# Trotskiy Scale?

Discussion in 'General Card Modeling' started by AdamN, Jul 22, 2004.

This may be a silly question, but are all the Trotskiy models the same scale? I have put together many of them, but I give them away as fast as I make them and now someone I have given two to asked me if they were the same scale. I didn't know.

Thanks for the help.

2. ### rickstefGuest

He has a scale listed, for the A3 size sheets, 1:60

but if you build them on A4 or letter you need to factor the scale difference, i would almost say they are 1:72 or so when printed on A4 or letter.

others, please confirm or deny my assumption

Rick
3. ### AshrunnerMember

Well, I won't confirm your assumption, but I will say this, and this is if my math is wrong. I sort of ran out of fingers doing the ciphering...anyway, I figure if they are printed on A4 paper, that they are about 1:84.6. If printed on letterhead, then about 1:82.5. But then that all depends on what margins are set on the printer and all. But I would say, stating 1:80 or thereabout would work.
4. ### rickstefGuest

well i was close
5. ### ButchPriceMember

Just my two pennies...

Just my two cents, but I think some folks obsess
about "scale" unneccesarily. The single most
important scale issue is relevence.
All parts of a model must be in a relative scale
to each other. Aside from that, scale is relative
to any models to be compared to each other,
like sitting them side by side to visually compare.

I personally very seldom do that.

I am a draftsman by trade, so I understand the value of "scale",
But I also recognize when it is really irrelevent.
For design purposes, scaling allows one to maintain
this "relativity" through the design process.
But unless you are sizing the model to specifically
represent it's scale in relation to other comparable models,
the "scale" really becomes unimportant.

Thanks for the info. I sorta gussed at the scale myself, and 1/72 was my guess. I think the reason he asked was because the Zero model was larger than the P-51. I went back and looked and the Me-109 was bigger than the P-51 also.

I think some of the older Trotskiy planes are smaller than the newer ones. Not by much, but enough to make you wonder if the scale is different.

Thanks again.

7. ### AshrunnerMember

The older Trotskiy models were I believe 1:50 scale when printed on A3 paper. I do not know the reason for the change in scale. But in the long run to me, it doesn't mean a lot. I rescale my aircraft (and space models) to 1:100 when I print them. Although I still print vehicle models at the designed scale, I am considering going to 1:100 with them also.

As for obsessing over scale, I want people who look at my models to know when I say, "They are built the same 1:100 scale." that they can look at a Fulcrum next to an Eagle and see the size difference. I have had several people who looked at my models ask me how their size compared to that of the original. Being able to give them the ability to visualize one set scale and compare each model to the other allows them to visually see what the difference between the two in real life would be also.

To say scale isn't important as long as every part included on the model is in scale with all other parts, is a strange statement to me. The entire purpose of "scale" in my mind, is so comparisons can be made, or the real world be modeled to a smaller size. To have an aircraft of 1:33 scale, sitting next to an aircraft of 1:50 scale doesn't make sense when both are viewed in content. But to have two aircraft of 1:72 scale sitting side-by-side does make sense when it is stated that the models are 1/72nd the size of the real thing. It's a lot harder for someone looking at two different scales to compare the size difference.

So I guess you can say I do obsess over scale. When I build a model, I check the length of the fuselage, the span of the wings, the height of the tail and a variety of things on the model against scale drawings, or even good photos to make sure eveything is within scale. For the most part, I find things close to being the scale I wanted them printed at. Sometimes I don't. When that happens, the model becomes one of my nephew's "flaming crash" victims and I "scale" the out of scale part to fit. Sometimes it isn't easy. I recently built a model where the wingspan if looked at in real life would have been four feet wider than it should have been and the wing root was also too large. But in process of scaling the wings down to proper size, the wing root area didn't fit the fuselage, even though scaling brought both the span and root area to proper size. Now I have to redesign the fuselage area to get the wings to fit for a proper 1:100 scale model. But even if I hadn't scaled the model it still would not have been an accurate model at the original scale it was drawn.

And just in case anyone is thinking I might have messed up my scaling calculations, I have two words for you 8v) No way! I spent many years scaling photos for print, and one of the things I used was a manual proportional scale (there's that word again 8v). It sits on my desktop (not the one on my monitor) just waiting and begging to be used. It is probably the most useful thing I have. With it, I get scaling percentages that I can use for both width and length, and I have no problem scaling a full page by different width and length percentages just to get one part proper scale. I just recently realized (actually thought of doing it since it hadn't crossed my mind before...old age thing) that I could remove the other parts from the page before I print by simply cutting them out and leaving only the part I want to rescale thereby saving ink. 8v) And yes, I am still kicking myself for not thinking about doing that before...hehe.

Anyway, do I obsess about scale? Most likely...but I also like uniformity. I still count cadence to myself when I am out walking, so that might give you an idea of where my desire for uniformity comes from. 8v)