F-14D Beta 1

******************************************************

THIS POST IS OUTDATED - STILL ONLINE FOR RECORD

******************************************************

Beta 1 has been closed - situation frozen as shown below.

External model:

1. Low frame rates. Sorry but I went for the maximum details. The Beta has already undergone a round of optimizations. I will do another round before release, but I do not think I can improve the performance significantly.If this bothers you too much, disable the aircraft self shadows. The F-35 will perform better. STATUS:OPEN; ACTION: FURTHER OPTIMIZATION IF POSSIBLE
2. Wing sweep happens at much higher speed than the real aricraft. This was done intentionally in order to prevent animation clashes with spoilers/flaps. STATUS:CLOSED, NO ACTION (BETTER KEEP IT AS IS)
3. Abrupt nozzle animation / afterburner. I tried to make it smooth (linking to the RPM) but coud not synchronize the nozzle with the a/b. STATUS:CLOSED, NO ACTION (BETTER ANIMATION WILL COMPROMISE A/B SYNC)
4. Landing gear does not kneel before cat launch: afaik there is no way to make the gear "kneel" on pilot's command (i.e. in the real Tomcat the nose strut is compressed 14 inches - the pilot command the compression via the NOSE STRUT switch)... Therefore I made a compromise while setting the gear contact points. No corrective action planned. STATUS:CLOSED, NO ACTION (AFAIK IMPOSSIBLE)
5. Tailhook does not touch the deck. STATUS:CLOSED (Solved on .mdl build 24)
6. Nose probe animation glitch (seems to sink into the fuselage too much). I knew this. I had major problems in keeping the fuselage smooth while "cutting" the probe vane, so there is a "visual patch" instead of a proper 3D vane... this is causing the glitch which should be visible only at close inspection. I will not modify it. STATUS:CLOSED, NO ACTION (TOO DIFFICULT).
7. Nose landing gear does not touch the ground. STATUS:CLOSED (Solved on MDL build 24)
8. Burner special effect bleeds through the nozzle. This is not much visbile on my system. STATUS:CLOSED; (Mitigated by contolling the .fx diameter - still visible - depends on graphic card settings)
9. Nose gear wheels/tires slightly too big. STATUS:CLOSED (Nose wheels and tires shrunk in build MDL 24)
10. Minor nose gear animation glitch (tire peeking through the gear doors). STATUS:Closed (Nose gear animation sequence reworked in build 24)
11. Minor spoiler gear animation glitch (actuators disappear into the fuselage). STATUS:CLOSED (Issue mitigated by reworking animation sequence in MDL Build 24, not completely solved but almost negligible. Complete solution would require a redesign of the spoilers which would be too time consuming)
12. Minor canopy geometry glitch (does not match perfectly with the fuselage); STATUS:CLOSED (Canopy assembly geometry reworked on build MDL 24)
13. Missing fuel dump effect. STATUS:CLOSED (Fuel dump added in model build 25, also FUEL DUMP switch now operative in cockpit build 17)

Interior model:

