F-8 Crusader

[delta_lima]

I think there was an RF-8 as well as the French model in the Alphasim set. What all did you end up doing when you brought it into FSX?
:ernae:

Afraid not.

There was no RF-8 model for FS9. There was an unofficial .mdl file/texture that allowed the fuselage weapon pylons to be blanked out. It was not the RF model, though. The fully faired over refueling probe, sharply cornered ventral corners, and of course, the camera ports - none of this was ever modelled. Still, the use of those file enabled a number of superb repaints emulating the RF-8 to be made by Russell Smith and maybe another couple of authors.

Those "RF-8 emulator" files do not work in FSX, at last investigation a number of months ago - discussed at great length here:

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforu...usaders-and-FSX-thumbnails&highlight=crusader

Yes, the Alphasim Crusader was a magnificent project - it was a treat to be even a tiny cog in that wheel. Carl and I emailed dozens of times a day at the peak of it. Even today, that bird looks good - though the Rollus model works a bit better overall in FSX.

If a bona fide RF model ever gets released, I will be a truly happy man. Here's to hoping.

dl

 

[ColoKent]

Yeah, I agree on the RF-

I'd love both an RF-8A and an RF-8G. It would be fantastic, I agree!

K

 

[fsafranek]

Yes, the Alphasim Crusader was a magnificent project - it was a treat to be even a tiny cog in that wheel. Carl and I emailed dozens of times a day at the peak of it. Even today, that bird looks good - though the Rollus model works a bit better overall in FSX.

If a bona fide RF model ever gets released, I will be a truly happy man. Here's to hoping.

dl

Just checked all my beta and release copies. For some reason I thought there was one. Must have been a pipe dream.

I know what you mean about the frenzied back and forth emails during these projects. Then it's released and silence. After all these years and projects still haven't gotten used to that.
:ernae:

 

[sparouty]

Does anyone know if there are any F-8's in developement right now, or on the drawing board? I am a big fan of the F-8, it would be neat to fly one in the sim.

So far I never eared/read that a Crusader project was started by anyone...

But what I can say is that my team (Royale French Navy) have planned a F-8 project.
It should not start right after the Etendard final release (which is now a question of weeks), because I need a little break, going back to my shipyards.
There are some work to be done on carriers : enhancements/fixes, Foch and Arromanches (ex-Colossus), and may be a C.DeGaulle... So F-8 start with Automn leaves??

Regarding Crusader version aimed, it should certainly be focused on the F-8E which is the one I have already collected materials/informations on.
Michel, my special advisor, is a former French F-8 pilot, and the F-8 E(FN) is mainly based on the US F-8E, I guess. If the RF-8 is also closed to this version, it should be great, because 3D cockpit work is very time consuming and it's hard to build different VC in the same time...

So far I have nothing more detailed to say on this next RFN project...

Regards,
Sylvain

 

[Daube]

Hi Daube
Rollus Crusader is OK but no VC in FSX Accel.
Do you run her in DX9 ???

Italo

I have too much FS9 planes in my FSX hangar to run DX10
FSX Acceleration of course, and no problems with the VC which works perfectly. I'm a VC-only pilot.

 

[hae5904]

So far I never eared/read that a Crusader project was started by anyone...

But what I can say is that my team (Royale French Navy) have planned a F-8 project.
It should not start right after the Etendard final release (which is now a question of weeks), because I need a little break, going back to my shipyards.

So far I have nothing more detailed to say on this next RFN project...

Regards,
Sylvain

Thanks Sylvain, that's great news!! (Still anxiously waiting for the IVR..... )

Salut,
Hank

 

[Daube]

And I confirm once more that the Rollus Crusader is the most difficult plane to land on a carrier :/
Even for those shots, it took me three times before I could land successfully:
- first time I caught the wires but the plane crashed on the side because of incorrect heading and speed
- second time bolter
- third time success, and a very beautiful centerline too
I also added the additionnal external views from the VRS Hornet to the Crusader

 

[Z-AZ1USN]

Denny, Strike Fighters is a pretty good sim. With SF2 Vietnam they really improved things. I don't have either one installed now, but now you've gone an given me the itch to fly them again.

