United 747-400 Version 3

VECTOR1 · 07-25-2005, 11:29 AM

Hi Guys,

Here we go again. Version three enjoy, I am off out to China tomorrow so I look forward to hearing from you.

David Hingtgen · 07-25-2005, 04:47 PM

2 things, for N174UA as first repainted:

1. Still need to change the window pattern on the main deck. Blank off the forward-most 2 windows. Also, aft of the first door, there should be 8 windows, then 6 blanks. Do both of these changes on both sides.

2. The grey spot at the bottom of the fin leading edge should NOT be grey. That was correct for 117, but is not for 174.

Pic attached.

David Hingtgen · 07-25-2005, 04:58 PM

While there are no photos of N174UA *online* in exactly this configuration, here is sistership N173UA in 1996 and 1999. Asides from the SATCOM antenna added in the mid-90's, it's exactly what we're going for--no Star Alliance logo, and the 8/6 window pattern between doors 1 and 2. (As opposed to the current 3/9/2 window pattern)

Vector1---here's the window pattern on the main deck---forward-most 2 are blank, then 8 windows and 6 blanks behind the first door.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/047370/L
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/115409/L

(Ignore the bare spot around the APU exhaust---seems to be fairly rare in the fleet)

Final request: please emphasize to the factory that the view from BELOW is the important one with regards to the bare metal belly strip shape. It must be the width of the nosegear doors, regardless of how that makes it look when viewed from the side. (Except of course where it starts to taper aft of the wing)

Make sure they don't try to match the side-view, we don't want a "very low silver belly" like TWA twin-stripes, etc. The bare belly strip is invisible when viewed from the side.

David Hingtgen · 07-25-2005, 05:10 PM

Third thing:

Would still like bare leading and upper edges on the winglets. See here:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/363046/L/

DLmd11 · 07-25-2005, 10:55 PM

What are the chances of seeing the artwork for the American 707.

I know it is not as complex as the UA 744, but I would be interested in it.

jjorgemiami · 07-26-2005, 01:53 AM

Woooo Hooooo Sweet!!!! Vector, pass this along to all involved.

YOU GUYS ROCK!!!

David Hingtgen · 07-27-2005, 05:48 PM

A few comments while we're waiting for artwork version 4 (hopefully the final one, yay).

1. My winglet drawing above is just for emphasis, the actual bare section should be quite a bit thinner. Here's a nice new pic of one: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/701659/L/

2. Make sure the factory paints all the landing gear parts light grey.

3. I'm somewhat concerned about "Blue 4". It's hard to know what the colors will actually look like, but it looks quite "sky blue" in the drawings. In real life, it's a very medium blue. The tail logo blue, and "medium blue stripes on the fin" are hard to tell from each other in most situations. The sticker on the fin seems to fade rather fast, but it rarely gets as blue as in that drawing.

In other words: darken blue 4, make it more "intense" medium blue, rather than the sky blue it appears now. Blue 4 should, I think, match the blue found in the previous scheme of the 1980's.

Somewhat similar comment for Blue 2---too "powder" blue. Not intense enough. All of UAL's blues in that scheme are RICH and deep. Remember, we're going for N174UA as first repainted, not after 5 years of fading. Blue 2 and 4 should both be made more of an intense blue. 2 needs more "royal blue" added in. Or maybe just a tiny bit of purple--the medium fin-stripe/fuselage stripe has always looked just ever so slightly purple to me, I think that's what it needs---a bit of royal purple-blue added in. But certainly a much deeper, richer blue.

I think this photo shows all the colors well:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/655164/L As you can see, a fresh tail logo is quite close in color to the medium blue of the fin stripes. The blue fuselage stripe would match that. UAL's stripes and logos fade FAST, so a "newly painted" model should be more intense than the average photo. I mean, you'll find lots of UAL planes with flat-out "rose pink" stripes, but that's only because they fade like that so quickly. We want new and vibrant markings.

If the blues are too light, it'll really throw off the look of the orange/red/blue stripe---go look a pic of the real thing, the blue stripe is often hard to tell from the darker blue belly. This photo again: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/701659/M/ is about as faded as the fuselage stripes get without looking awful and being replaced.

