Aero Studios F-16s

[squid 21]

Teras, i now realise the shapes notes i had send you were based on Block 50/52/+/Adv (maybe even 60, i am not sure yet, looking into it further. This E pic above looks exactly as the previous C family shapewise). From the pics you post it looks that nose and fin chute/avionics housing are different from the C family till 50/52/+/Adv, even the canopy shape is changed. On the other hand the imagery i have seen so far though is from 3D models only (*) ..... so, i am still looking into that too. Your model is shapewise very good if based on those models but there's a chance that those models maybe are inaccurate?

 

CFTs look also like maybe need some curve smoothing more

 

 

"Normal user view ( NUV )" -> perspective views are more useful than orthographic (3Dmax terms) when view is form an angle.

 

 

(*):

Edited November 5, 2011 by squid

[+ST0RM 145]

Check the nose gear door. You've got 4 round taxi lights, when the true Vipers only have 2 square ones. Even if you kept the round, the lowest one wouldn't allow the door to close.

 

Also, the blade antenna in the middle of the spine has to go. It would interfere with the A/R receptacle. The aft one is ok. It's there.

 

Nice progress.

 

-S

Edited November 5, 2011 by ST0RM

[Teras 67]

thanks everybody for your feedback!

 

now lets talk pics

 

 

@ migbuster

 

 

1- about the CFTs , actually CFT removed only during training missions , but see the pic below

 

 

 

 

2-

 

a - fixed

b - that is bigmouth intake , see below

 

 

 

 

 

@ squid

 

true , but can you explain more about the CFTs? and more specific about the current model?

 

 

 

 

 

 

@ storm

 

- fixed all

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

thank you all guys , im waiting your feedback and will do my best.

[+EricJ 3,985]

He means the upper part where it meets the fuselage, it's flat when it's actually angled down.

Edited November 5, 2011 by EricJ

[Teras 67]

thanks for the support eric

 

how about now?

 

 

[+EricJ 3,985]

Much better

[MigBuster 2,871]

thanks everybody for your feedback!

 

now lets talk pics

 

 

@ migbuster

 

 

1-

 

 

 

2-

 

a - fixed

b - that is bigmouth intake , see below

 

 

 

 

thank you all guys , im waiting your feedback and will do my best.

 

 

 

1. Well done - do you have a side on image with the canopy closed?

 

 

2. the top seemed straighter:

 

[Teras 67]

thanks guys

 

 

@ migbuster

 

1- done

 

2- done

 

see below

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

side elevation

 

 

 

 

 

 

once again thank a lot guys for the help and im waiting your feedback

 

 

Teras

[MigBuster 2,871]

 

[Teras 67]

thanks a heap mate

 

working on it...

 

 

a request if possible , does anyone have a good sight for f-16D from top? i mean drawing lines from top or 3 views if possible because im going to rebuild the F block model today but couldn't find any good ones on google

 

 

thanks

[MigBuster 2,871]

Forgot this - notice how the bottom frame of the canopy is shaped - its not a straight line but curved:

 

[squid 21]

I was about to post about that curve of the canopy too since was the only thing you left from your notes. Its the part i was talking about few posts back about the canopy shape looking different in those photos of "photorealistic" renders of a 3D model supposedly representing the 70. Now i know that its inaccurate in the canopy area at least. I am not sure yet about the nose shape change due to AESA. Still looking into it. And now i am suspecting that maybe the back part of avionics housing on the fin base is maybe inaccurate too in those illustrations.

 

Attaching the notes i sent to Teras that correspond to a typical C (not 70)

 

 

 

 

 

 

.PSD file to check differences by rapid layers visibility toggle : http://www.easybytez.com/la2zy4kdymd2

[Teras 67]

thanks guys

 

im working on it right now ...

 

@ squid

 

that was the CJ model , i fixed all of those mistakes on the E model except the canopy

 

keep eyes on the thread for the next 2 hours all of those will be fixed

 

 

teras

[+76.IAP-Blackbird 3,545]

This is a good exmple how the comunity can work together

 

Teras, you are creating a very detailed Viper version,

[squid 21]

@ Teras, yes that's the general C profile . just posting it here too in case someone maybe notices something wrong or smth i am missing

[Teras 67]

thanks blackbird , these vipers for the community for sure

 

 

@ squid

 

thanks a lot i just used yours and migbuster's ones to modify the block 60 & 70 E vipers

 

 

now lets talk bznz

 

 

gimme your opinions and your feedback , i just done the block 70 and 60 according to your observations

 

block 60 f-16E

note the tail housing , i made new one using migbuster and squid observations and some plans

 

 

 

 

block 70 F-16E

not the tail housing also

 

 

 

 

what new ?

 

removed the gaps in the engines

edited the nose and the canopy and the fuselage

removed the antina blade under the nose

edited the CFTs

new vertail for both

new hosing tail base for both

some other changes...

 

waiting your feedback

[Teras 67]

forgot to post this , sorry

 

 

in game . block 60 E viper

 

 

[squid 21]

The CFTs now look better from this angle. Good smoothing. for the rest will try post feedback asap

[Centurion-1 1,228]

Looks great. How about the cockpit?

 

 

Doesnt actually look like super much work, due to the 3 big MFDs...

[squid 21]

a PROPER cockpit is always much work even if its Rafale or F-35 ;)

[+EricJ 3,985]

Or Super Hornet :)

[Teras 67]

my brother will do the cockpit when he arrive here next week as i promised ericj to do the super hornet cockpit right after these vipers.

[+76.IAP-Blackbird 3,545]

Have you thought about ravenclaws cockpits?! dont know how different a blk 52/ and a 70 is. So there could be a standartized cokpit layout for the upcoming viper pack ?!

[Teras 67]

block 60 & 70's cockpits are totally different

 

our viper's cockpits will look like this

 

 

Edited November 7, 2011 by Teras

[MigBuster 2,871]

Its getting there

 

 

I would say:

 

 

 

Then can you show a front on view please - looks like the nose will need reshaping from that aspect also