-
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
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Black Widow II over Edwards
- Thread starter Mach3DS
- Start date
Chuck_Jodry-VJPL
Charter Member
Still my favorite ride when i get some quality time with FSX, although that one is the Grey Ghost , did you ever try the ejection seat sequence ? it was an amusing bit of code to author , give it a try sometime ...
tommieboy
SOH-CM-2025
Me too, but you have to wonder why China or Russia hasn't copied the design since? I'm thinking it's was not all that it was cracked up to be. The one interesting comment that Lockheed made after the competition was that if they had know that the requirement for vector thrust had been removed as one of the requirements from the program; the height of engine humps on the top side of the aircraft could have been reduced. I think that would have made the aircraft even better looking.
Tommy
Sundog
SOH-CM-2025
There never was a requirement for vectored thrust. They could use it or not use it to meet the requirements. The YF-23 didn't need it to meet the requirements. I believe you're thinking of the thrust reversing. Thrust reversing was removed, but the YF-23 was already being built when they removed it. Since Lockheed-Martin was given time to completely redesign their original ATF submission (It was too heavy to meet the requirements), they were able to make sure the YF-22 wasn't built for the no longer required TR requirement.
The YF-23's performance is still classified, but one of the reasons Northrop ran into trouble was because the B-2 wasn't meeting it's LO signature requirements and the NATF was used as an excuse to choose the YF-22 over the YF-23, even though it was never going to be and in, in fact, was cancelled within about a month of the ATF down select. I think it was partly viewed that Northrop had the bomber contract and the F-22 would meet the requirements so give the fighter program to L-M.
The production version of the YF-23, the F-23, had much slimmer smaller nacelles than the YF-23 that were also moved inward toward the centerline. That, coupled with the longer fuselage for the redesigned weapons bays (From one deep bay in the YF-23, to two tandem shallower bays in the F-23) gave the F-23 a higher fineness ratio. In fact, the production F-23 was so clean looking it almost made the YF-23 look clunky by comparison, and the YF-23 was already a beautifully clean aircraft.
The YF-23's performance is still classified, but one of the reasons Northrop ran into trouble was because the B-2 wasn't meeting it's LO signature requirements and the NATF was used as an excuse to choose the YF-22 over the YF-23, even though it was never going to be and in, in fact, was cancelled within about a month of the ATF down select. I think it was partly viewed that Northrop had the bomber contract and the F-22 would meet the requirements so give the fighter program to L-M.
The production version of the YF-23, the F-23, had much slimmer smaller nacelles than the YF-23 that were also moved inward toward the centerline. That, coupled with the longer fuselage for the redesigned weapons bays (From one deep bay in the YF-23, to two tandem shallower bays in the F-23) gave the F-23 a higher fineness ratio. In fact, the production F-23 was so clean looking it almost made the YF-23 look clunky by comparison, and the YF-23 was already a beautifully clean aircraft.
Mach3DS
Charter Member
@chuck, true it is called grey ghost but I figured most would identify with black widow 2 in the title.
One thing I'm not skilled enough to do is repaints. Still looking for a more Grey version of no.800 rather than the stock and very black leaning paint scheme which is included. Most photos clearly show this light grey for 801 and a much darker grey for no.800, but not as dark as the included paint scheme.
This is by far my favorite of modern designs and the FSD-Milviz team did an outstanding job recreating her.
One thing I'm not skilled enough to do is repaints. Still looking for a more Grey version of no.800 rather than the stock and very black leaning paint scheme which is included. Most photos clearly show this light grey for 801 and a much darker grey for no.800, but not as dark as the included paint scheme.
This is by far my favorite of modern designs and the FSD-Milviz team did an outstanding job recreating her.
krazycolin
Banned
We are considering re-releasing all of the products that we did with FSD... updated and upgraded... would that be of interest?
(P-38, YF-23)
(P-38, YF-23)
tommieboy
SOH-CM-2025
tommieboy
SOH-CM-2025
Mach3DS
Charter Member
I purchased both so a HUGE Yes from me. If the YF-23 incorporates some of the techniques used in the F-15E and T-38 it will b one of the great Addon's for FSX IMHO. Same goes for the P-38. It's currently THE addon if you want a P-38. And it's still a great addon that I fly regularly.
Sundog
SOH-CM-2025
Yes. Any chance of a getting the production versions of the F-23 in both single seat and two seat variants? If so, PM me for info.
Stickshaker
SOH-CM-2023
Yes!!! I would absolutely buy the P-38 and most certainly the YF-23, if in the latter case the HUD-symbology would be in the proper place (now it sits too low so that, for example, the horizon line is way beneath the real horizon).<o
></o><o
> </o>Good idea!!!
Yes indeed!!
Mach3DS
Charter Member
tommieboy
SOH-CM-2025
Not much of a painter myself, but the grey camo scheme that is included with this product is very nicely done, and has a lot of potential for "what if" repaints. I plan on doing one "easy" repaint based on the grey camo scheme soon. I just revised the engine impeller blade texture to remove the wobble that was apparent in the hub / fan blades. I might release this on avsim this weekend. I used my hub / fan blade texture fix for the RAZBAM EA-6B Prowler as a placeholder; but it looks good on the YF-23 too.......:costum:
Tommy
Mach3DS
Charter Member
Very cool. Can you PM me if you do? Very interested in any/all schemes for this one as it's been neglected in the paint scheme department. I can see why seeing as it's a Flight Demonstrator aircraft, but it's worthy of a few!
I still hope to see the PAV1 Dark grey redone by some telented painter out there (hint hint) with the glossy factor reduced, as it's more of a matted finish.
Mach3DS
Charter Member
Playing around with heat effects, trying to get it right and slowly, very slowly learning to use basic photoshop skills... Maybe one day I'll try a repaint, but I have no idea where to start with that...
This one has a F-35 in the background, blurred out as an allusion to it's roots in the failure to select a suitable ATF/NATF....if only the
"F-23" could have been!
View attachment 73764
Maybe one day I'll try a repaint, but I have no idea where to start with that...This one has a F-35 in the background, blurred out as an allusion to it's roots in the failure to select a suitable ATF/NATF....if only the
"F-23" could have been!
View attachment 73764