1. Low frame rates. Will try to make another round of optimization if I'll have the time. STATUS:OPEN; ACTION:PERFORM OPTIMIZATION IF POSSIBLE
2. AoA indicator replaced by VV indicator:
   Sorry but I've never managed to make a 3D Aoa indicator that works...so I've replaced it with a VVI. STATUS:CLOSED (Added AoA indicator thanks to XML code courtesy of Paolo Oriani)
3. Radar altimeter replaced by a gmeter:
   Same as (1) - the 3D radar altimeter was not working. STATUS:CLOSED, NO ACTION (CANNOT MAKE IT WORK)
4. Fuel quantity and engine panels showing weird values:
   I thought I've correctly reverse-engineered the parameters to do them in 3D but while I was making the Goshawk....but it was not true.
   STATUS:OPEN;ACTION:CHECK MDL,CFG,XML and refer to NATOPS
5. Several switches/knobs not working or mapped incorrectly
   I'm not sure I will have the time to fix them all. Please tell me what are the most annoying malfunctions and I'll see what I can do. Keep in mind that some of the Tomcat functions cannot be properly replicated in FSX without external coding.STATUS:OPEN; ACTION:WAIT FOR TESTERS TO IDENTIFY MAJOR MALFUNCTIONS: Some MFD buttons not working for no apparent reason.
6. Incorrect reading of some gauges.See (5). STATUS:OPEN; ACTION:WAIT FOR TESTERS TO IDENTIFY MAJOR MALFUNCTIONS
7. Autothrottle not working...can't tell why. I've double checked the code and it should work....Not sure I can fix it. STATUS:OPEN; ACTION:INVESTINGATING XML, MDL,CFG
8. MFDs are obiviously mutuated from the Hornet (BLASPHEMY!). I do not have the time and skill to make new, more accurate ones. STATUS:CLOSED,NO ACTION
9. Difficult access to CRS/HDG knobs. They are currently positioned in the "right" place, but they are difficult to access with the mouse pointer. Can be moved upwards. STATUS:CLOSED (Knobs moved upward for better accessibility in cockpit build 18)
10. Cannot start engines manually and in general cannot follow actual F-14D startup procedure ("cold and dark operation"). STATUS:OPEN, ACTION:ADD FUNCTIONALITY, WRITE FSX:A CHECKLIST
11. Windshield frame too big. STATUS:CLOSED (Geometry modified in cockpit build 16)
12. No VC Backlight - There is no backlight code in the Beta 1 build. STATUS:CLOSED (Backlight added in cockpit build 17 - green backlight+red diffuse light)

Additional functions/features in current build (18):

- HYD HAND PUMP (Mapped to Emergency Landing Gear Lever)

- FUEL DUMP SWITCH now opeartive

- MULTI STATUS INDICATOR shows mock weapon status

Flight model:

1. Approach speed - It appears to be higher than the real one (reading from the NATOPS). A/c tends to sink below 135/140 kts. STATUS:CLOSED (Modified .air file to lower approach speed - as side effect the stall speed is considerably lower than the real plane...but carrier approaches seem much more accurate)
2. Overpowered - While I've set the right engine values and a/c weight, I have the impression it is overpowered. STATUS:OPEN; ACTION:TBD After derating the engine and increasing the drag the plane seems still overpowered...
3. Speed brake effect - I've already boosted its effect...but it still seems weak to me... STATUS: CLOSED (Modified .air file - speedbrake is much more effective now, not sure it makes sense to increase its effect further)
4. Moving the control surface while on the deck causes the a/c to tilt... STATUS:CLOSED (No changes - I did some trials to fix this but I don't want to change the ground handling behaviour...it is not perfect but I think it is OK)
5. Asymmetric thrust during takeoff (ashore). Does not seem to be a showstopper often on my system. Keep in mind that AFAIK, the F-14D does not take off with a/b. Not sure if it is a real issue or not. Flight parameters look ok (symmetric values for engine location). EDIT: THIS WAS A TRICKY ONE...IT WAS DUE TO AN ASYMMETRY OF THE AUX FUEL TANK LOCATIONS:so it was dependent on the fuel quantity, STATUS:CLOSED (Solved by removing the fuel tank CoG asymmetry in the .cfg file)
6. Toe brakes effect weak. STATUS:CLOSED (Solved by boosting the toe brake effect in the .cfg file)
7. Roll rate slightly high. STATUS:CLOSED (Solved by reducing the roll control surface effectiveness in the .cfg file)
8. Gear retraction too fast. STATUS:CLOSED (Solved by setting the right retraction time 9.0 sec in the .cfg file)
9. Add 1 notch flap position. STATUS: CLOSED (Solved by adding one flap position to the aircraft.cfg)

F-14D Tomcat Beta Release (and new project announcement)

F-14D (version Beta 1) flying over Las Vegas

This is how the cockpit is looking in the Beta.

I've just completed the Beta 1 build of the Tomcat. It will be distributed to testers and supporters as soon as I can find the time (probably in a day or so). The visual model is complete. The virtual cockpit il 95% done (basically some switches and buttons are still not working and there are a couple of missing textures). The flight model needs some tweaking, as usual :-), but I think it is acceptable and carrier operations are smooth, except for the approach speed that tends to be a little high.

