Conspicuous by Their Absence

Thank all of Ya'll for the Kind words about the Free Flight Site. I offer CFS1, CFS2 and Fs2004.
smilo is correct, our average is about 6500 downloads a month ( all 3 sims included).

As many know the counters crashed a few times in the past and that has been fixed for a while now.

Ivans page will also have the new counters updated to show again soon. I have the counts
just have not had the available free time to finish the project.

I add the counters to the new stuff submitted, when and if it is posted. I receive several a week
but many are rejected for various reasons

CFS1 just needs a flying club to take over the AAC and bring it back, just my 2 cents on that subject.

Be safe all and have a happy holiday season,

Dave
 
Oops! ... AT-9 Jeeps don´t shoot

Hi again...
I overlooked the obvious, didn´t I! :banghead:
Not much sense in CFS1 for a plane which doesn´t shoot, however difficult or hot-roddy it was to fly. Oh well, not to worry, I´ll look for another which does :tommygun2:! I remember a kind of wish list at the beginning of this thread.
We shall see!
Cheers,
Stephan
 
Which one, is the question...

Hello again all!

It´s confusing...:confused:. I´m trying to find a plane which will honour the name of this thread, something that there is demand for, but it´s a little complicated to deduce.

There are some models which clearly some people are already working on, and perhaps others, that are not so obvious. I definitely wouldn´t want to step on anyone´s feet, so... suggestions are welcome!

Or perhaps: How about a poll? Which could be the most wanted model not under present construction, the MOST conspicuous for its absence?
Cheers,
Stephan
 
hello Stephan,
i wouldn't worry about whether it shoots or not.
does the c-47 shoot?
okay, yes, but that was during the vietnam era.
you get my point, don't you?
there are many recon, liaison and cargo aircraft under represented.
i think you should finish and release your at-9.
i'd put it in my hanger.
back in the day, hubba and i would meet up
and do what he called lazy flying.
just flying with no shooting. it was a nice change.

in my opinion, what we need are quality aircraft.
it doesn't matter that it's been done if quality is lacking.
besides, this is a hobby. enjoy yourself.

as for suggestions,
there's an old p-36 model out there,
but, i'm not thrilled with the quality.
hopefully, you could do better.
i have the a-30 baltimore on the back burner,
but don't know if or when i'll get to it.
have at it...i don't own the rights to build it.

just don't forget to have fun.
 
twins are fun

Great answer, Smilo, thanks!
Your suggestion sounds sound indeed!

At the moment I´m sorting out some tail bleedthrough on the AT-9 Jeep. The tailplanes shine through the fuselage seen from the front if they are grouped in tail left/right, or else the fin shines through the tailplanes if they are grouped in Tail with everything else in the tail. (This could be the lesser evil). Here glue is difficult too because there are already so many separate components and structures glued in the tail - the fin top tip because of the knook in the fin, the lower rudder... It´s like a puzzle to be sorted out, but this is part of the fun in AF99, isn´t it?

The problem is the location of the tailplanes on the fin, just above the rear-fuselage, not really high enough for Tail upper left/right, added to the fact that it´s lower than the forward fuselage. Also, separating the top cabin part into Canopy/high wing has no effect either. Well, I´ll see...

Anyway, I had a look at some pics of the Baltimore A30 and it looks like fun to build. I like twin-engined planes a lot! That could be next on the list after the AT-9.

The P36 Hawk also looks fantastic - it has a great stance. That one could be for after the A-30.

I definitely agree with the fun part, it´s the main thing, isn´t it!
Good suggestions!
Cheers,
Stephan
 
Welcome!

Hello Aleatorylamp,

As you suggested, I looked for your name at FlightSim.Com and was amazed at the HUGE body of work you have over there. I haven't had a chance to download or try out anything yet, but will eventually get there as soon as I can figure out what my old username and password were.

As for subject matter, the AT-9 Jeep sounds like one that really meets the "Conspicuous by Their Absence" description. I believe it was the most common starting point for multi-engine pilot training. I believe I might have some dimensional drawings of that aeroplane somewhere if you want them. It will take me a while to find them though. I believe they were done by Paul Matt.

I know Smilo has already commented on this, but don't worry about colliding with projects done by anyone else. If you are interested in a subject, build it. I don't think I have built a project yet that hadn't been built previously for Combat Flight Simulator.
I also have been talking about building a P-36 / Hawk 75 for at least a few years, but haven't gotten very far yet.

You have also built quite a few aeroplanes from the Great War. Perhaps you can upload a couple of those here?

Welcome to the forum!
- Ivan.
 
a couple comments to reply to;

first, i am not an af99 guy. i don't have the patience.
even though, i like to watch the build process.
for example, Ivan's current p-38 project. it's truly amazing.

i would suggest asking him to help with your bleed issues.
he is an uncompromising master of af99.
when i talk about quality, he sets the bar.
from what i've seen, there is no "lesser evil" in his builds.
that is the challenge, isn't it?

for me, aircraft designer 2000 (ad2k) is the build preference.
don't get me wrong, i am, by no means, a master builder.
i have been working on the same aircraft for nearly two years now.
longer, if you consider the year i changed over to the ar196.
anyway, ad2k doesn't have the limitations of af99,
but, it does have issues of it's own.

i, too, am also partial to twins.
the big boys and the fighters got the glory,
the attack twins did the dirty work in the trenches.
then, there are those unsung heroes, the cargo haulers.

i really like floaters and amphibians, too.
bill potvin's classlist modification fixed the water landings problem.
maybe someday, we'll see a mavis. the p-38s first kill.

