F4U 'Zero'

Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:20 am

I'm not sure what they are claiming, or even if this is meant to be a serious exercise, but someone's pulling a fast one.

This is a CAD 'improved' Mitsubishi Zero:

Here:
http://www.ptc.com/appserver/wcms/ptcaw ... bkey=36127

WTF?

Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:37 am

I hope that is a joke- otherwise some individual of questionable judgement changed the tailwheel setup, shortened the prop, and threw meatballs onto an early Corsair design and submitted it- and the people at that company bought the idea because they were stupid- no other word for it!

Robbie

Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:41 am

all I can say is WOW. That is "something else" for lack of anything besides a cuss word.

Is there even a cowl on that "thing"?

Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:00 am

HUH?

Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:02 am

I think it's an inside joke by the design team. How do you improve the Zero? Turn it into a Corsair!

Zack

Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:03 pm

has to be.....corsair is probably more known in mainstream society than the zero.

Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:37 pm

And, it appears to me, that the wings are crooked. Look how much distance there is from the tip of the left wing to the tabletop as compared to the right wing.

All due respect, but...what an abomination :toimonster:

Mudge the repulsed :vom:

Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:25 pm

Where is the Sidewinders :wink:

Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:17 pm

"Huge improvements were made to target specific areas of the A6M Zero Fighter to enable it into have a competitive edge in today’s market"

So id say that this is something they put into the design of there project to make it "better" im guessing. In the entire paragraph they talk about the changes they made for "practicle" use if made today. Lighten up guys. :roll:

Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:57 pm

I've looked over lots of student projects over the years. This is what happens when they get direction from instructors/professors who have no idea about the subject given to the students. And if he/she did, then they definitely suffer from the "everyone is a winner" mentatlity and failed to give these kids the hard facts in the flaws of their project. The paragraph explanation is laughable. They can render aircraft parts in their 3-D program, but I think they failed to learn what they could have potentially discovered with such an assignment.