Military AI Works

As far as I know the only difference between the HT2 and HT3 was that the RN birds had a hoist. Now whether that was permanently fitted or it was an optional thing I don't know. That would be the thing to look for, difference-wise.

Yes indeed, I also read that and did a search, but couldn't find a photo of an HT2 with a hoist. I came to the same conclusion that the hoist was removable and not very common.

John

In which case I would say that the two variants can use the same model.

Not my favorite helicopter, but you did a beautiful job on the model!

This is one I can help out with the details, for the Army anyway.

The pole typically carried a Nitesun on the port side, at least in Northern Ireland. Either as is, or with a IR filter.
Also the N.I. ones had an IRCM exhaust that directed the airflow up through the rotors.



Most were fitted with the Gazelle Observation Aid above the co-pilot, if not the aperture was blanked off.


Not a great pic. But shows the different upper 'bubble' with the flat area where the GOA was fitted.


Nitesun




N.I. also seen some 'unusual' fits.

For us oldies, we had one serial number XZ321, which was appropriately nicknamed 'Dusty Bin'.

[edit] As on observation (hope oyu don't mind). Sometihng doesnt look right about the 'manhole cover' area on the stbd side (where the large access panel is just before the tail join)

Thanks Kev, glad to have someone on board who knows about Gazelles, at least for the Army.

I can make an alternative model with the Nitesun and transparent observation bubble. Is that bubble transparent on all sides, including the top?

Could you elaborate on the "manhole cover" area - what do I need to change please?

John

Very nice indeed, just love this little helicopter

Gary

John Young wrote: ↑06 Jan 2021, 06:37 Thanks Kev, glad to have someone on board who knows about Gazelles, at least for the Army.

I can make an alternative model with the Nitesun and transparent observation bubble. Is that bubble transparent on all sides, including the top?

Could you elaborate on the "manhole cover" area - what do I need to change please?

John

No probs, spent 9 years on Gazelles and Lynx.
Pic looking at the top of the bubble with no GOA fitted..
http://data4.primeportal.net/hangar/pie ... of_291.jpg

Manhole cover. Hard to explain. That lower area on the Gazelle has started to round off rather than straight sides with rounded corners.
Pic here...
http://data4.primeportal.net/hangar/pie ... of_291.jpg

Something for the paintkit...
When I was based at Oakington our Gazelles were also used as glorified taxis for the higher ups.
There is a door on the nose that we used to replace with one with a dayglo orange panel with stars on it. Higher up = more stars.
Open door here...
http://data4.primeportal.net/hangar/pie ... of_291.jpg

Bit of useless info...
The wipers and door handles came from Renault!

Thanks Kev, that's really helpful.

I did map that little door on the nose separately for the RAF model so that the letter code can be applied. I think I'll do it on the Army models too so artwork can be applied as you suggested.

The bit that is really puzzling me is that "dustbin" hole in the right fuselage side. I spent a long time trying to pin that shape down, but I'm still not sure. My 3-view plans do show a slight egg-shaped distortion, but photographs are a bit iffy. There is a natural perspective distortion because the the curve is not on a vertical plane. I even tried a Boolean cut circle extruded into the fuselage like the real thing. That too produced a slight egg-shaped distortion when viewed at an angle. I decided not to use the Boolean, however, because it was disturbing the smoothness of the fuselage mesh in that area. Instead I drew a circle on the texture and filled it with a wire mesh image. It's very easy to change the shape, but I'm not clear yet to what. The French "dustbin" is more straight forward with a different with straight sides that is easier to fathom. I'll keep looking.

John

The curve of the manhole itself changes from the front to the rear.
Toward the rear the fuselage is markedly rounder on the lower areas than at the front.
Will also look for pics for you.

This helps I hope.
Its taken pretty much straight on.
Shows the lower curve of the fuselage in that area.
As a bonus its also shows the IRCM.

It's my great regret that, even though I hate hicopleters, I never got to fly a Gazelle. It always looked like a fun little toy.

Looking good, John!

Thanks Kev, I need to make those engine shapes for the SOKO Gaxelles, so the photo is doubly useful.

I'm still inclined to think that the bore is circular with the axis angled to the left. Why would the design need to be more complicated with a pear-shaped bore I wonder?

John

Hi John,
The bore is circular, you are correct.
The cover was made of spring steel and was almost perfectly pre-bent to the correct curvature, both vertically and horizontally.
The angle would be to the left and down.
The area it is at is a compound curve.
I think on yours that area looks too flat from top to bottom.

I have taken the pic and added a red line.
From there downward the fuselage strarts to curve a lot thats why you cant see the lower edge of the cover.

Woohoo, think I found a pic that shows it perfectly....

http://data6.primeportal.net/hangar/jea ... _of_30.jpg

Also from another look, the location seems off.
The grill is level with the bottom part of step, on yours its way higher, it also looks a little big - maybe this is what doesn't look right, and not the model itself?

The engine covers are tricky because they are both different (on military versions anyway).
Its because of the way the exhaust is 'supported', the support has an angle and is not centred.
So on the port side the cover 'cuts' around it, on the stb side it covers it, you can see the stbd side in the pic from the previous post.
The port side...


Good news is the main rotor gearbox covers are the same port and stbd.

Some good pcis here..
https://www.net-maquettes.com/pictures/ ... elle-walk/

I think I have it Kev.

What I did was do what the manufacturer did and bore a circular hole, but this time slightly lower and at right angles to the fuselage surface in the "dustbin" area and not square on to the x axis of the model. That produces more of a compound curve as you suggested:



It's too course at the moment and could do with moving down a tad, which will also accentuate the compound nature a bit more. I don't in any case want to use the Boolean, but I'll try and replicate a smoother shape on the texture.

I had been thinking there were two styles of exhaust support, one angled straight down and the other with the the curve to match the casing. Indeed, there is only one, but it is different, as you say, on each side.

Thanks again. That's progress.

John

Yeah the "support" has to be offset because the tail rotor drive shaft runs along the centrline.
Striclty its not a support it is a cooling duct.
You also have the intermediate gearbox in that area.
Can you import FSDS stuff?
I started a Gazelle years ago, maybe you could use MCX to at least look at some of the details if I guve you a compiled mdl file?

Thanks Kev. I don't think I can import an FSDS file to Gmax easily, but I think I'm back on track now, thanks to your help.

I did discover the reason for the offset support (the drive shaft), only because, at last, I found a photo of the gearbox from the rear. As you say, it is quite tricky to make, but I think I have it correct now.



The "Dustbin" also looks better too using the texture and not the Boolean. Squashing the circle a tad, making it slightly smaller and moving it lower, has given a better shape. I don't think I'll push that any further:



John

John just went through some pics
I have feeling like connection between fuse and tail should be more roundish as well as entire tail. I mean cross section to be more precise.