--------------
yeah, i forgot to mention the trainers
 
The Great War: Grossflugzeuge and Riesenflugzeuge

Hi again!

Thanks for your good words! Building since 2002, a lot of water has passed under the bridge, and at the beginning I didn´t have much experience, but with time the models got better.

Of course I´ll be glad to upload a few of the big WWI multi-engined biplanes. How about a few German ones, a couple of English ones, an Austrian one, a French and American one or two, some Russian ones with 2 fuselages, and some Itailan triplanes! That would be a nice selection.

I´ll be preparing the uploads shortly, including the AFX-PCX files. They are all labelled for FS98, so I´ll change that to CFS1, and the pictures have to go separately on this site, as I see. Just in case, I´ll try them all out in CFS1 before.

Also: They will need damage points. Who could do this? Just uploading them here without DP´s may not do, so please let me know the best way.

Some are really outlandish!! The size of a DC9, taking off at 70 km/h with a maximum speed of 130 km/h!, carrying upto a ton of bombs... The engines were like truck engines, water-cooled... Some could be serviced in-flight! You probably know the Germans had high-compression engines (Ratios at all of 5.5/1 instead of the normal 4.5/1 or less) with gated throttles, which meant they could only take off at 60% power at sea-level - otherwise they´d explode into pieces. As they gained height, the navigator would take away some gates on the throttle lever every 1000 ft or so, and the pilot pushed it forward a bit more each time. Slowly they´d circle up to the altitude they needed to head for enemy territory. Only at the rated altitude, 2500 ft for the 245 hp Maybach and 3000 ft for the 267 hp Mercedes, could they unleash the grand total of their horsepower and fly at full speed: 130 km/h... Good grief! ...and that in an open flight deck!

Rough times... How old were those guys anyway? 20? Pity about the war though, but the planes must have been a real dream! Not something you know will fly anyway and you just get in, sit down and off you go, and then the stewardess serves you a sandwich and a coffee!!

Cheers,
Stephan
 
Smilo, you write like a poet!
Some of the oldtimers I plan to upload here are floatplanes too.
With AF99, at least for me, it is sometimes really difficult not to have to go for the lesser evil. However, there´s always room for improvement, so I´m including the AFX files, and the models will most probably benefit from it!
Cheers,
Stephan
 
A twin engined landplane and floatplane

Hello, hello...

I´ve just uploaded a rare twin-engined biplane, the Curtiss Twin-JN from 1916 in both landplane and floatplane versions. The DP´s went quite well, I think. Let me know if there are any bugs!
From what Smilo wrote, I gather this could be just his cup of tea!
I have to fix the big ones a little before uploading them. Meanwhile I´ll send some more medium-sized ones which need less fixing!
I hope you enjoy them.

Cheers,
Stephan
 
"Smilo, you write like a poet!"

right...if i only was.
the truth is, i have a hard time
keeping focused on long lines,
be it forum posts or emails. weird, huh?
besides, i usually write in short bursts.
funny how it works, isn't it?

i look forward to checking out your models.
even though time is of the essence this time of year,
i will get to it as soon as possible.
may i suggest, copying a link and posting it when you upload.
it makes it a lot easier for folks to find.

i am surprised Dave hasn't chimed in yet.
his freeflight site is a great place for cfs uploads.
most likely, he would create your own page.
from the sound of it, probably two.
 
smilo,
I did chime in...see post #881

Also notice that Ivans Long tail has 8 times more downloads on the FFS compared to the SOH.
and he did not submit the new 109 so that is not posted.
http://www.thefreeflightsite.com/Ivans.htm

I also noticed that your Beauty AR196 busted 520, congrats.
http://www.thefreeflightsite.com/Smilos.htm

Have been busy with some reorganization of my companies, so I can be like you..retired
Hopefully one day.

But have still updated the site daily, most for FS2004 and CFS2.... Can not post it if it is not
submitted for review.

Merry Christmas to ALL,

Dave
 
yeah, but, your chiming wasn't a direct invitation
to Stephan to upload at the freeflight site.
you know how those artists types are.

as for the no upload of the 109e,
i don't know what to tell ya.
it's none of my business.
 
Hello All,

For some reason, the quoting feature doesn't seem to be working reliably for me right now. Not quite sure why.
The P-38 Design Study is proving to be much more involved than I had first thought and is eating up a lot of my spare time.