In short, I think the F-14 is good enough to involve the community. If you wish to contibute to this project, I'd need:

BETA TESTERS:

I already have few testers on board,but if you think you have the experience and the time needed to provide a significant feedback to the Beta 1 version, drop me an email at dino_cattaneo@libero.it

I plan to release the Tomcat asap, say 2-3 weeks after the Beta, so if you don't have the time to fly it in the next week please do no apply.

SOUND DESIGNER:

I'd love to have custom sounds for the Tomcat. Should anyone be able to provide them please contact me. Needless to say, they need to be FSX-compatible original sounds and, if I think they are OK, will be distibuted as freeware as part of the package (of course proper credit will be given the the author). Again, this should be done in 2-3 weeks.

REPAINTERS:

All of the early repainters have bailed out for several reasons. Should you want to give a try and have enough time and experience, please contact me. Some rules will apply: 1) No fictional repaints (I hate them) 2) No "vintage" repaints (i.e.the ones with white lower/moving surfaces - this limitation is due to the model texturing) 3) I will decide if and which repaints will be included in the base package (with proper credit)

Please forgive me if replies to your emails will be late or very short - but I will not have much time for them.

One last thing: I've finally selected the subject of my next project. It will be the F-35 Lighting II. It is likely to be my first payware project. Please do not hate me for this. I'll keep on doing things in the freeware scene as I love it, but the fact is that a good FSX project simply needs A LOT of time and resources - much more than what I can afford without a financial justification.

Quick update

Just a quick update to say thank you to the users that tested the Goshawk version 1.69. Your feedback has been appreciated. The new version is ready and will be uploaded asap (hopefully tomorrow).

By the way, the Tomcat Beta version is almost ready. Flight model is better now, and you can actually launch and recover from a carrier (even if the approach speed is a little too high).

Vista 64bit + FSX benchmark on my system

I think I have a pretty high-end system, at least for a home rig.
I have a i7 920 CPU, P6T deluxe mainboard, 4Gb 1600Mhz RAM and a Nvidia X295. It is not a cheap system. Probably not the best value-for-money around, but definitely high end.

How does FSX perform on such a rig? Badly (not much of a surprise). There are tons of benchmarks on the web, so I am not going too much into detail here. The main fact is that FSX is not designed to make full use the (awesome) computing power of the latest CPU and GPUs.

But, with such a machine, I thought it may be interesting to give Vista 64 bit a try. I will not go into the details of the test, but on my system, FSX on Vista 64 in DX10 preview mode outperforms clearly XP.
Basically, I first defragmented all the hard disks. Then switched off the computer, fired up XP, FRAPS and FSX. And measured how many fps I get, using the Sitka approach mission as a reference.

Numbers were as follows:
Windows XP (32 bit, DirectX 9.0): 10 fps
Windows Vista 64 (DX 9.0): 11 fps
Windows Vista 64 (DX10 previews): 23 fps

FSX was set with ALL the sliders maxed and all the options checked (bloom, scenery shadows, antialiasing, anisotropic filtering everything to the max). Screen resolution was 1366x768 (I know it is low but I use FSX on a 42" plasma TV). No other tricks/special tweaks and clean FSX installations.

As FSX is a 32 bit application I tend to believe that the performance increase was more due to the DX10 than the rest. Whatever the reason, for my system, the verdict is: Vista 64 bit + Direct X 10 largely outperforms Win XP 32 bit for Flight Simulator X.

Tomcat update: carrier trials and cockpit progress

As today has been a rainy Sunday here in Genoa, I finally found the mood to make some significant progress with the Tomcat. "Significant progress" means that finally the left console is textured and most of the switches have been modelled. Main instuments are functional, and so are the MFDs and the HUD. Let's say the cockpit is 80-85% complete. I just need to make the rivets and bolts of the canopy, put some screws and switches here and there, make the advisory lights and assign the animations/mouse rectangles. Two/three hours and it will be done.

I've also tweaked the textures of the outer model - now they are more color-consistent and slighly more defined. The burner effect has been furtherly revised, too.

Bad news come from the extenisve carrier trials I did today... while the flight model is generally OK, the plane sinks too much below 150-160kts forcing the pilot to keep an attitude that makes almost impossible to see the deck though the HUD. It is possible to land, but it is extremely difficult (I mean I know it should be difficult but this is like "guess where the deck is").... I need to work on this.