This looks right to me, for the Blue 4 and Blue 2: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/171221/L

Final comment: It looks like the fuselage stripe on the drawing matches the tail logo, and is thus Blue 4. I think it should match the fin striping, and be Blue 2. Look at the photo just above--the small logo doesn't match the striping. Logos are blue 4, but all striping is blue 2. And the fuselage stripes are definitely much deeper blue than the drawing.

Yes, that's a long comment, but "stripes and logos are the wrong color" would be a fairly big issue. And sorry for bringing this up so late--I was so focused on small printing details, I forgot to check the colors! If nothing else, or in summary:

Match the blues colors to this photo: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/171221/L Note color of fuselage stripes---the blue one is much darker/richer than the artwork, and doesn't match the logo.

Here, quick redraw of fuselage stripes---basically, made them a more "intense" blue, added just a tiny bit of purple, and made slightly darker--looks MUCH better:

Flying Ace · 07-27-2005, 06:32 PM

Not to criticize anything that you have done David becasue you have clearly done alot of homework...more than I have time to devote to. But I certainly would not advise the Inflight folks for using Airliners.net references for color actual determinations. I always thought when licenses were obtained the airliners always assisted the manufacturers with providing color samples and paint chips of the what they use on their aircraft. Then there was some discussion here awhile ago about how actual color on the aircraft seems to change at different fields of vision...from close up to very far away and hence the same can be applied to scale models as well. Although your point is taken about color matching, my point is to suggest that I am not so certain that using airliners.net as a reference for color comparison is such a prudent step at this point...and acieving a good color match that is going to look accurate on the model is going to be more difficult than I think either of us are capable of understanding.

I know from experience in my discussions with model makers like Pacmin and Bader models they typically are supplied with samples of the actual paint to develop something similar that will work on their models. And I know Gemini has hinted at something similar. So I would not be surprised if Inflight doesn't do that also. Maybe I'm wrong..don't know for sure.

David Hingtgen · 07-27-2005, 07:21 PM

Yes, I know, I'm using it mainly to illustrate my point that it should have much darker, richer blues than the artwork drawing. Not necessairly as a "true match" but merely a--"hey look, they're much closer to royal blue than sky blue".

Either way, the "sky blue" color is way off, no matter what your reference. And the middle blue is too "dull" as well. Perhaps the colors on the drawings are "exaggerated" in their difference to make it easier for the factory to tell what goes where---with so many similar shades, it would be difficult to tell. But perhaps they are close to what is to be used--in which case, I would ask for much darker, richer colors for "Blue 2 and 4".

Finally--regardless of shade/hue, the tail logo and fuselage stripe should not match, which it appears they do on the artwork. Fuselage stripe should match the lighter of the 2 stripe colors on the tail.

If IF200 gets actual UAL samples etc, great! But making sure the right color goes in the right spot is part of it too. The lightest blue (and it should still be a "medium" blue) should be for logos only, not anything else. As it is, the model looks like it has dark blue, and two shades of powdery/sky blue. Should be dark blue, and 2 slightly different shades of "royal blue".

Here is my "corrected" tailfin, which at least on my monitor, looks much more correct. Deep royal blues. (Darkest blue left alone, it's fine--but the tail logo is more pure medium blue, and the lighter of the tail stripes is rich and royal)

jjorgemiami · 07-28-2005, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Hingtgen

Yes, I know, I'm using it mainly to illustrate my point that it should have much darker, richer blues than the artwork drawing. Not necessairly as a "true match" but merely a--"hey look, they're much closer to royal blue than sky blue".

Either way, the "sky blue" color is way off, no matter what your reference. And the middle blue is too "dull" as well. Perhaps the colors on the drawings are "exaggerated" in their difference to make it easier for the factory to tell what goes where---with so many similar shades, it would be difficult to tell. But perhaps they are close to what is to be used--in which case, I would ask for much darker, richer colors for "Blue 2 and 4".

Finally--regardless of shade/hue, the tail logo and fuselage stripe should not match, which it appears they do on the artwork. Fuselage stripe should match the lighter of the 2 stripe colors on the tail.

If IF200 gets actual UAL samples etc, great! But making sure the right color goes in the right spot is part of it too. The lightest blue (and it should still be a "medium" blue) should be for logos only, not anything else. As it is, the model looks like it has dark blue, and two shades of powdery/sky blue. Should be dark blue, and 2 slightly different shades of "royal blue".

