• 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.

B-25: Spot the difference

jankees

jankees

SOH-CM-2025
Anyone else fly the RCS B-25J? It has some good points and some not so good points.

For instance, there's a few things that have always annoyed me about the Dutch paint that comes with it, but without a paintkit....
I've changed a few things (but not all..), can you spot the difference?

FX8704.jpg
 
There was a big discussion last year regarding this aircraft. It's a good rendition of a restored B-25J. The virtual cockpit is a bit lacking.
 
Without loading it up, it looks to me that you cleaned up the gray bottom, and/or the tail markings.
 
Were you thinking of releasing the paint for the public? Always enjoyed Ray's model, wish there was a paint program for it, so many nice aircraft out there, or at least were. Thanks for sharing.
 
roger-wilco-66 said:
yeah MAAMs rendition of the cockpit looks better....

Cheers,
Mark
Click to expand...

The RCS VC is incomplete for FSX. This has been an issue with the RCS (freeware) version of the B-25 from Day One. Shortly after release, the original author said he would like to redo/complete the VC but shortly after that, he became very busy with a/c design activities for other firms and the redo of the B-25 fell by the wayside. I am not sure that Roy ever commissioned him to do this either. When I saw this latest revival of interest, I had a surge of hope that at long last, the VC had been updated but alas, it is pretty much the same aircraft as the original.
 
No, the original paint had the names of the authors on the fuselage marked as pilot etc. As it was meant to be a Dutch aircraft of No 320 Sqn, all these English names annoyed me, so i removed them. I also added the correct serial for Mitchell III KJ678 NO-K on the tail. This aircraft flew with 320 Sqn in march 1945, so no D-Day stripes. Unfortunately, without a paintkit, removing the stripes is a bit too much work for me at the moment..

I agree, the cockpit is not brilliant, and the layout of the textures is also rather..interesting, lots and lots of little texture files, and all in bmp format as well...
I do like the flashing exhaust flames though!
It's funny to compare it to the Maam-Sim version, I believe they worked together on that one at one stage?
Somehow, I have the feeling the shape of the two is somewhat different, the Maam bird feels stockier somehow..but it has the better cockpit and outside textures.

25-2.jpg


25-1.jpg


But I do like the stance of the RCS version, and the sound is not bad either (nor is the Maam sound btw.)

Makes me wonder what the vertigo B-25 will be like, how's that coming along ,Dean?
That will be an earlier model, so expect lots of 320 Sqn paints from me, they had only a few J models..
 
Nice Jan Kees. I didn't answer your question as you already told me in the car back from Soesterberg that those names annoyed you.

In the past I had some e-mail exchange with the South African guy who did all the schemes for this B-25. (Which is the reason he did this repaint from an aircraft from 320 (Dutch) sqn. He worked in an odd paint program which made it impossible to work with large textures and which is also the reason why it can't be converted. It is a sad story as the South African guy was forced to stop making repaints, due to very sad private family circumstances.

The textures are a collection of patches, all in different scale which make it almost impossible to create a new paintkit from scratch as well.

I prefer the 'olive drab' on this livery instead of the 'olive drab' on the MAAM B-25. Which is far too greenish in my opinion (please notice the word opinion!).

Cheers,
Huub
 
huub vink said:
I prefer the 'olive drab' on this livery instead of the 'olive drab' on the MAAM B-25. Which is far too greenish in my opinion (please notice the word opinion!).
Click to expand...

thank god I'm colorblind...

I suspected some Dutch involvement....it's weird about the textures though, as there are a few 1024x1024 textures, but also lots and lots of 256x256 texture files. Why they never combined those...?
 
getting there with it, externally completed. Internals are well under-way and progressing nicely.

Dc3 / C47 is fully textured and modelled and coding is in progress

Carrier texturing starts on Monday
 
Really looking forward to it Dean as your B-25 will be the first 'early' B-25 for FSX and there are endless possibilities for repaints.