As some of you are asking. the Tomcat Last Flight is currently the only paintscheme and it will be the default one. As all of the repainters seem to have "bailed out" of this project, I am not sure if I will have the time to make some other liveries myself. If I will, the ones I'd like to do are VF-213 , VF-31 and VF-101. Due the the way I places the textures "vintage" schemes (i.e. the ones with white moving surface and lower fuselage) cannot be done with this model.

...and I know that 4 JDAMs is not an allowed configuration for carrier ops!

Major rework of the Goshawk fuselage (and a word about quality).

I just finished a major rework of the Goshawk geometry.

The overall dimensions are almost 100% correct now, and the model is even more accurate!

This is the "blueprint box" method I've used to check the geometry and improve it. It is a common practice in modeling, and basically consists in pasting accuate blueprints of the object onto the faces of a box. Then make the box 100% dimensionally correct and use it as reference while modeling.

As some (well very few) of you have noticed there was something "wrong" in the Goshawk... While I think it captured the "look and feel" of the real machine, some dimensions and proportions were, in fact, inaccurate. This was not done intentionally, but it was a sort of "error propagation" that sometimes happen when some "artistic" touch is applied to what is, basically, an cold automatic process.

While I like adding some artistic touch here and there (I think it helps making the thing more "striking") I simply could not stand the fact that, from some angles, the Goshawk did not look quite right. So, I took it back in the modeling hangar and made a major rework, checking it towards a 100% accurate "blueprint box".

It turns out that there were several areas that could be improved. I knew that the model was longer and taller by roughly 30cm... but the inaccuracies affected the general shape much more than I tought. In detail:

- fuselage "slope" towards the tail was wrong, and, in general, it was too "rounded"

- the tail itself was too big, and too "straight"

- the stabilizers were too wide, and the shape was incorrect

- the air intakes were slightly too small

- the hook "support" was slightly too big, while the hook itself was a little "stubby"

After 4.5 hours of tweaking the result is that now the dimensional error is less than 1%... and the model looks better.

Now my two cents on freeware "quality"... I recently saw a post in a forum that was complaining about the Goshawk geometric accuracy - the message was like "well I don't think is good, but as it is freeware I think it is OK". There were two things I did not understand:

1) why the authour did not drop me an email. I am adult - I can take the criticism: I think criticism can help me making better models. And it will not spoil the fun I have in making them and flying them. I may agree with a comment or not....but ultimately let's call this whole thing for what it is: A VIDEOGAME. Nothing more. Don't be afraid of commenting my work.

2) Much more important: I cannot understand the logic for which if it is freeware then the "quality bar" is lower. Sure, professional payware has, on the average, a quality level that is impossible to reach for freeware - which lacks the resources that payware can afford to employ. But on the other hand, in freeware you can develop interesting models that have little or no commecial value. And it is basically the only way in which you can have unusual planes or scenery. There are some amazing freeware addons out there. I think I will be reviewing some in this blog sooner or later. The fact that a project is freeware, to me, does should not be a reason not to try to deliver the best possible software. I like trying to do the best I can for the sake of doing it. And ultimately, it is just a videogame so...when I am not having fun I can quit.

End of this big post. The new Goshawk will be released as soon as I finish improving the rest of the package. Tomcat fans: do not panic. The big cat is still coming and is sharpening its claws for the Beta. Maybe next week - depending on the wheather: good weather here means Tomcat delay :-)

Tomcat cockpit WIP pictures

Here are few pictures of the current cockpit model... still work in progress. But, as you can see, the front panel, stick, pedals, and the side consoles are done. The only things that need to be done so far are the canopy details and the side panels. Then, I will complete the functionality (what you see is only partially working). A rough estimate is 20 work hours - which means one or two week, depending on the weather and my mood :-)

And - sorry if it disappoints you - do NOT expect a RIO panel. I know it would be great, but: 1) I definitely have no time to do it. 2) It would make the cockpit model huge (and it is already pretty heavy) 3) Most of the functionalities would be gimped or lacking due to FSX limitations.