Here is my "corrected" tailfin, which at least on my monitor, looks much more correct. Deep royal blues. (Darkest blue left alone, it's fine--but the tail logo is more pure medium blue, and the lighter of the tail stripes is rich and royal)

This looks correct to me David! I too don't know, but I hope United has provided Inflight200 with accurate paint chips, Flying Ace.

07-25-2005, 11:29 AM	#1
VECTOR1 Collector Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 141	United 747-400 Version 3 Hi Guys, Here we go again. Version three enjoy, I am off out to China tomorrow so I look forward to hearing from you.

07-25-2005, 04:47 PM	#2
David Hingtgen Complete Wacko! Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Iowa Posts: 4,055	2 things, for N174UA as first repainted: 1. Still need to change the window pattern on the main deck. Blank off the forward-most 2 windows. Also, aft of the first door, there should be 8 windows, then 6 blanks. Do both of these changes on both sides. 2. The grey spot at the bottom of the fin leading edge should NOT be grey. That was correct for 117, but is not for 174. Pic attached. __________________ *We need more TWA twin-stripes!*

07-25-2005, 04:58 PM	#3
David Hingtgen Complete Wacko! Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Iowa Posts: 4,055	While there are no photos of N174UA online in exactly this configuration, here is sistership N173UA in 1996 and 1999. Asides from the SATCOM antenna added in the mid-90's, it's exactly what we're going for--no Star Alliance logo, and the 8/6 window pattern between doors 1 and 2. (As opposed to the current 3/9/2 window pattern) Vector1---here's the window pattern on the main deck---forward-most 2 are blank, then 8 windows and 6 blanks behind the first door. http://www.airliners.net/open.file/047370/L http://www.airliners.net/open.file/115409/L (Ignore the bare spot around the APU exhaust---seems to be fairly rare in the fleet) Final request: please emphasize to the factory that the view from BELOW is the important one with regards to the bare metal belly strip shape. It must be the width of the nosegear doors, regardless of how that makes it look when viewed from the side. (Except of course where it starts to taper aft of the wing) Make sure they don't try to match the side-view, we don't want a "very low silver belly" like TWA twin-stripes, etc. The bare belly strip is invisible when viewed from the side. __________________ *We need more TWA twin-stripes!* Last edited by David Hingtgen; 07-25-2005 at 05:04 PM.

07-25-2005, 05:10 PM	#4
David Hingtgen Complete Wacko! Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Iowa Posts: 4,055	Third thing: Would still like bare leading and upper edges on the winglets. See here: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/363046/L/ __________________ *We need more TWA twin-stripes!*

07-26-2005, 01:53 AM	#6
jjorgemiami Complete Wacko! Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: MIAMI Age: 47 Posts: 5,870	Woooo Hooooo Sweet!!!! Vector, pass this along to all involved. YOU GUYS ROCK!!! __________________ Fly United Airlines we are R I S I N G !

07-25-2005, 10:55 PM	#5
DLmd11 Master Collector Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: suburb of chicago Posts: 728	What are the chances of seeing the artwork for the American 707. I know it is not as complex as the UA 744, but I would be interested in it.