Hello No Dice,

Thanks for the update on numbers. Pity is that the Long Tail P-40K really needs a rework in light of my updates to the P-40E. I finally figured out the incorrect shapes and they are all over the place. Nothing is that far off, but there is a LOT that is off. I won't be updating it before actually re-releasing a P-40E, but that will be waiting for a bunch of other stuff in line ahead of it such as the P-38J Design Study.
To be honest, I don't know if I will ever really complete the P-38J but that was expected and is the reason it is a "Design Study" only.
I wanted to post a lot of information I had accumulated about that aeroplane.
Didn't think I would be spending a lot of time trying to debug AF99.

Regarding the Me 109E, I had never really intended it for any great distribution. It isn't even my aeroplane to begin with and the real audience is the group that participates in this thread. If others find it, great. If not.... I just thought the group here was a bit larger than it probably is.


Hello Aleatorylamp,

I downloaded a couple of your projects from FlightSim.com. Your models are really quite excellent.
Regarding the Tail Assembly of your Curtiss AT-9, I hit nearly the same problem with the Me 109E by Richard Osborne.
I don't know what your current resource count is, or if you are intending to animate the control surfaces, but I would try the following sequence:
(Tail Group)
Fin
Glue
StabLeft
Glue
StabRight
Glue
TailCone
Glue
Tail Gear Strut
---- No Glue here ----
TG Fork
Glue
Tail Wheel
Glue
TG Fork Top

You would be setting the precise arrangement between the control surfaces and the Tail Cone.
You would also be setting the precise relationship between the Tail Wheel and the Fork pieces around it.
The automatic glue would put the two together and there is a wide range of angles that can be used without any bleeds.

This is what I am planning for my version of the Messerschmitt 109 and pretty much what I used for the RO Me109E except that the 109E also has a couple bracing struts to complicate matters a bit.

Hope this helps.

- Ivan.
 
Tail grouping and other simming pages

Ivan: OK, Thanks - I´ll try it and report back this afternoon! Glue seems to be able to do more than I expected.

All: Thanks for your good words on my models - good positive reinforcement is nice. I´m glad to have bumped into you lot because it makes aircraft building life much, much more interesting!

No Dice: Nice hearing from/about you. I´ll get onto the other page issue later. You can of course publish any of my stuff on your page as you like!

Cheers,
Stephan
 
Building sequence for tail

Hi Ivan!

Your tail parts-sequencing works really well! I never knew that 2 parts on opposite sides could simultaneously be glued to 1 central part mentioned above - this would allow a third part to be glued to it at the beginning of the list!

So the sequence in the list is not literally sequential! The opposite parts one after the other in the list are in effect not glued to each other, as one would have thought!

So far, so good. Now I suppose that the elevators would inserted with their glue, into the list exactly each one after its corresponding stabilizer, and that the rudder would go at the top of the list with glue right before the fin, perhaps?

Thanks in advance for your help and consideration!

Cheers,
Stephan
 
aleatorylamp said:
Hi Ivan!

Your tail parts-sequencing works really well! I never knew that 2 parts on opposite sides could simultaneously be glued to 1 central part mentioned above - this would allow a third part to be glued to it at the beginning of the list!

So the sequence in the list is not literally sequential! The opposite parts one after the other in the list are in effect not glued to each other, as one would have thought!

So far, so good. Now I suppose that the elevators would inserted with their glue, into the list exactly each one after its corresponding stabilizer, and that the rudder would go at the top of the list with glue right before the fin, perhaps?

Thanks in advance for your help and consideration!

Cheers,
Stephan
Click to expand...

Well, aleatorylamp, you've just experienced "Ivan's conga". I, too, was unaware of that property of glue parts until I met Ivan here. As a scenery API maker, I usually used them for up-down, left-right, front-aft "single-shot" projects. It never occured to me that you create a "snowball effect" by adding parts to already glued ensemble. Ivan's conga was an eye-opener...:jump:
 
Hello Hubbabubba!

Yes indeed! After so many years building with AF99 by myself (not lonely because in the little group - almost the last FS98 Mohicans - we have a texture maker and an .air file tweaker who also makes sceneries, but nobody else builds!), I find it extremely refreshing to see not one, but three builders who are more knowledgeable than I about AF99.

With the glue the sequence is not linear, but more like a tree that branches out glueing left and right just after a central piece and continuing down the centerline upto another left/right branchout.

There is so much material in these threads that one could write a complete addendum to the AF99 help file! It would be a big job though.

Cheers,
Stephan
 
Last edited:
Links to the two Curtiss TWIN-JN uploads

Hi Smilo!

Here are the links you suggested - good idea, thanks!

Curtiss TWIN-JN, 1916 Landplane and seaplane prototype - 8 units built.
It was a twin-engined development of the Curtiss Jenny.

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=19&id=19218


http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=19&id=19217

There will be more to come...

You mentioned that you were using AD2k2 - I tried it some time ago and liked it very much because it is quite similar to AF99 in its style of working, and is the only other solution other than FSDS or GMAX to model for the modern simulators. I think it´s even possible to make planes for FS2004 with that. I didn´t get into it very much though, because nobody in my little group of FS98 developers does anything for any modern simulator!

Cheers,
Stephan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top