+Dave Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 View File FB-111A Version 2.2 FB-111A Version 2.2 By FastCargo Skin by Jat81500 Decals, Hangar Screen by USAFMTL (also Ant) Original model by Paco and Wpnssgt Hex Edited Tanks by Ant Original FM by Column5 Sounds by the Mirage Factory Avionics by MJ Pit by NormanKnight 28 Jan 09 Avionics upgrade and ini fixes. 26 Jan 09 Update (Version 2.1) Body position lights updated with correct lighting rules (no flash) and colors (red is right). Airbrake will not deploy with weight on wheels. Non-decal exported LOD included (FB-111A.LOD) as an option if you have problems with frame rates (slower computers). Gunsight glass built into model. Read the readme!!!!!! Submitter Dave Submitted 01/26/2009 Category F-111 Aardvark Quote
Viggen Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 YES! Time to nuke some commies. Except... NO! Cursed history project! Quote
ch53fixer Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 thanks again , how about the templates for this nice birds ??? Quote
Spinners Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 This and the F-111C are the best looking F-111's in my opinion - I just love those long-span wings. I can't wait to get home from work to fly it (sigh, only another nine hours to go) but I've had a peek inside and that's a great looking skin. Good work Team Aardvark! Quote
kct Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 This would look good with the early SAC scheme. Quote
Spinners Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 This would look good with the early SAC scheme. I think that's available somewhere in the downloads section. Quote
+Dave Posted January 26, 2009 Author Posted January 26, 2009 I think that's available somewhere in the downloads section. The old skins of the other F-111's are not compatible with these F-111's. These F-111 are 90% new to include a complete re map. Quote
GASCAN39 Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Great job on this one, my nose gear even moves. I love the scheme on the FB (lizard I think it was called) Was it not unusual for them to carry four fuel tanks, while on alert? Seems like I saw pix of that, just wondered what type of room they would have left for the SRAM if they had to load extra tanks like that. I love that this model kind of had everything as far as countermeasures, I know alot of jets from that era did not have internal cm, kind of an afterthought..... Quote
+Dave Posted January 26, 2009 Author Posted January 26, 2009 Great job on this one, my nose gear even moves. I love the scheme on the FB (lizard I think it was called) Was it not unusual for them to carry four fuel tanks, while on alert? Seems like I saw pix of that, just wondered what type of room they would have left for the SRAM if they had to load extra tanks like that. I love that this model kind of had everything as far as countermeasures, I know alot of jets from that era did not have internal cm, kind of an afterthought..... Well if went with the full external tank load on the outside, then the SRAM's were carried in the bomb bay. Glad you like it. Quote
shess57 Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 Well if went with the full external tank load on the outside, then the SRAM's were carried in the bomb bay. Glad you like it. The SRAMs or free fall nukes would be carried in the weapons bay and usually the inboard pylons. Sometimes depending on the mission the outer inboard pylons would carry a nuke, but usually a drop tank. These pylons pivoted with wings as they swept back. There are two more outer pylons that are at a fixed angle to match the first wing sweep possession. On the Alert birds one fuel tank would usually be uploaded to the inboard fixed pylon. The most common configuration was; 2 in the weapons bay, 2 on the inboard pivoting pylons, and a drop tank on the outer pivoting and inner fixed pylon. Quote
+Dave Posted February 3, 2009 Author Posted February 3, 2009 The SRAMs or free fall nukes would be carried in the weapons bay and usually the inboard pylons. Sometimes depending on the mission the outer inboard pylons would carry a nuke, but usually a drop tank. These pylons pivoted with wings as they swept back. There are two more outer pylons that are at a fixed angle to match the first wing sweep possession. On the Alert birds one fuel tank would usually be uploaded to the inboard fixed pylon. The most common configuration was; 2 in the weapons bay, 2 on the inboard pivoting pylons, and a drop tank on the outer pivoting and inner fixed pylon. Thanks for the info. Quote
+Spectre_USA Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 Wowsers! Nice site you got there Shess! Might have to check out the Pease AFB thingmie for FS:X, as I gew up in Hampton, NH, right under the BUFF's and FB's landing lines. ~Ex-Aardvark armorer. Quote
shess57 Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 Wowsers! Nice site you got there Shess! Might have to check out the Pease AFB thingmie for FS:X, as I gew up in Hampton, NH, right under the BUFF's and FB's landing lines. ~Ex-Aardvark armorer. I served in the Air Force at Pease from 76 -80 as an avionics tech on the FB-111As. Very nice area, I really like NH Quote
+Spectre_USA Posted February 7, 2009 Posted February 7, 2009 I also gave you the kill for your link to the "USAF : Together We Served" site. Another very cool site. I got in touch with a few guys I hadn't seen in over 20 years! Thanks again for that... Quote
+Dave Posted February 7, 2009 Author Posted February 7, 2009 I also gave you the kill for your link to the "USAF : Together We Served" site. Another very cool site. I got in touch with a few guys I hadn't seen in over 20 years! Thanks again for that... And a OPSEC nightmare, had a huge briefing about it not too long ago and they are telling people to stop using it. They are a comapny out of Europe and using it as an intel gathering tool. I pulled all my information off of it. Quote
+Spectre_USA Posted February 8, 2009 Posted February 8, 2009 Uh, oh. The NSLookup does not resolve as a DotCom. Re-director? I red the article in Stars and Stripes, looked legit. PM comin' your way... Quote
+Dave Posted February 9, 2009 Author Posted February 9, 2009 Uh, oh. The NSLookup does not resolve as a DotCom. Re-director? I red the article in Stars and Stripes, looked legit. PM comin' your way... Of course it looks legit. Thats the hook. You just had to see the breifing given by OSI and the AF Intel people. It was pretty shocking to say the least. I have been trying to get a copy of that breifing they gave us. The intel gathering they are getting off of that site is down frightning.Thus why I deleted everything off my account. You can do what you want, but I am not making this up, they were deadly serious about the OPSEC ramifications. Quote
+Typhoid Posted February 9, 2009 Posted February 9, 2009 Of course it looks legit. Thats the hook. You just had to see the breifing given by OSI and the AF Intel people. It was pretty shocking to say the least. I have been trying to get a copy of that breifing they gave us. The intel gathering they are getting off of that site is down frightning.Thus why I deleted everything off my account. You can do what you want, but I am not making this up, they were deadly serious about the OPSEC ramifications. ??!!!! There is a similar Navy version but I have not heard of the opsec issue. Can you shoot that info to me? Quote
+Dave Posted February 9, 2009 Author Posted February 9, 2009 ??!!!! There is a similar Navy version but I have not heard of the opsec issue. Can you shoot that info to me? I am trying to get a copy of the briefing from the OSI here. They knew what I was talking about though. Quote
+Typhoid Posted February 9, 2009 Posted February 9, 2009 anyone having trouble with the FB-111 tanks showing up? they load but don't seem to show up. Quote
+Dave Posted February 9, 2009 Author Posted February 9, 2009 anyone having trouble with the FB-111 tanks showing up? they load but don't seem to show up. Have you checked all the naming conventions? Quote
+Typhoid Posted February 9, 2009 Posted February 9, 2009 Have you checked all the naming conventions? working through that. I can see some disconnects and just haven't worked all the way through yet. Just curious if anyone else had seen the same thing? Quote
+Dave Posted February 10, 2009 Author Posted February 10, 2009 working through that. I can see some disconnects and just haven't worked all the way through yet. Just curious if anyone else had seen the same thing? It worked when I uploaded it. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.