From Photos only!!!

[Peter]

Only if we can make cool sound effects too

Peter

[cliff strachan]

I'm not too sure exactly how this cook-up is supposed to work. But I hope that my intentions qualify. I'm planning to draw three views of a Tiger Moth - the DH82C version - from both pictures that I've taken from one side of a Moth that is currently part of the WCAM's collection and smaller 3views of the DH82A that I've already got. The DH82A views will provide a top view after some deletions have been made - primarily the wing slats and a tail watchamaycallit on top of the fuselage at the rear. And I need some more photos showing the other side of the museum's Moth so that I can show the airspeed indicator on the wing that was an integral part of most Tigers. This last detail will determine the scale. At the present, I believe that as much as I would like to model the aircraft in 1/72nd this scale would be too small.

Currently, I propose to proceed by stitching together photos of the one side; tracing the result; xeroxing this onto a copy of the 3views of the DH82A and from there .  .  .   .

I actually thought that a computer might be able to help but I'm not sure exactly how.

To this stage - that is a workable 3view - I believe all is expected to fulfill the requirements of this particular cook-up. Perhaps I've got it wrong.
Cliff.

[Balsabasher]

Well this is my approach,take one photograph of the Handley Page Type S24,in fact this is the only photograph ever taken of the Type S.24 ! place sheet of drawing paper onto board and study the picture,using the standard wheel divide out that onto fuselage dimensions,keep cross checking different areas and note angles with a protractor,keep working up the drawing,utilise known full size dimensions ie wingspan and fuselage length,scale accordingly,keep looking from a distance and constantly refer to your photograph/s,end result sufficent information to build a solid model,the drawing stage to me was real fun and such a challenge,if you like sketch in the details roughly and place sheet of tracing paper over the top of drawing and tidy everything up,another good tip is to look at the drawing in a mirror,surprising what this shows up dont worry we are not after perfection this is a really skillful thing to achieve and not everyone is a draughtsman,as long as you can put pencil to paper it works and geat fun,give it a go !
Barry.




http://smm.solidmodelmemories.net/Gallery/albums/userpics/10005/HP24_PICTURE.JPG




http://smm.solidmodelmemories.net/Gallery/albums/userpics/10005/HP24_DRAWING_UP.JPG


http://smm.solidmodelmemories.net/Gallery/albums/userpics/10005/DRAWING_PLANS_HP24.JPG

[Mark Braunlich]

Barry, is this the same bird?   HPS-1 is USN designation...Handley Page Scout.  Wing looks quite different in this view.  Tyre/wheel looks like standard 100mm x 700mm, same as SE5a.  

[Balsabasher]

Where did you find that Mark ?! excellent and it answers the final wing arrangement that I was looking for,this picture will be invalueable in the construction and that the first time the U.S.Navy designation has been mentioned.
Incidently thats a BR2 Rotary up front so I bet it was a bit down on performance,the rear fuselage swung to allow carrier stowage,thank you for locating this on my behalf,I had  better re-draw the definitive wing shape now it is known.
Barry.

[Will]

Cliff,

Don't forget there's the DH82C 1:72 GA from Aircraft of the Fighting Powers I uploaded.
Its not from volume 1 so might be accurate .
http://smm.solidmodelmemories.net/Gallery/displayimage.php?album=search&cat=0&pid=5801#top_display_media

Will

[Will]

Barry,

Your photo and a brief mention of the USN HPS-1 also appears in the Harleyford US Navy Fighters history.  No drawing though.
I thought you might have a full set of the Harleyford books - the ones I've bought or borrowed from the library are great.

Will

[Balsabasher]

I will take a look,I think that book is in my Harleyford collection ? I buy them second hand from the local book shop.
Barry.

[Mark Braunlich]

Barry,
The photo at reply #18 is from United States Navy Aircraft since 1911 by Gordon Swanborough and Peter M. Bowers.  That would be a Putnam book on your side of the pond....over here it's published by Naval Institute Press.

This appears to be the second prototype with 6° of dihedral.  See link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handley_Page_Type_S

B.R.2 is the same engine that was in the Snipe....can't have been too underpowered.  Better than that A.B.C. Dragonfly that was fouling other aircraft programs at the time.

Mark

[cliff strachan]

Will, for some reason or other I just get: "the file does not exist." While it may be my fault could you check it to see what the problem is. Thanks for trying in the meantime.
Cliff

[Will]

Cliff,

The link in my earlier post works for me.  Otherwise you can put DH82C in the "Search" on the SMM gallery and it comes up too.

Cheers
Will

[Balsabasher]

Cliif it comes up fine this end,a pity that there is no photo reference but the information is interesting,thank Mark for locating it on my behalf.
Barry.

[cliff strachan]

Thanks again Will. I followed your suggestion and when I "searched" for a DH82C miracles of miracles I got the 3-views. But I believe that I've got those already and while not trying to be ungrateful I think they are lacking in the degree of detail that I was hoping for. Which reminds me, will someone please tell me if I proceed as planned and outlined in a previous posting is that enough or in other words is the expectation of a workable plan sufficient to be part of the cook-up? I'm not too sure that I fully understand what's required. (I know that I'm slowing down and not speeding up with age but this really is a different kind of cook-up.)
Cliff.

[Oceaneer99]

Barry, I still think you have performed a miracle going from the photo to your drawing, but you have some very good pointers to your method.  I have a photo that has lines drawn all over it from my poor attempt at something similar a while back. It may be time to dust that photo off!

Garet

[Balsabasher]

What we should remember is that every drawing starts as 1/ A few photographs 2/ Known dimensions,the problem is as we know the more obscure the subject the more ground work is needed from that invalueable only picture available,yes the lines drawn over a picture is a good method as well,it is difficult however as always to get a perfect side view as camera distortion can play some tricks so its all a compromise.
This really has been an eye opening cookup already for many of us but above all it teaches eye/hand/drawing/observation skills that we can all utilise and expand on,I think whatever method is used then as long as the final result looks interesting then thats fine to me at least,I think it is true to say that many solid plans were drawn up by eye by unskilled draughtsmen even those in some kits but there is charm in those plans,building the 'Hobbies' range from those green printed drawings has revealed many errors in interpretation,I had to redraw the Blackbrn Botha as the wing was not even in the right cnfiguration,that was something I could not live with ! probably drawn by someone  who did not know his aeroplanes ? which brings up another interesting point,this is all about that important feel for a subject,the more close to your heart then the more likely it is to succeed.
To Cliff I would say select as many good pictures as you can of the Tiger Moth and attempt your own individual drawing of it,you may be surprised to see it turn  out better than anything available,and above all it will have been fun along the way,best of luck with this everyone the end results should be very interesting.
Barry.