Jump to content

ndicki

SENIOR MEMBER
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    964

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ndicki

  1. Posted

    Actually, if you can make the pilot grunt under the gees, can you make the engine grunt too? Always worthwhile thinking sideways a bit...

     

    Meanwhile, I've been busy. This is from 19 Squadron - I've got the serials of a number of MkIa aircraft that were issued to 19 Sqn during August and September, as well, so even that will be correct. Contrary to appearances, there's still quite a lot of work to be done, but the uppersurfaces panels and riveting are done, the gun-positions done (only the outboard one in each wing can stay unchanged), new 8 gun sound effects, tracers, etc, etc. More than meets the eye!

  3. Posted · Edited by ndicki

    I've been thinking about that but am not sure how to do it. Even cooler would be to get the sputtering engine sound.

     

    Not sure that's possible in SF. Pity, really - another thing CFS does better. But the one thing CFS (I mean even the sort of heavily-modded CFS I run, not CFS from-the-box!) does badly is actual fighting. You can cruise around the sky quite happily without much risk of being shot down by the other lot. SF is much more convincing in this respect!

     

    Edit - First Eagles does something like that, now I think of it. The rotary engines do have a funny "grunt" noise which I think is linked to loss of power owing to gravity... I think. Bit complicated for me here!

  4. Posted

    Didn't the MkXIIs have E type wings? (two 20mms and two .50s....) Skins look great! Nice work :)

     

    No. All MkXIIs were fitted with C-type wings and B-type armament. Rather than have the .50 Browning stubs visible in the wrong place (in the E-type armament fit, the 20mm cannon are in the outboard of the two cannon positions, while in the B-type they are in the inboard one) I removed them completely, giving it a B-type wing as opposed to the correct combination of C-type wing with B-type armament. Confused? In any case, the B-type armament of 1x 20mm and 2x .303s per wing is what you get here, and it is the right one.

     

    Don't get confused with the MkXIV, which came originally in C and later in E flavour!

  10. Posted · Edited by ndicki

    Looking good! But don't finalise the gun muzzles until I've done the wing panels. It's easier to move the x,y,z co-ordinates around than it is to redraw the wing panels, which by necessity have to fit the wing shape correctly ! Also, Kevin's kind offer notwithstanding, I'll be doing my own decals. It'll get too complicated otherwise, you'll see...

  11. Posted

    Spitfire LF.MkVIIIc, SEAC

    View File

    Spitfire LF.MkVIIIc, SEAC

    Spitfire LF.MkVIIIc, No.607 Sqn RAF, 1944-45

     

    No.607 (County of Durham) Sqn began flying on the Spitfire MkVIII in March 1944.

     

    The serial numbers included all correspond to LF.MkVIIIc aircraft built in late 1943 to early 1944 and shipped out to India.

     

    Credits:

    Model and flight dynamics by Third Wire

    Cockpit by Kesselbrut

    Decals, placement and data.ini modifications by ndicki

     

    The canopy is activated by toggling "shift 0" - RAF procedures dictated that the canopy should be open and locked back during take-off and landing.

    As the MkVIII had a retractable tail-wheel, I have removed the MkIX-type fixed tail-wheel.

     

    For use ONLY with SF2 including the Israel Expansion Pack. This will NOT work if you do not have the stock TW Spitfires installed and working.

     

  16. Posted

    Actually, the Bf109e-1 and e-3 had a DB601A while the e-4 and e-7 had the DB601N, which had a higher compression ratio.

     

    DB601 A-1Up to 1,100 PS (809 KW) at sea-level with 2,400 rpm, up to 1,020 PS (750 kW) at 2,400 rpm and 4.5 km altitude, B4 fuelDB601NUp to 1,175 PS (864 kW) at sea-level and at 4.9 km altitude with 2,600 rpm, with C3 fuel Up to 1,270 PS (934 kW) at 2.1 km altitude with 2,600 rpmFigures from Wikipedia because I couldn't be bothered to get all my books out... ;-)

     

    Other differences were to do with the armament fit and internal plumbing, so they shouldn't have much impact on the FM. The only visible difference between the e-4 and e-7 was that by the time the e-7 came out, they'd realised that the Motorkanone wasn't going to work, and they'd faired over the cannon aperture in the spinner.

     

    The model, by the way, is by Russo_UK - I just uploaded it and did the odd bit of fiddling about. If you want a particular skin, give me a yell; I've got the template somewhere.

  18. Posted · Edited by ndicki

    here's a trick I do when making new templates for stock or otherwise unavailable skins

     

    assuming (oh! that word!!) the stock skin is the bottom or background layer, duplicate it, then INVERT it. Panel and rivet lines will now appear white, and be just a smidge easier to see. A LOT of guess work is still involved, but it really does help. Rivets being the biggest nightmare, the reason I didn't do them on the stock C-47

     

    wrench

    kevin stein

     

    You can't see the riveting anyway, unless you make it unrealistically heavy. I did full riveting on the 109, and to be honest, it's barely perceptible. But then it is anyway, so that's OK. The same for the Spit - flush-head riveting, so really, the best technique I know is to do the actual rivets white, with a touch of shadow and then blend them in... SF doesn't have the visual sharpness I'm used to from CFS3 - that cuts both ways.

     

    While I'm working, I actually draw the new panel lines in in bright colours rather than black, white or greys. That helps, too!

  19. Posted

    2048 skins? you related to Sundowner?:lol: i enjoy the detail but always hafta scale down to 1024 :this:

     

    So do I, but don't tell anyone! It's not really any more trouble doing 2048s than 1024s, so I might as well. As they're BMPs, they don't suffer from detail loss the way they would if they were dds format, for example, so it doesn't matter one way or the other. I might just try using dds for my own though, but it would not be releasable - I'd have to hack the model, and as it's a stock one, that's a no-go!

  21. Posted

    was playing with it a little couple of weeks ago ... flys good to me, but has 'pulling' issues on the ground. Shoudn't be torge related, as the engines cournter-rotate outwards from each other. I think it may be gear related, but couldn't run it down

     

    wrench

    kevin stein

     

    I vaguely remember hearing that somewhere before, but as I was busy on other things, I didn't think any more of it.

     

    Working on 2048 skins for the TW Spit IX at the moment. Quite a job - the original panel lines are not desperately accurate - I'm redoing at least the most flagrant!

  24. Posted

    Try this instead:

     

    Component[011]=Move1

    Component[012]=Move2

    Component[013]=Move3

    Component[014]=Move4

    Component[015]=Move5

    Component[016]=Move6

     

    [Move1]

    ParentComponentName=fuselage

    ModelNodeName=20mm_R

    DestroyedNodeName=20mm_R

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE

     

    [Move2]

    ParentComponentName=fuselage

    ModelNodeName=20mm_L

    DestroyedNodeName=20mm_L

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE

     

    [Move3]

    ParentComponentName=fuselage

    ModelNodeName=cannon_bump_R

    DestroyedNodeName=cannon_bump_R

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE

     

    [Move4]

    ParentComponentName=fuselage

    ModelNodeName=cannon_bump_L

    DestroyedNodeName=cannon_bump_L

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE

     

    [Move5]

    ParentComponentName=fuselage

    ModelNodeName=cap_L

    DestroyedNodeName=cap_L

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE

     

    [Move6]

    ParentComponentName=fuselage

    ModelNodeName=cap_R

    DestroyedNodeName=cap_R

    DetachWhenDestroyed=TRUE

    HasAeroCoefficients=FALSE

     

     

    Running a search for _L in case sensitive mode seems to yield results! Now I expect I'd better think about painting it...

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

  I accept