NARAM 63 Sport Scale Competition

[kbfrazier]

Hello,

I'm thinking of attending NARAM 63 and want to compete in the Sport Scale event.

I'm pretty good at building a scale models and was wondering what would be good model to compete with.

Size
Military vs Civilian
Heavy Lift vs Sounding
Single motor vs. Cluster
Booster Pods (Active vs Static)
Finned vs. Active Guidance
3D Printed (Getting a Phrozen Sonic MEGA 8K) & SolidWorks CAD program. Are points deducted for 3D parts?

Maybe this in an extremely detailed model.



These are just a few of questions. Many more will come.

Thanks,

Keith

 

[Ez2cDave]

Like this ?

I suggest that this thread be moved over to the Scale forum.

Dave F.

 

[James Duffy]

That's a Vladimir Minakov drawing. It will make a cool model, but there's no way to trust the data as he liked to make stuff up.

An unimpeachably accurate drawing of the Bomarc can be found in Peter Alway's "Selected USAF Missiles of the Cold War," which can be purchased from ARA Press or Aerospace Specialty Products. Start with the general dimensions from Alway's drawing of the Bomarc, then fill in the gaps from the Minakov drawing. If they conflict (and they probably will) trust the Alway drawing.

 

[Ez2cDave]

That's a Vladimir Minakov drawing. It will make a cool model, but there's no way to trust the data as he liked to make stuff up.

An unimpeachably accurate drawing of the Bomarc can be found in Peter Alway's "Selected USAF Missiles of the Cold War," which can be purchased from ARA Press or Aerospace Specialty Products. Start with the general dimensions from Alway's drawing of the Bomarc, then fill in the gaps from the Minakov drawing. If they conflict (and they probably will) trust the Alway drawing.

James,

Remember, the models are judged for accuracy, according to the data presented, not other data that may be available from other.

Alway does not get into the "nuts, bolts, screws, rivets" level of detail that Minakov does. So, if using Alway's data you can't verify fine surface details, while the Minakov drawing backs up whatever you built. The judges have no other criteria to go by, other than data submitted by the modeler.

If you were judging a model, submitted with Minakov data, and you docked its score, because "Alway says different", you would find yourself in an immediate protest situation. If you attempted to repeat your "Alway says" position, the modeler would be right to seek your removal as a judge.

Peter Alway, while a valuable resource, is not an unimpeachable source, as I can cite numerous errors in ROTW.

Dave F.

 

[caveduck]

There are some really great photos from BOMARC production at Boeing here: https://secure.boeingimages.com/CS.aspx?VP3=DamView&VBID=2JRSN2ATKURURU

Some perpetually popular scale models at NARAM:
Saturn 1B
Saturn V
Argo D4 Javelin
Astrobee 1500

 

[TheAviator]

Hello,

I'm thinking of attending NARAM 63 and want to compete in the Sport Scale event.

I'm pretty good at building a scale models and was wondering what would be good model to compete with.

Size
Military vs Civilian
Heavy Lift vs Sounding
Single motor vs. Cluster
Booster Pods (Active vs Static)
Finned vs. Active Guidance
3D Printed (Getting a Phrozen Sonic MEGA 8K) & SolidWorks CAD program. Are points deducted for 3D parts?

Maybe this in an extremely detailed model.



These are just a few of questions. Many more will come.

Thanks,

Keith

No points are deducted for 3D prints, though you may get more credit if you did the 3D models yourself (see rule 52.11.6)

52.11.6 Degree of Difficulty: 200 points Points must be awarded according to the difficulty experienced by the competitor in building the model and adapting it for flight. Consideration should be given to whether the entry was built from a kit. Points should be awarded for parts and details that were individually constructed by the competitor. To facilitate judging, the competitor should point out difficult assemblies or construction problems in his/her data.

In general, pick a model that you want to build. A well constructed, well finished but simpler model will generally out-place a complex but poorly finished model. Play to whatever strengths you have in your pocket. The top (static score) models last year were a mix of space launchers and sounding rockets, but the top three in C and D division were all sounding rockets excepting Guy Gehlhausen's Atlas V 411. This was in part due to the windy Friday scale day. It has to fly to win!

 

[Ez2cDave]

No points are deducted for 3D prints, though you may get more credit if you did the 3D models yourself (see rule 52.11.6)


In general, pick a model that you want to build. A well constructed, well finished but simpler model will generally out-place a complex but poorly finished model. Play to whatever strengths you have in your pocket. The top (static score) models last year were a mix of space launchers and sounding rockets, but the top three in C and D division were all sounding rockets excepting Guy Gehlhausen's Atlas V 411. This was in part due to the windy Friday scale day. It has to fly to win!

Chris Flanigan flew this 3-D printed TALOS at NARAM-50 . . .

 

[dpower]

Depending on your goals, building a staged or clustered model can improve overall score due to mission points. I built an Estes 1:100 SV for NRC this year, modified for a 5 motor cluster.

 

[Ez2cDave]

Depending on your goals, building a staged or clustered model can improve overall score due to mission points.

Staged AND Clustered . . . With clustered Upper Stage(s).

Example : A 5+5+1 Saturn V

Dave F.

 

[PeterAlway]

JUst a comment on some things said about Minakov's drawings vs. my drawings. My drawings are imperfect (I try to make everything they show accurate, but my sources are not infallible, and I am not infallible. Minakov's drawings are imperfect (He shows a lot of detail and dimensions without a single supporting reference for any of it, probably measured off of photographs). I'm sure that both of us have made the best drawings we could with the information available. For purposes of NAR competition, that doesn't matter. Your model will be judged against the data you provide. No judge will look at a model documented with Minakov's or anyone else's drawings and dock you points for not agreeing with one of my drawings that you did not submit with your model.

I will add that Minakov's drawing depicts a Bomarc B and my drawing depicts a Bomarc A, so that there are several differences simply because they depict different versions.

Back to the original question, you should build a model of a subject that strongly appeals to you. It takes a lot of time to make a good contest-quality scale model, and it will be a good experience if you build something you love. If the Bomarc B turns you on, then the Bomarc B using the data you have found will be a very fine project.

Sport Scale does not require precision dimensioned drawings. If you find a subject you love and only have photographs and maybe a side view with no dimensions, that is a perfectly legitimate subject--don't be afraid to give it a shot.

As far as your methods of cunstruction, there is a difficulty score in Sport Scale, but you can make a case for it in the documentation you hand in with the model. For instance, if you created the files you printed from, that works in your favor.

Mostly just build something you love.