DC Designs F-4 Phantoms flight model update and information

DC1973

DC1973

Members +

Posting this here as it will be of interest to Phantom Phans. Phase one update complete, with highly realistic spin modelling based on the real F-4J NATOPS, along with multi-player visible stores, effects etc.

Phase two already underway with an interior and exterior modeling / texturing overhaul, should be done within a month or so.
 
Thank you for the update(s). I appreciate your dedication and applaud your efforts. Got a few back seat rides in the J models in the 80’s, never forget low transition burner takeoffs and 500 kts at mast height. No spins though, happy to do that in the sim thanks to you. I have all your airplanes and enjoy them all. Looking forward to the F-14 update. Got a few hours in the back of an A model as well.

Cheers
 
slackerbg said:
Thank you for the update(s). I appreciate your dedication and applaud your efforts. Got a few back seat rides in the J models in the 80’s, never forget low transition burner takeoffs and 500 kts at mast height. No spins though, happy to do that in the sim thanks to you. I have all your airplanes and enjoy them all. Looking forward to the F-14 update. Got a few hours in the back of an A model as well.

Cheers
Click to expand...
Back-seat rides in an F-4 and an F-14? Wish I could claim the same, must have been incredible! Glad you're enjoying the jets :)
 
I got to thinking about your decision not to put flat spin characteristics in the F4. I haven’t reviewed the NATOPS but assume that’s what could happen some or all the time and that it also may be unrecoverable. I guess most folks don’t want to be bothered with that, which is akin to having crash detection on and restarting. A user defined switch for simplified recoverable spin and a truer to life spin and recovery characteristics might be an option. I only say this because you went to the effort to begin with to put some form of realistic departure and spin in to begin with and it sounds like you could put in the flat spin.
Any way just another brain fa_t.
 
slackerbg said:
I got to thinking about your decision not to put flat spin characteristics in the F4. I haven’t reviewed the NATOPS but assume that’s what could happen some or all the time and that it also may be unrecoverable. I guess most folks don’t want to be bothered with that, which is akin to having crash detection on and restarting. A user defined switch for simplified recoverable spin and a truer to life spin and recovery characteristics might be an option. I only say this because you went to the effort to begin with to put some form of realistic departure and spin in to begin with and it sounds like you could put in the flat spin.
Any way just another brain fa_t.
Click to expand...
The true flat spin is kind of there, in that if you fall for long enough it develops eventually into an irrecoverable condition. At present, the aircraft spins nose low and at least gives folks a chance to get out of it. I build for the audience, and likely many of them would be put off after a few flights ruined by irrecoverable spins. It's important for me to ensure that folks enjoy my aircraft, as it's a form of entertainment. The balance between accuracy and popularity is a constant battle for me :)
 
Dean,

Can you elaborate on the changes that are being done on the interior and exterior models?

Cheers,

Priller
 
collensr said:
I thought you were throttling back to retirement !!
Click to expand...
I am retiring, with only the P-61B to be released this year, but I'll still be updating my existing products so that customers aren't left with anything out-dated or not working. I can't see myself releasing any new products for the forseeable, even though I'd like to - there are nearly 300 new aircraft in development for the sim, and I would imagine that most I'd like to build are already underway. Mind you, probably 287 of those are Boeing 737s, F-16s and Airbus A300s :D

Mostly, my simming will return to being my hobby and not my job.
 
Priller said:
Dean,

Can you elaborate on the changes that are being done on the interior and exterior models?

Cheers,

Priller
Click to expand...
Much higher detailing and texturing in both cockpits, revised exterior normal maps and PBR, better effects and a general polish. Work was already underway but Heatblur's announcement of their F-4E coming to MSFS encouraged me to get it all done a little bit sooner. They're targeting a different customer to mine of course, but it seems sensible to spruce up my Phantoms while I can.
 
DC1973 said:
I am retiring, with only the P-61B to be released this year, but I'll still be updating my existing products so that customers aren't left with anything out-dated or not working. I can't see myself releasing any new products for the forseeable, even though I'd like to - there are nearly 300 new aircraft in development for the sim, and I would imagine that most I'd like to build are already underway. Mind you, probably 287 of those are Boeing 737s, F-16s and Airbus A300s :D

Mostly, my simming will return to being my hobby and not my job.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a good plan Dean. BTW What happened to that Griffon Spit that you showed some screenies of a couple of years back?
 
Dean, I so appreciate how well you've supported your products! For me, they're the right balance between "feeling real" and not being a pain to operate. (I've had a back-seat in a real F-15D, and I find yours awesome.)

Once you're retired and have time on your hands I can bug you for an RCAF scheme for the SC/DC F-5. :)
 
Just like Slackerbg, I managed to get quite a few backseat rides in Phantoms during my time at NATC Patuxent River 73-76. Back then the money for fuel and pilot hours was plentiful, I think mostly due to Pax being a test center. Whenever a F-4, T-2, TA-4J, T-38 was scheduled for a sortie with a open backseat, I jumped at every chance I could.

1000002158.jpg
 
Impressive! Only 'flown' an ex-RAF full-motion F4 simulator but looking forward to the DC update:)

Dean, Only heard of one new 737 in the making...
 
A flat spin was very uncommon. Any spin in the F-4 was very dangerous. If my memory serves me correctly, the F-4 lost 4000 feet per revolution while in a spin, hence the nickname, "Flying Brick". The BOLD face EPs said, eject at 14,000 feet AGL.

We lost two pilots (one a good friend of mine) once. They departed controlled flight while in trail formation (aka Topgun) and didn't get out in time.

F-4 pilots learned to use his feet in controlling the airplane at high AOAs. Otherwise, the Phantom was a very stable airplane and awesome to fly.
 
collensr said:
Sounds like a good plan Dean. BTW What happened to that Griffon Spit that you showed some screenies of a couple of years back?
Click to expand...
Too many good Spitfires out there already, so it would not have been a wise choice. I try not to build aircraft that others have done, as it can steal their sales away from them, especially newer developers.
 
DennyA said:
Dean, I so appreciate how well you've supported your products! For me, they're the right balance between "feeling real" and not being a pain to operate. (I've had a back-seat in a real F-15D, and I find yours awesome.)

Once you're retired and have time on your hands I can bug you for an RCAF scheme for the SC/DC F-5. :)
Click to expand...
RCAF low-viz grey scheme is coming for the F-5, along with external wing-tip tanks.
 
DC1973 said:
RCAF low-viz grey scheme is coming for the F-5, along with external wing-tip tanks.
Click to expand...
Would it be too much to ask for a Swiss Tiger II with the grey randome, the way they ended their career (almost)?

Priller
 
54405782970_679686af07_k.jpg


Priller said:
Would it be too much to ask for a Swiss Tiger II with the grey randome, the way they ended their career (almost)?

Priller
Click to expand...
Something like this, perhaps?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top