Different modelling scales for fs9 aircraft?

I have noticed that there seems to be at least two different scales used in the modelling of fs9 aircraft. The stock aircraft are noticeably smaller in scale than many add-on models. This isn't a huge issue except when parking the larger scale aircraft in smaller hangers. Sometimes when the two scales are shown in a group of aircraft grouped on taxiways the size difference can be quite obvious. Is there a an official scale for fs9 aircraft, and if so, why would modeler's not follow that scale?

There can be only one scale, 1:1! Anything else would be silly, or human error. You have made me curious though; do you have any specific examples?

Hi,

 

The autogen and such tend to be oversized, about 1.1 normal size. Perhaps some authors try to match this?

The Iris Harrier is about 20% larger than the Harrier from UKMIK. The Electric Lightning by K. ITO is also too large compared to the UKMIL planes. There are others which don't come to mind. I get the comment that there is a scale for modelling, but these aren't subtle differences, so someone or something is wrong.

 

The forums discussions about the RAF Gutersloh scenery contain several references to the planes of the same design but from other sources being different in scale to each other. It is vaery obvious when you park planes next to each other. I could perhaps post a screen shot if it is allowed.

any specific examples?

 

The IRIS Harrier is very obviously larger than the UKMIL Harriers and will not fit into the hardened hides or hangers. If permitted, I could post a screenshot. The Ito Electric Lightning is also oversized. Even various 737-800's looked to be model (scale meaning the modeled out of scale (scale meaning the default aircraft =1:1).

Never knew the Me-262 was so large (payware 262, default Lear)

 

I think that to the person who made each model, they are made to 1:1, but the actual size depends on how accurate the initial setup is.

The ME 262 photo is a good example of what I am asking about.

Difficult to judge as the Lear and the 262 are at different distances and the wingspan variation is only 13%. The Lear has a wingspan of 48 feet, the 262 41 feet. Not that I don't believe you, I just never noticed it.

Here are some pics showing what I am seeing:http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee300/finefettle/Screenshot%20383_zpsx1mae464.pnghttp://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee300/finefettle/Screenshot%20385_zpsjfxxqvby.png

I'm certain that all Harrier aircraft were similar in size. The IRIS model shown in these photos is clearly not rendered to the same scale as the UKMIL version.

I noticed this years ago. I 'fly' vehicles like Semi Jet truck, and UFO's, Beluga, SR-71, etc. Just don't park them next to each other as it kills the 'realism'. And if you trade FDEs for Iris and UKMIL harriers neither one will fly good. Why? Because they write (code) the FDEs according to the 'scale'. Nothing new. I myself pretend the add-on models are 'normal'. What else can we do.

Chuck B

Napamule

Hi,

 

If you want to find out which one is "right", you can load the MDL file into ModelConverterX, change the Grid Step in the Options/Renderer Settings to 3.05 (meters, equals 10 ft), and measure the fuselage length and wingspan on the grid (top view). Then compare that to the real numbers.

Just as an aside, the FGA1 Kestrel was 42 feet 6 inches long and the Harrier GR3 is 47 ft 2 in. The Harrier GR9 is 46 ft 4 in. So Im just wondering if maybe UKMil used the Kestral dimensions for the Harriers and IRIS used a different dimension. Just an idle thought.

 

Sean