Plastic Model Conversions

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
FWIW - a Plastic Model Conversion article I wrote as part of a NARAM Tips series. A lot of generic tips plus a few examples of specific models.

Use THIS link first https://georgesrockets.com/GRP/AOL/GCGassaway/contest/PMC.htm
P8070003.jpg


A revised version is on the NAR website, with different photos. But it only shows the thumbnail images of drawings, not the enlarged version if you click them. See the original link above first.
https://www.nar.org/contest-flying/competition-guide/craftsmanship-events/plastic-model-conversion/
Stuff like converting the 1/144 shuttle orbiter.
Orbiter.gif


And the F-16.
F16L.gif


And Jupiter-C and Saturn-V.
Juno_SaturnL.gif


This is one of the most useful generic tips, for ANY model. Usually, not enough room in PMC's to store bulky cloth chutes. But normal chutes often have the shroud lines pull off too easily. Unless the lines are run across the top:
ChuteL.gif
 
Last edited:
They only have PMC at NARAM every once in a while. It's a prang festival; competitors grumble about it, spectators love it...for the same reason!

That is why "PMC" ( Plastic Model Conversion ) has earned the nicknames "Plastic Model Destruction" and "Plastic Death" . . . Personally, I love PMC !

Dave F.

5979084862_d2d1dd19a1_b.jpg

11-07-24-21-41-42 - IMG_2017.JPG

2016-0724 - 2141.04 IMG_6417.JPG

2016-0724 - 2141.10 IMG_6418.JPG

5999565320_9c7741b3c2_b.jpg

Apollo 27 model.jpg.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 009-PMC.pdf
    4.9 MB · Views: 8
  • monogram-satv.pdf
    2.1 MB · Views: 8
  • pmc-start.pdf
    2.4 MB · Views: 11
  • Mission_Worksheet_Ver_2010.1.pdf
    141.7 KB · Views: 9
nice! I have not been to a NARAM or built a PMC in many years. I was wondering how PMC competition may have evolved with LMR, up to 1500 g. Can you show any more examples?
 
Well, the reason that ban exists is that Harry Stine happened to see a poorly done submarine crash. Game over. Personally I think they should be fairly easy, you just need enough fin and some nose weight. Back then people were tempted to rely on the very small maneuvering planes in the prototypes, which were not really sufficient, even if you added a bunch of weight. Dynamic stability was not well understood by the rocket crowd in those days.

BTW putting rocket motors in the nacelles of an SR-71 is not a good idea. I've seen a number of attempts over the years and probably 3/4 of them have crashed due to unbalanced thrust and/or non-simultaneous ignition. In competition I think that is not allowed anymore.
I seen a numerous successful clusters with the Estes kit. Should not be that hard on a PMC. Like submarines, an over confident yet inexperienced "rocket scientist " gets in a competition, crashes the odd rocket and gets everyone scared. That leads to a good old fashioned banning. Idiots. :)
 
Thanks, I rarely peek into the gallery. I saw two or three kits that I would like to add to my collection. I loved the MMX conversions and photo documentation, cardboard cutout and all. However, it did not adress my questiono of PMC in the LMR world.

That Chinese CHANG-ZHENG CZ-2F weighed about 2-2.5 lb. , at liftoff.

The problem with higher power rocketry is mainly that there are no suitable plastic models that are large enough.

This Revell / Monogram 1/48 kit of the Lancer B-1B Bomber is the largest "convertible" kit I have ever seen.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-c1998-Revell-Monogram-1-48-Scale-B-1B-Bomber-Lancer-Extras-Open-Box/184390565058

As I recall, it's about 3 feet long, when built.

20 years ago, that kit could be had for about $50 - $60 . . . Not anymore !

Here is the LINK to the INSTRUCTIONS . . .

https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/8/2/3/1181823-72-instructions.pdf

Dave
 
Last edited:
The Horizon kits are nice! A bit pricy, but very nice.

I'm wanting to do a PMC to the Bandai UFO Interceptor, but I also want to build the kit as a conventional kit.

I. Vac formed the body:

gMRXorZh.jpg


Here is what the kit built looks like:

C43QTLbh.jpg


I figure I can put a BT-5 inside the fuselage, make 3 fins from the rear landing gear and vertical stab.
The front missile will have to be figured out, I think a BT-20 will be too big.
 
The front missile will have to be figured out, I think a BT-20 will be too big.
Would a BT-5 fit through the narrowest spot? If so, you could run one with a pair of centering rings forward and a pair of bulkheads with holes (cousins of centering "rings") behind. That would hold it connected and withstand bending loads at the junction. You might even fit a streamer inside the missile.
 
Excellent Interceptor! That looks too big to be the Bandai kit. Is it a resin kit?

It looks like you have a bit of a UFO display in the background? Any more photo's?


Alas, I am not the builder. The modeler who created that beautiful model, Romano De Marco, sent me those images, several years ago ( circa 2008, I think )..

If I recall correctly, I believe that it is either scratch-built or, possibly, a kit made by ENA Models ( about 27-29 inches long ) . . . Great talent !

Dave F.
 
Last edited:
Would a BT-5 fit through the narrowest spot? If so, you could run one with a pair of centering rings forward and a pair of bulkheads with holes (cousins of centering "rings") behind. That would hold it connected and withstand bending loads at the junction. You might even fit a streamer inside the missile.

I like how your thinking here!
The BT-5 is actually slightly to wide to fit well in the fuselage. Surgery will need to be done.
 
Alas, I am not the builder. The modeler who created that beautiful model, Romano De Marco, sent me those images, several years ago ( circa 2008, I think )..

If I recall correctly, I believe that it is either scratch-built or, possibly, a kit made by ENA Models ( about 27-29 inches long ) . . . Great talent !

Dave F.

Great talent indeed!
 
Did conversions on Revell 1:32 F-104C and MiG-21MF. Also Monogram 1:144 Saturn V and 1:72 Hawk/Testors XF-92A. The latter being a test subject with inverted balsa t-tail for stability and flown on an MPC B3-3m.
 
Back
Top