07-27-2005, 05:48 PM	#7
David Hingtgen Complete Wacko! Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Iowa Posts: 4,055	A few comments while we're waiting for artwork version 4 (hopefully the final one, yay). 1. My winglet drawing above is just for emphasis, the actual bare section should be quite a bit thinner. Here's a nice new pic of one: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/701659/L/ 2. Make sure the factory paints all the landing gear parts light grey. 3. I'm somewhat concerned about "Blue 4". It's hard to know what the colors will actually look like, but it looks quite "sky blue" in the drawings. In real life, it's a very medium blue. The tail logo blue, and "medium blue stripes on the fin" are hard to tell from each other in most situations. The sticker on the fin seems to fade rather fast, but it rarely gets as blue as in that drawing. In other words: darken blue 4, make it more "intense" medium blue, rather than the sky blue it appears now. Blue 4 should, I think, match the blue found in the previous scheme of the 1980's. Somewhat similar comment for Blue 2---too "powder" blue. Not intense enough. All of UAL's blues in that scheme are RICH and deep. Remember, we're going for N174UA as first repainted, not after 5 years of fading. Blue 2 and 4 should both be made more of an intense blue. 2 needs more "royal blue" added in. Or maybe just a tiny bit of purple--the medium fin-stripe/fuselage stripe has always looked just ever so slightly purple to me, I think that's what it needs---a bit of royal purple-blue added in. But certainly a much deeper, richer blue. I think this photo shows all the colors well: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/655164/L As you can see, a fresh tail logo is quite close in color to the medium blue of the fin stripes. The blue fuselage stripe would match that. UAL's stripes and logos fade FAST, so a "newly painted" model should be more intense than the average photo. I mean, you'll find lots of UAL planes with flat-out "rose pink" stripes, but that's only because they fade like that so quickly. We want new and vibrant markings. If the blues are too light, it'll really throw off the look of the orange/red/blue stripe---go look a pic of the real thing, the blue stripe is often hard to tell from the darker blue belly. This photo again: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/701659/M/ is about as faded as the fuselage stripes get without looking awful and being replaced. This looks right to me, for the Blue 4 and Blue 2: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/171221/L Final comment: It looks like the fuselage stripe on the drawing matches the tail logo, and is thus Blue 4. I think it should match the fin striping, and be Blue 2. Look at the photo just above--the small logo doesn't match the striping. Logos are blue 4, but all striping is blue 2. And the fuselage stripes are definitely much deeper blue than the drawing. Yes, that's a long comment, but "stripes and logos are the wrong color" would be a fairly big issue. And sorry for bringing this up so late--I was so focused on small printing details, I forgot to check the colors! If nothing else, or in summary: Match the blues colors to this photo: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/171221/L Note color of fuselage stripes---the blue one is much darker/richer than the artwork, and doesn't match the logo. Here, quick redraw of fuselage stripes---basically, made them a more "intense" blue, added just a tiny bit of purple, and made slightly darker--looks MUCH better: __________________ *We need more TWA twin-stripes!* Last edited by David Hingtgen; 07-27-2005 at 06:08 PM.

07-27-2005, 06:32 PM	#8
Flying Ace Registered User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 1,150	Not to criticize anything that you have done David becasue you have clearly done alot of homework...more than I have time to devote to. But I certainly would not advise the Inflight folks for using Airliners.net references for color actual determinations. I always thought when licenses were obtained the airliners always assisted the manufacturers with providing color samples and paint chips of the what they use on their aircraft. Then there was some discussion here awhile ago about how actual color on the aircraft seems to change at different fields of vision...from close up to very far away and hence the same can be applied to scale models as well. Although your point is taken about color matching, my point is to suggest that I am not so certain that using airliners.net as a reference for color comparison is such a prudent step at this point...and acieving a good color match that is going to look accurate on the model is going to be more difficult than I think either of us are capable of understanding. I know from experience in my discussions with model makers like Pacmin and Bader models they typically are supplied with samples of the actual paint to develop something similar that will work on their models. And I know Gemini has hinted at something similar. So I would not be surprised if Inflight doesn't do that also. Maybe I'm wrong..don't know for sure.

07-27-2005, 07:21 PM	#9
David Hingtgen Complete Wacko! Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Iowa Posts: 4,055	Yes, I know, I'm using it mainly to illustrate my point that it should have much darker, richer blues than the artwork drawing. Not necessairly as a "true match" but merely a--"hey look, they're much closer to royal blue than sky blue". Either way, the "sky blue" color is way off, no matter what your reference. And the middle blue is too "dull" as well. Perhaps the colors on the drawings are "exaggerated" in their difference to make it easier for the factory to tell what goes where---with so many similar shades, it would be difficult to tell. But perhaps they are close to what is to be used--in which case, I would ask for much darker, richer colors for "Blue 2 and 4". Finally--regardless of shade/hue, the tail logo and fuselage stripe should not match, which it appears they do on the artwork. Fuselage stripe should match the lighter of the 2 stripe colors on the tail. If IF200 gets actual UAL samples etc, great! But making sure the right color goes in the right spot is part of it too. The lightest blue (and it should still be a "medium" blue) should be for logos only, not anything else. As it is, the model looks like it has dark blue, and two shades of powdery/sky blue. Should be dark blue, and 2 slightly different shades of "royal blue". Here is my "corrected" tailfin, which at least on my monitor, looks much more correct. Deep royal blues. (Darkest blue left alone, it's fine--but the tail logo is more pure medium blue, and the lighter of the tail stripes is rich and royal) __________________ *We need more TWA twin-stripes!* Last edited by David Hingtgen; 07-27-2005 at 07:32 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: