Thanks ... I will be doing only the FS2004 version, and FS2002 if requested, Will also assist or accommodate a CFS2 version, and make the source available for a CFS3 and FSX versions if requested.
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
F7F Tigercat SOH Project
- Thread starter Milton Shupe
- Start date
A while back we did the work on the XP47-J and I am really looking forward to more progress on that at some date. A real hoot to fly, hyper fast!
As the quality of FS offerings has increased in standard the time and complexity for completing them has increased many fold. The functionality and complexity of the interiors is particularly challeging.
Cheers: Tom
As the quality of FS offerings has increased in standard the time and complexity for completing them has increased many fold. The functionality and complexity of the interiors is particularly challeging.
Cheers: Tom
That should not be a problem.
BTW, the AT-11 thread (and xp47j thread) is down in the Design forum: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=27651
Hi Daveroo,
The exterior model development is as complete as it can be awaiting the phase 2 interior development to start.
The flight models continue in development by fliger747 for the -3 series, -1, and the tankers.
Effects are being worked on by thunder100.
The exterior model development is as complete as it can be awaiting the phase 2 interior development to start.
The flight models continue in development by fliger747 for the -3 series, -1, and the tankers.
Effects are being worked on by thunder100.
Ill chat it up with the hanger crew and see if the can give me there F7F Firecat Manual. But it will be hard to do.
The manual would only be helpful if it were specific to the tanker. Copies of the tankers performance charts I believe is all that is needed.
PilatusTurbo
members+, Fighter Fanatic
Yes, Stan, I think we need screenies... ;-). I'd love to see more progress on this beautiful bird! :-D
No rush on the designers; they just know how excited about this project we are. :ernae:
No rush on the designers; they just know how excited about this project we are. :ernae:
Fliger747 continues to make progress on the flight models for the variants. They all fly sweetly. 
Thunder100 and James are still evolving the tanker's retardant drop effects and will hopefully have some awesome looking drops for us.
Our planned quality modeler for the VC unfortunately is heavily booked right now so I am looking for a quality modeler to do the FS9 VC. If no one steps up, then I will do it after the AT-11 release which is at least 6-8 weeks out. I really hope someone steps up for this.
A native FSX modeler is planning to do the FSX native upgrades. He can announce that when the time comes or whenever he chooses. {applause}
Thunder100 and James are still evolving the tanker's retardant drop effects and will hopefully have some awesome looking drops for us.
Our planned quality modeler for the VC unfortunately is heavily booked right now so I am looking for a quality modeler to do the FS9 VC. If no one steps up, then I will do it after the AT-11 release which is at least 6-8 weeks out. I really hope someone steps up for this.
A native FSX modeler is planning to do the FSX native upgrades. He can announce that when the time comes or whenever he chooses. {applause}
For me this works out well, if not for all of the folks waiting patiently (or otherwise). Time to hone and polish and differentiate the three main flight models. Summer is an insanely busy time in Alaska, so much to do and it flies by so quickly! I do think the plane are in a mature stage for exterior and FD.
For the RTW racers, the Dash three should be a pretty popular plane, pushing 400 knots at altitude, though the dash one with 335 knots at SL may have it's adherents. And unusually the fire bomber version has some folks working on retardant drop effects.
Cheers: T
For the RTW racers, the Dash three should be a pretty popular plane, pushing 400 knots at altitude, though the dash one with 335 knots at SL may have it's adherents. And unusually the fire bomber version has some folks working on retardant drop effects.
Cheers: T
airattackimages
Charter Member
What an awesome and gorgeous aircraft this thing is going to be.
As far as the "killing" of fire with fire retardant... it would be an awesome accomplishment to be able to kill a fire with it in FS. But I just have one item of note; in actual air tanker operations the Phoschek (retardant) is actually very rarely dropped "direct". The retardant typically is dropped in front of the advancing flames and not on the flames themselves. Don't get me wrong, they do sometimes go direct, but only in particular situations - when there is an immediate structure threat or a threatened fire crew on the ground. Or, if there is no longer any threat that the fire will spread, then there is no longer a need to wrap containment line around it and they'll just finish the fire off by hitting it direct. Usually though, the Phoschek isn't "wasted" in this way. They'll just call in helicopters to use water.
However, on aircraft that DO operate direct (Martin Mars, PBY Catalina, CL-215/CL-415, not to mention the Aircranes and other helicopters) using water, it would be really cool to see the water kill the flames!
As far as the "killing" of fire with fire retardant... it would be an awesome accomplishment to be able to kill a fire with it in FS. But I just have one item of note; in actual air tanker operations the Phoschek (retardant) is actually very rarely dropped "direct". The retardant typically is dropped in front of the advancing flames and not on the flames themselves. Don't get me wrong, they do sometimes go direct, but only in particular situations - when there is an immediate structure threat or a threatened fire crew on the ground. Or, if there is no longer any threat that the fire will spread, then there is no longer a need to wrap containment line around it and they'll just finish the fire off by hitting it direct. Usually though, the Phoschek isn't "wasted" in this way. They'll just call in helicopters to use water.
However, on aircraft that DO operate direct (Martin Mars, PBY Catalina, CL-215/CL-415, not to mention the Aircranes and other helicopters) using water, it would be really cool to see the water kill the flames!
Excellent insight there my friend. Thank you for educating me and the masses who have no direct experience with this. This kind of insight makes for better products and effects and helps us to better fight the fires the right way in FS.
Even though the retardant is not normally applied directly to the fire itself, you will often see an immediate effect on fire behaviour. The retardant line is always built as close to the fire as visibility and fire behaviour allows. A fast moving grass fire will easily outflank a retardant line if you start the line to close to the main fire so your better off to back up a ways and give yourself time to complete (anchor) the line before the flame front and retardant meetup. I think having the ability to directly affect the fire itself would be very realistic, we could always create seperate fire and smoke effects so that a direct drop with retardant would put out the flame but not the smoke. Having the ability to sacrafice a load on the head of the fire to remove the open flame effect and then boxing in the remaining smoke effect would be fantastic. I've been working on some large fire sceneries using a modified "blacksand" landclass tile to represent the fire itself, default fire.fx files to indicate the head of the fire and some blackened custom trees to fill in the blackened areas of the fire. I'm quite happy with the results so far and I'm really looking forward to flying the FSX version of the F7F on these fires when it's availalble. If the fellows working on the retardant effects need any reference material or testers I'd be more than happy to help out, just let me know.
Thank you very much Slund. Roland is on holiday this week but should be back next week. Sounds like you have something great going there.