Friday, May 4, 2012

A-B-C nearby Fort Worth




Just some pictures while I was preparing the thumbnails for the aircraft selection menu - F-35A, B and C flying over Fort Worth.
There is still some work before Beta 2 is ready - it will only feature -A and -B models.
The -C you see is the results of some "Frankenstein" modeling I am doing. Looks promising - but there is a lot of work to be done (much more than what it may seem judging by the photo).

By the way, I am seriously considering a freeware release. This project, like the previous F-35A, started as payware in order to mitigate the expenses of the professional 3D meshes I acquired to have a better visual fidelity. Now, the size of this project grew way too much for a hobby - and the amount of money involved is now surely relevant for the taxes - so I'd be required by law to face some relatively obscure (to me) burocracy and accounting... which I am not sure I have the time to follow without impacting my "regular" job and spare time. I will have to think about it carefully. The main thing is I do this for fun. And I want to continue doing this for fun. If I will be able to do this without loosing too much money (or even earning some), fine. Otherwise, it's fine all the same. But that is another story - the focus at the moment is deliver a good plane to FSX. 

14 comments:

worx said...

I tried researching and couldn't find out what the difference from A and C was? B is the only one that hovers i believe.

Anyway, looks amazing, i would defiantly buy the whole pack, A, B, C ( if i knew what C was :P )

ScimmiaSpaziale said...

C is the carrier variant. It has a much bigger (and "foldable") wing, larger stabilizers, refuel probe (like the -B, -A has a receptacle), stronger gear (two-wheels nose gear with launch bar) and a tailhook (-A has a small emergency tailhook).

Jiri said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
worx said...

Oh so F35 A cannot land on carrier? B can hover, and C is an f18 replacement there for can land on carrier / take off with boosters.

Because i saw few pix of F35 A having the tail hook n i thought it was for the carrier but obviously not?

worx said...

I must admit im mostly waiting for the f35b, it looks amazing. One of my favroit jets, its weird that i like th US planes and im russian.

Jiri said...

I was waiting to see B animations in action, it looks great :) By the way, maybe you already know, but there are tons of hi-res reference photos that could be found on Lockheed Martin official flickr, that could help you with modeling and texturing. I used flickr alot when I was repainting Goshawk.
Cheers, J.

ScimmiaSpaziale said...

Hi Jiri - yes I knew. Really good photos indeed! Also, Eglin AFB website has some good ones on the F-35A and F-35B (I used them as reference).

@worx - Being an engineer, I consider the F-35B one of the most amazing flying machines ever built. And it owes a little to Russian technology, too, as afaik Lockheed Martin, during the initial feasibility, acquired flight STOVL test data from Yakovlev Yak-131 and 141.

F-35A (like most military jets) has a small tailhook which is not for carriers but for emergency landings on normal runways equipped with arresting gear at their end - in case of brake failure.

worx said...

Yes, it is amazing, im a 3d modeller my self and would love to get a hold of some blueprints of this bad boy in order to model it. Do you do 3d modelling your self? If so what software you use? Because from the looks of things it looks like a very well done model, not easy to do. I would love to see some wireframes.

And yes i know that Yak was the main engineering point of things, however Yak never went into production which i have no idea why, because seeing videos on youtube it worked and worked well, however it is considered that the F35 is the FIRST supersonic jet with hover function.

ScimmiaSpaziale said...

@worx - the Liftfan engine system is a wonderful piece of engineering.

As for the modeling - I use gmax, 3ds max and have access to even more expensive engineering tools. I usually do all my modeling and texturing - but in the case of the F-35 model, I have bought a professional 3d meshes to start with (which I vastly modified - high polycount meshes are useless in FSX) for maximum visual accuracy. They are quite expensive, and that it is the reason why this project started as payware.

worx said...

Oh yes, saw the one you baught, i didnt realise cg jets are so expensive, i sell cg cars + renders. i might look into this CG planes business, thanks.

Also looking at the price i see why this is payware.

ScimmiaSpaziale said...

It's no mystery I've purchased them from Camelot Inc. - They are quite accurate, although some details are incorrect. I believe they've got first hand data from Lockheed-Martin - also because their models are used in Lockheed Martin media.

Those meshes (799 USD each at the time) are more expensive (but more detailed) than the average. And they are a good starting point - and an exceptional reference in modeling - but they are not useable in FSX, at least without a lot of work - for both polycount and limits in the Direct X 9 structure.
Also, I've completely redone the texturing.

worx said...

well, if you ever need help to make meshes less denser whilst keeping the detail you can buzz me, id be more then happy help. I do it for my cars to reduce render times.

Anonymous said...

Please check email. dino_cattaneo@libero.it

ScimmiaSpaziale said...

@Anonymous commenter

I am sorry but the @libero.it is so full of spam that is difficult for me to tell imporant emails from less important ones.

Please direct your questions to indiafoxtecho@gmail.com