Only thing I find wrong with Strike fighters is that when it installs, and if you have AI
carriers intalled, it will write a new EXE.XML file in your FSX which wipes your installed
AI carriers 2 and any other programs i.e. autothumbnail (they will share the same EXE.XML
file however Strikefighters doesn't. I had my discovered that recently after I installed
strikefighters and noticed that AI carriers was missing from the module dropdowns.
Then after I read the manual install directions for AI Carriers I noticed that you had to
locate your EXE.XML file and edit %APPDATA%\Microsoft\FSX\EXE.XML and add a reference
to aicarriers.exe so that it can be launched when fsx is started.

Strikecarrier will make its own new EXE.XML file and not add to the already established
XML file that has AI carriers 2 on it. Strike carriers creates a Three wires program and
writes the new EXE.XML.

 

[delta_lima]

Just checked all my beta and release copies. For some reason I thought there was one. Must have been a pipe dream.

I know what you mean about the frenzied back and forth emails during these projects. Then it's released and silence. After all these years and projects still haven't gotten used to that.
:ernae:

You - with the prolific amount of work you've done, of all people, must know that feeling well. The QC/beta work I did was limited to the AF Hornet, AS Crusader, and a dozen or so other freeware projects. I miss having the time to do it, but count it as a rewarding privilege for me likely far out of proportion to the contribution itself.

Thanks Sylvain for formalising the news of the Crusader. You had mentioned it a while back, but of course, it was most appropriate for you to bring it up here. Given the quality of all else you and your team have done, it'll be yet another masterpiece.

Merci bien, mon amis!

dl


ps: for those having issues with the Crusader(s) .... it can be done, but it NEEDS to be done by the numbers.

First, it helps if you set up a brief headwind. Now that in FSX the carriers are moving, you no longer need gale force, thankfully.

Next, you need to have expended/dumped your fuel appropriately. I bring on no more than 15%-20% fuel.

Finally, managing your AoA/vertical airspeed. Very little stick - mostly throttle. You need to get into the right attitude early, and keep it there throughout the approach. You cannot get behind the thrust curve - it'll kill you. Also, really trust the attitude indicator. It's deceiving given how far forward you are - you have to be very flat, or you'll hit your tail.

Again, just attention and practice. I've found both the AS and Rollus models can be trapped well.

:ernae:

 

[SkippyBing]

Only thing I find wrong with Strike fighters is that when it installs, and if you have AI
carriers intalled, it will write a new EXE.XML file in your FSX which wipes your installed
AI carriers 2 and any other programs i.e. autothumbnail (they will share the same EXE.XML
file however Strikefighters doesn't. I had my discovered that recently after I installed
strikefighters and noticed that AI carriers was missing from the module dropdowns.
Then after I read the manual install directions for AI Carriers I noticed that you had to
locate your EXE.XML file and edit %APPDATA%\Microsoft\FSX\EXE.XML and add a reference
to aicarriers.exe so that it can be launched when fsx is started.

Strikecarrier will make its own new EXE.XML file and not add to the already established
XML file that has AI carriers 2 on it. Strike carriers creates a Three wires program and
writes the new EXE.XML.

I think you're talking about something completely different! The Strike Fighters series of sims are a stand alone product that has nothing to do with FSX. http://thirdwire.com/projects2.htm

Installing Strike Fighters should have no effect on FSX unless something very odd is happening.

 

[ColoKent]

What I take from all of this...

....is that the AS Crusader is "it" if you want a US version. Doesn't sound like any payware producers are even contemplating any US follow on projects at this time.

Does anyone know if the refueling probe can be made to extend/retract in FSX?

Thank,

Kent

 

[hae5904]

Regarding Crusader version aimed, it should certainly be focused on the F-8E which is the one I have already collected materials/informations on.
Michel, my special advisor, is a former French F-8 pilot, and the F-8 E(FN) is mainly based on the US F-8E, I guess. If the RF-8 is also closed to this version, it should be great, because 3D cockpit work is very time consuming and it's hard to build different VC in the same time...

So far I have nothing more detailed to say on this next RFN project...

Regards,
Sylvain

Sylvain, even though the F-8E(FN) was based on the F-8E, it introduced a different wing, having double hinged leading edge droop and boundary layer control. Only the F-8J and F-8E(FN) were equipped with this wing. Mainly to reduce the landing speed, as the French carriers were a little bit smaller than the Essex class.