Cheers,
huub
 
Jan Kees,

I thought these guys deserved some more credits so I replaced the names by missions ;). Quiick and dirty as well. Perhaps the differences is size of the textures can be explained by the fact this model was originally a FS2002/CFS2 model.

Cheers,
Huub

RCS-B25-NOK.jpg
 
I hope Vertigo gets the B-25C/D right. I commented on their early WIP screen shots and pointed out some errors. They no longer seem to be posting WIP shots or allowing anyone to see their WIP and spot errors. I can't say that I agree with this policy.
 
stansdds said:
I hope Vertigo gets the B-25C/D right. I commented on their early WIP screen shots and pointed out some errors. They no longer seem to be posting WIP shots or allowing anyone to see their WIP and spot errors. I can't say that I agree with this policy.
Click to expand...

After seeing the petulant behaviour of several forum members over the work in progress pictures of the Bearcat I think it's actually a very sensible policy.
 
agreed, why set yourself up for constant criticism...they did fine all by themselves on the Panther!
 
I was debating whether or not to make this post, but still..

I can understand some peoples perspectives regarding 110% accuracy, however there will be without a doubt regardless of whom the dev team is - inaccuracies.

Unfortunately this is the real world, I would even go to the extent to say that no model in FSX is a 110% rendition of the real-world aircraft, its simply not physically possible.

However the guys that produce these aircraft whether it be vstudios, a2a, virtavia... they all set out to be as accurate as possible with there models and do a lot of research gathering.

Over the coming months development screen-shots will be non existent, why ? because of people always searching for the perfect model down to the last square inch, which is not going to happen I'm afraid.

When a Dev team releases development screen-shots its not to show how accurate the model is, its simply marketing and to get people interested in the next upcoming product.

Now on the down side, the only thing that's happening is people are ripping these models to bits and hyping on about how in-accurate the models are. Others then jump on to the band wagon, pulling apart the development screen-shot and before we know it the thread is locked.

Regardless on what anyone thinks, this is very very damaging to any new release. I've seen it first hand and its not nice at all. Some members go to the third party stores and even go to the extent in commenting on a new release on a store and say this aircraft is totally wrong, its a poor rendition of the real aircraft. If this is not damaging enough they even post links on the store pointing back to the locked topics on SOH.

Guys for the love of FSX, be careful and courteous to the dev teams. If not, the only thing that is going to happen is you'll push the development teams into a shell.

Think to yourself are you really that flush to to pay $100 per product ? if so please email me personally - dean@vertigostudios.co.uk

No one forces your hand, if you want to buy new releases and support the development teams please do so. If its not accurate enough for you go buy the real aircraft.

Sorry mods, if this reply causes you to much work then by all means delete it, it gets a little tiring when some poeple are always searching for that Holy Grail

*Disclaimer - this is not a rant :)
 
huub vink said:
Jan Kees,

I thought these guys deserved some more credits so I replaced the names by missions ;). Quiick and dirty as well. Perhaps the differences is size of the textures can be explained by the fact this model was originally a FS2002/CFS2 model.

Cheers,
Huub

RCS-B25-NOK.jpg
Click to expand...

Huub,

will you be releasing this? If not, could you post a link? I used to fly the RCS B-25 regularly and this has rekindled my interest:jump:

Cheers,
Sascha
 
Have to agree with Deano on this one. Constructive criticislm is a very useful tool, but just to nitpick, just to show how knowledgable you are is stupid. I think it is especially harmful when directed at freeware products. I have downloaded and installed my share and appreciate the effort involved in the creation, far beyond my skill set. I may decide not to keep the product but it would be disrespectful to just complain about little nitpick things. Roy's vc may not be state of the art but it has been around awhile also. And the work that went to this was always to be the best at the time of execution, and hey, it did not cost anything! Didn't ask for money or help, just here you go enjoy it. All done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top