought they were, but have never heard for sure.
believe deuce tanks had fins on them to direct empty tanks to drop nose first away from the plane when jettisoned- last worked on a deuce 10 Oct '59 when I launched the last of the 27th FIS birds to leave Griffiss.... That is a long time ago |
|
|
|
Post by Diamondback on Oct 30, 2013 5:16:45 GMT 9
So, for variant parts, we're up to... (I'm sorting the options in order of earliest fit to the aircraft) Canopy, A-model: ->Framed ->Blown Spine, A-model: ->No receptacle ->With receptacle (maybe an option to model the slipway open like approaching a tanker, or closed?) Wheels: ->Spoked ->Un-spoked Pylons and drop tanks: ->Early for subsonic tanks ->Late for supersonic tanks Bay doors: ->Original, open ->Original, closed ->With clearance cut for gun, open ->With clearance cut for gun, closed (can either mold gun as part of this if you do a Revellogram-style one-piece closed door, or mold a hole and use the same gun parts as "bay open") Instrument panel: ->Early gauges ->Late tapes Speedbrake: (note, might be able to save tooling cost by just molding the speedbrakes as two separate pieces from the rest of the aircraft, so builder can position as they like) ->Open ->Closed Seats: (thanks for the reminder, Mark!) ->Early ->Late Missile rails: ->Extended ->Retracted Elevons: PLEASE mold these as separate pieces from the rest of the wing! The Revellogram kit 1. only comes with them in "ground drooped" and 2. requires you to hack them off to clean up fuselage seams then reinstall. Maybe have optional "joining tabs" like AMT did on their 1/72 XB-70's wingtips where you have a slot in both the wing and the elevon, and optional tab inserts to glue in for drooped, neutral for level flight, and maybe even a few common deflection angles for those who like to model their birds flying but in attitudes other than Straight & Level? Another trick I might consider would be, if you can find panel joints in the upper fuselage suitably near the weapons bay forward bulkhead and the elevon leading edge, maybe break the fuselage into three subassemblies at those points, building up the nose and engine/tail as separate units then joining those to the wing/weapons bay and then mounting the spine, canopy, intakes and elevons as the last step of construction? Can't remember if Bert Kinzey did a Detail & Scale volume on the Six (I know he had one in the Colors & Markings series) or if I have it in my collection, but if such a book exists it would certainly be worth your while to pick up as a reference if you don't have it already. Part of why markings came up: I've been in touch with several decal manufacturers--Bare-Metal Foil (who published several lines including Experts Choice) have told me they're getting OUT of the decal business completely (in fact, they see scale modeling as a dying hobby so they're trying to refocus their business model on the arts-and-crafts scene), and everyone else I've been in touch with cited lack of demand so no future reprints coming. Hopefully, if this project takes off (maybe you might contact Squadron re their lines) they'll change their tune... EDIT - Found 'em! You're looking for: Detail & Scale # 13 - F-106 Delta Dart (Aero Publishers, Inc., 1983, may have been reprinted by Squadron/Signal Publications) --Amazon: www.amazon.com/F-106-Delta-Dart-detail-scale/dp/1888974265--Historic Aviation: www.historicaviation.com/product_info.po;jsessionid=ziRxSFSXhcZFQMguqR72K9VT?ID=5792D&S Colors & Markings # 1 - F-106 Delta Dart (Kalmbach Books, 1984) --Amazon: www.amazon.com/Color-Markings-F-106-Delta-Dart/dp/0816845255/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1383080718&sr=1-8&keywords=colors+and+markings |
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Oct 30, 2013 5:40:14 GMT 9
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Oct 30, 2013 6:00:34 GMT 9
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 30, 2013 9:03:58 GMT 9
Actually there were several squadrons equipped with the Deuce prior to the shake test...... The fins were added because the tanks, when jettisoned (empty) would roll clear of the pylons and fly with the aircraft, beating hell out of the elevons.......... |
|
