F-106 VC Rebuild

[mbmorgan]

Ed thank you for the VC make over:salute: Once I started flying, I did not like the exterior shine, actually the plane looks metalic and that is wrong because they were a glossy light grey. I tweaked the MDL specularity with the MDLMat FSX tool. It all depends on personal taste I guess but if anyone likes what I done I will post the "how to". 1st pic is as it comes out of the box, 2nd is my tweaked MDL version:

View attachment 66440View attachment 66441

Beautiful repaint ... although technically NL 17 was a B model (two seater). I was working as a controller at GTF back when the Montana ANG was still flying the 106 and even managed to get a little back seat time in NL 17. Quite an experience ...

Cheers,
Mike

View attachment 66514

 

[falcon409]

Beautiful repaint ... although technically NL 17 was a B model (two seater). I was working as a controller at GTF back when the Montana ANG was still flying the 106 and even managed to get a little back seat time in NL 17. Quite an experience ...

Cheers,
Mike

View attachment 66514

Also, never noticed this until you mentioned it in a round about way. . .the tail number isn't correct either.

 

[StormILM]

FDE/CFG Change

Folks, after looking at my FDE adjustments and the effect it made on both the takeoff and landing speeds, I went back and studied a couple more FSX Delta Wing models and decided to add a Flight Tuning section to the F-106's Cfg file which doesn't feature one. All the numbers are nominal except the cruise lift scalar which I adjusted in an attempt or better yet a tradeoff for a good liftoff speed and not quite so nasty landing speed/sink rate. After much testing and comparing, I sat the cruise lift at 1.500(the standard setting would be 1.000). So far as I can tell, the change didn't have a negative effect in the handling or pitch trim but the liftoff and touchdown speeds and profile seem more on target. Just copy and paste the below text into the Cfg file just below the Reference Speeds entry.

[Flight_Tuning]
cruise_lift_scalar= 1.500 //- increase to reduce aoa vs speed/G load
parasite_drag_scalar= 1.000
induced_drag_scalar= 1.000
elevator_effectiveness= 1.000
aileron_effectiveness= 1.000
rudder_effectiveness= 1.000
pitch_stability= 1.000
roll_stability= 1.000
yaw_stability= 1.000
elevator_trim_effectiveness= 1.000
aileron_trim_effectiveness= 1.000
rudder_trim_effectiveness= 1.000



BTW, I did the MDLMAT changes and they look great! Been many a year since I used to see the F-106's out of the detachment that was based here at ILM. I remember how loud they were! I miss the sonic booms when they returned from an intercept mission!

 

[falcon409]

Great! Thanks Storm!!

 

[fsafranek]

You're both wrong...

Beautiful repaint ... although technically NL 17 was a B model (two seater). I was working as a controller at GTF back when the Montana ANG was still flying the 106 and even managed to get a little back seat time in NL 17. Quite an experience ...

Cheers,
Mike

Also, never noticed this until you mentioned it in a round about way. . .the tail number isn't correct either.

I suppose next you're going to tell me that I used the wrong ANG badge on the tail, right?

The aircraft I painted for the payware package is absolutely 100% correct for the Montana ANG in 1971. Probably before your time Mike since you said "still flying".

When Phil changed his mind at the 11th hour and decided to do the single seater as the original type with the brace on the top of the canopy I had to backdate all of my schemes and throw some out (some schemes were revised to the B model and [URL="http://www.mirage4fs.com/Alphasim/index.html#F-106']put out as freeware[/URL]). So a bird from a decade earlier was selected because I've always been a fan of the Montana ANG scheme and wanted to keep it in the mix.

I did however paint a freeware version of a 1984 era [URL="http://www.mirage4fs.com/Alphasim/index.html#F-106']two-seater in Montana ANG scheme[/URL] with the more current ANG shield (and again with correct numbers).

I do my research guys. I never paint fiction when its going in a payware package. :salute:
:ernae:

Thanks for the FDE update Storm.

 

[falcon409]

You're both wrong...I do my research guys. I never paint fiction when its going in a payware package. . . .

. . .and I honestly know nothing about 106's. My note was just that when I looked at the image Mike posted and I looked at the tail number. . .I realized that the repaint also had a "17" but the tail number was different. I "assumed" that the 17 was supposed to be part of the tail number and so In my cluttered mind figured something was amiss. Considering how flammable a lot of "criticisms" can get in the forums a lot of times, on a scale of 1-10, that was probably a 2. Sorry for questioning your work.

 

[hae5904]

Thanks Ed for your tremendous job! :salute:

Time for me to upload my F-106 repaints to here at SOH........

View attachment 66620View attachment 66621View attachment 66622View attachment 66624View attachment 66625

Just some pictures...I will make it a total file of all my repaints (FS9 & FSX) containing the following squadrons:
27 / 83 / 84 / 95 / 318 / 329 / 456 & 539 FIS

Cheers,
Hank

 

[fsafranek]

. . .and I honestly know nothing about 106's. My note was just that when I looked at the image Mike posted and I looked at the tail number. . .I realized that the repaint also had a "17" but the tail number was different. I "assumed" that the 17 was supposed to be part of the tail number and so In my cluttered mind figured something was amiss. Considering how flammable a lot of "criticisms" can get in the forums a lot of times, on a scale of 1-10, that was probably a 2. Sorry for questioning your work.

Sorry for freaking out a bit. After all these years the skin is just as thin.

Do appreciate your repainting the cockpit textures. Never did like the originals taken from a flight manual.
:ernae:

 

[falcon409]

Nice work Hank. I certainly understand the move to "low-vis" paint jobs on airplanes these days and all the necessary camo schemes, but you gotta admit. . .the airplanes from the 50's, 60's and 70's really looked awesome with all the bright colored markings and full color Squadron logos.

 

[StormILM]

Minor fix

After reviewing my update and running some tests, I realized something was off regarding engine power/climb/mach@altitude performance. The number I had listed in the [TurbineEngineData} section had the static _thrust set at 16100.000(which that simulated thrust would be reached in AB/Max Throttle without Shift+F4). At that setting, I was barely able to reach Mach 1.1/1.2. The real PW J75-17 had 24500lbf thrust. I returned to that level of thrust in the CFG and it seemed too powerful so I dialed it down to 20500. At that setting the takeoff roll + rate of climb (29,000fpm) seems about correct as well as being able to reach the max mach number at altitude under optimum weights and conditions. Give it a try and see if it's in the ballpark and if not, just make minor adjustments to suite user specs.

 

[lazarus]

I am assembling all the bits to try out, it looks great! The -106 model is a favorite, as impressive as the aircraft was in the world! A real rocket ship.

 

[fsafranek]

Thanks Ed for your tremendous job! :salute:

Time for me to upload my F-106 repaints to here at SOH........

View attachment 66620View attachment 66621View attachment 66622View attachment 66624View attachment 66625

Just some pictures...I will make it a total file of all my repaints (FS9 & FSX) containing the following squadrons:
27 / 83 / 84 / 95 / 318 / 329 / 456 & 539 FIS

Cheers,
Hank

Maybe I missed it, life has been a little hectic lately. Were these repaints ever uploaded?
:ernae:

 

[hae5904]

Frank, they were uploaded to AVSIM, before their major crash. During the same timeframe I painted the buzz-number for your 319 FIS F-106B !

And as falcon redid the VC, I though it would be better to re-upload the repaints, though this time to SOH.
Due to time I haven't found them all.......they are scattered around among some 4 Tb of data.


Cheers,
Hank