• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Douglas X-3 Stiletto FSX Native

DvPf8f5.png
 
We are making good progress in the VC, the flight model, and exterior textures. Much to do yet, however.

We are looking for someone to join the team as a sounds engineer for the X-3. If you are interested in creating a full set of authentic sounds, please notify me by PM. Thanks
I really like RAZBAM's J-34 sound in the Banshee. Even if the X-3 came out with the default Lear sound I think I know what I'd really alias to! (Just like there are a few payware planes in my hangar with R-2800s pulling sound from the great sounding Marauder!) After the B-26 and XF-92 I'm quite interested to hear what the sound will be like for the Stiletto, but iffin I don't like it at least there is a nice fallback available for myself and others who own the Banshee. (And I do think anyone who enjoys vintage jets would have it.)
 
It's nearly the end of June. How 'bout an update?? :bump:

Thanks for your interest Sir.

Generally, progress on all fronts. We have been quiet as we do our due diligence.

The 2D and VC panels, gauges, and xml custom coding are pretty much done save some VC panel and floor shading.
The elevator/ejection seat is just getting started.

The exterior paints are making headway with the fuselage base panel lines and rivets layed down.
Wellis is now working on the wings and tails to get the basics in place.

Pam and Paul continue work on the flight model.

No interest was shown from anyone willing to develop sounds particular to the X-3 engines.

Here are a few screen shots.
 

Attachments

  • ms-2018-jun-28-004.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-28-004.jpg
    96.2 KB · Views: 0
  • ms-2018-jun-22-004.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-22-004.jpg
    76.6 KB · Views: 0
  • ms-2018-jun-22-005.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-22-005.jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 0
  • ms-2018-jun-28-001.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-28-001.jpg
    62.9 KB · Views: 0
  • ms-2018-jun-28-002.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-28-002.jpg
    73.1 KB · Views: 0
  • ms-2018-jun-28-003.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-28-003.jpg
    92.3 KB · Views: 0
C'Mon guys..this thing may have been underwhelming in performance but the J-34 more than made up for it in sound.. The sound profile on the J-34 was surpassed only by the Avons used on the B-2 Vulcan.. Check out its Growl..
 
Shucks, can't get it to play.:banghead:

Did you try playing it directly from You Tube??.. theres also a ton of J-34 run up videos there that were recorded from the front and the sides. sadly the growl is heard mainly from the aft quarter..
This video isnt as good as the tech that is runnning the engine is doing something weird and the cameraman didntlet it run up all the way..

 
Here are two screens of the VC I should have included above.
 

Attachments

  • ms-2018-jun-28-005.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-28-005.jpg
    92.2 KB · Views: 0
  • ms-2018-jun-28-006.jpg
    ms-2018-jun-28-006.jpg
    91 KB · Views: 0
C'Mon guys..this thing may have been underwhelming in performance but the J-34 more than made up for it in sound.. The sound profile on the J-34 was surpassed only by the Avons used on the B-2 Vulcan.. Check out its Growl..

That delayed Light-Off was certainly undesirable! Last time I saw that happen was when I was assisting starting a Lear 23 (which happened to be the oldest Learjet flying in the late 80's/early 90's) and they were having issues with the fuel feed & pressurization system on #1 which is also the side where the GPU receptacle is located (on the fuselage under the left engine). During the prolonged spool-up of #1, raw Jet-A Fuel was pouring out of the nozzle onto the ground and the delayed light-off pretty much was the same as this video BUT in this case it endangered the aircraft, crew and ground crews & GPU. I had to suppress the fire on the ramp with a fire bottle and then rapidly close the electrical contact switch on the GPU + unplug it from the aircraft and push it out of the way. It all happened in seconds! Scary stuff at times!
 
C'Mon guys..this thing may have been underwhelming in performance but the J-34 more than made up for it in sound.. The sound profile on the J-34 was surpassed only by the Avons used on the B-2 Vulcan.. Check out its Growl..

It certainly was a noisy, smokey engine, and very underpowered. I went through basic jet training at NAS Meridian, Mississippi in the single engine T-2A. Most people are more familiar with the two engine T-2B and T-2C, powered by J-60s and J-85s, respectively.

During 4-plane formation training, it was easy to keep track of everyone during a running rendezvous after taking off at 10 second intervals. If you were number 4, you couldn't see the lead airplane as you started the takeoff roll, but you sure could see his smoke trail, along with the #2 and #3 as well. Once at altitude and back on the power, I seem to recall they did not smoke all that much - if at all - though.
 
I think you will find that Vulcan B2's were fitted with Olympus - the prototype B1 had Avons.
The noisiest aircraft I can recall was the AW52 - it had a very high pitched scream as well as the exhaust roar.
 
That delayed Light-Off was certainly undesirable! Last time I saw that happen was when I was assisting starting a Lear 23 (which happened to be the oldest Learjet flying in the late 80's/early 90's) and they were having issues with the fuel feed & pressurization system on #1 which is also the side where the GPU receptacle is located (on the fuselage under the left engine). During the prolonged spool-up of #1, raw Jet-A Fuel was pouring out of the nozzle onto the ground and the delayed light-off pretty much was the same as this video BUT in this case it endangered the aircraft, crew and ground crews & GPU. I had to suppress the fire on the ramp with a fire bottle and then rapidly close the electrical contact switch on the GPU + unplug it from the aircraft and push it out of the way. It all happened in seconds! Scary stuff at times!

Yes, Fire coming out the pipe during startuipis usually a bad sign. Not being a powerplant person i can only assume what you described is exactly whats happening here.. Either way, its sad..
 
It certainly was a noisy, smokey engine, and very underpowered. I went through basic jet training at NAS Meridian, Mississippi in the single engine T-2A. Most people are more familiar with the two engine T-2B and T-2C, powered by J-60s and J-85s, respectively.

During 4-plane formation training, it was easy to keep track of everyone during a running rendezvous after taking off at 10 second intervals. If you were number 4, you couldn't see the lead airplane as you started the takeoff roll, but you sure could see his smoke trail, along with the #2 and #3 as well. Once at altitude and back on the power, I seem to recall they did not smoke all that much - if at all - though.

Breaking it down all the way, the J-34 wasnt a bad engine. It powered a lot of great aircraft from that time period, but the X-3 had several thousand pounds on all of them. Mind you, the X-3 was small, and perhaps too nimble, but it's reality was that it weighed 22000 pounds which was the same as a B-25 bomber..The fact that that lil engine vcould drive this plane anywhere close to mach 1 was in myt mind a miracle, but it did it and it did it with gusto.. 9000 pounds is only around 3000 pounds off from ideal, because once you break mach 1, the drag drops to half and it becomes much easier to achieve Mach 2. However, please dont ask for Mach 2. Westinghouse was incapable of packaging 6000 pounds of thrust in a 27" wide engine, and evewn if they had, the plane would have become completely and fataly unflyable somewhere just above mach 1 due to the then unforseen anomolies involved with that specific design.

Paul Currently is running the fdethrough his sieve of utilities and dialing it in. I guarantee that when he and I finish it. It's going to be a challenging, yet very satisfying ( if not just a little terrifying ) experience..Perhaps even the best he and I have ever done ( and we've done some very good ones )..
 
Back
Top