Cheers

 

[sparouty]

Sylvain, even though the F-8E(FN) was based on the F-8E, it introduced a different wing, having double hinged leading edge droop and boundary layer control. Only the F-8J and F-8E(FN) were equipped with this wing. Mainly to reduce the landing speed, as the French carriers were a little bit smaller than the Essex class.

Cheers

Hi!
You're right, I read that the new wing allowed the stall speed to be reduced of 9% which was important to land on Clemenceau class carrier. But I'm more wondering the differences that may exist between versions into the cockpit...I do not well know the F-8J's cockpit neither RF-8 one...

Collecting information is certainly the longest task of a project (you're always missing something...) but it's also the most interesting one (in my opinion)...

Regards,
Sylvain

 

[fallenphoenix1986]

Would anyone be kind enough to post their catapult points for the Rolland F-8?
Been searching for a tutorial I saw once that showed where the measurements came from but having no luck so far.

Craig

 

[hschuit]

Would anyone be kind enough to post their catapult points for the Rolland F-8?
Been searching for a tutorial I saw once that showed where the measurements came from but having no luck so far.

Craig

This is my Carrier Ops setup for the Rollus F-8:

[launch_assistance]
//supports FSX Acceleration AI carrier launch
launch_bar_pivot=8.0, 0.00, -5.2
launch_bar_lug =8.0, 0.00, -6.2

See also Lamont Clarke's "Adapting FSX aircrafts to acceleration carriers" page at

http://lc0277.gratisim.fr/

 

[fallenphoenix1986]

Thanks for that.

Just spent the last half hour shooting aproaches to the Clem, 128 knots, on glideslope, green AoA indexer, 10-15% fuel load... crashed every single time. As the aircraft slows almost to a stop it seems to be nose heavy at which point I flip off the deck cartwheel a few times and go for a swim.

Tried the following for the hook and problem solved:

[TailHook]
tailhook_length=6.47
tailhook_position=-21.05, 0.00, -2.13
cable_force_adjust=1.0

Now to kill the GPWS warnings and I'm done.


Craig

 

[hae5904]

Thanks Craig!!

I was looking for the correct Tailhook config. :salute:

Cheers
Hank

 

[delta_lima]

....is that the AS Crusader is "it" if you want a US version. Doesn't sound like any payware producers are even contemplating any US follow on projects at this time.

Kent

I know seems odd ... I agree that there doesn't appear to be any payware producers looking at this. I'd have thought this would have been a project very much in the Razbam vein. Limited time and resources, I suppose.

I wouldn't say it's AS or nothing. As has been said, the Rollus Crusader is very nice too. There's at least 2 USN repaints I recall it having (not at my flying pc now) - one being the DF-8 Drone Controller version. That said, it's focus is more then F(N) version - but it's an option.

Sylvain, regarding your fall project - again, great news. There is indeed differences between the versions, and certainly between the fighter and photo versions. For example, whereas the E has the radar scope at the top ...

... the RF-8G has the camera sighting/drift scope up on top ...

As you can also tell, some of the flying instrument positions changed too - (course indicator, etc.)

I completely understand that this might deter you from considering the RF version. But if the external model of either the RF-8A or RF-8G can be done, I for one, will happily accept the compromise of having the VC of whichever fighter version you would choose to do - F-8E(FN) - just as you did with the Etendard. In fact, knowing as I do how deeply folks desire a good quality RF version, I challenge to find anyone who would not rather have that compromise and no have one at all. That said, it's of course your call, and anything your team produces will be greatly appreciated.


I still have a great deal of my Crusader technical material - if the time comes and you need any reference data, don't hesitate to ask.

Best regards,

dl

 

[ColoKent]

Yeah...ditto on what Delta Lima said...

...I too would welcome an external RF-8A or G, regardless of the instrument panel.

Kent

 

[TARPSBird]

Aside from the viewfinder lens at the top of the panel and the placement of the gauges, I don't think there's much structural difference in the cockpit of a RF-8 vs. that of a standard gunfighter model. Easy to get other opinions on that from my F-8 driver shipmates if anybody's interested.