New Hi-Poly Spitfire in the works

lythronax said:
... Animating them is going to be a pain. ...
Click to expand...
Not really, the sim itself does most of the work here; IIRC you only have to name the part according to the SDK and set the correct pivot point (admittedly, that can be a bit difficult to find but if you have access to blueprints, it should be noted there). The limits (max. up/down angle) are set in the flight model text files. Looking good so far!!
 
Like Frosty says. Aligning the pivot itself can seem intimidating but if you’re struggling, drop me a PM and I’ll show you how Helper objects make it really easy.
 
Looking good. I like how you can see that the control surfaces are separate parts, gaps, hinges being modeled, etc. Great details.
 
Thanks for the comments everyone! There's a fair way to go if I want to get this detailed to a level I'm happy with.

Here are the C wing cannon fairings. The outer double-tapered section is actually the exact same part as in the Mk Vb.

5yxXYg6.jpg

fhSuQno.jpg

akDG5wT.jpg


And here it is in the gorgeous four cannon arrangement:
sS5RoPP.jpg

JNfe8FT.jpg


The actual length, shape and more minute details of these fairings has eluded a lot of people when modelling the Mk Vc and its derivatives. I'm aiming to be as close as possible. Modelling the blister for the feed motors and attaching it to the wing mesh with satisfying geometry is going to be a massive challenge; hell, attaching the barrels to the wing mesh so that they're not intersecting is looking to be a bother (I've not done it yet, though I've made unsuccessful experiments).
 

Attachments

  • akDG5wT.jpg
    akDG5wT.jpg
    504.6 KB · Views: 177
This is so nice!
I'm glad you're here sharing this, nice to see the progress,
and you're in good hands with the modelers here that have
been giving us top quality planes for CFS3 for years!
 
Hello! Having taken a break, learned some new skills in MAX, and found flaws in the basic dimensions of the model, I've elected to do the maths and very rigorously plan out the dimensions in a jig - accurate to the millimetre. This should allow better cross referencing of dimensions. Additionally, I've figured out a way of scaling plans/drawings based on the size of individual parts and panel lines according to engineering measurements as opposed to the full length/wingspan of the aircraft, as these measurements are commonly and broadly misquoted; the wingspan of Spitfires Mk 1 through Seafire 47 (excl. extended and clipped tips) is 11.25m/36'11", NOT the commonly quoted 11.23m/36'10". Similarly the length of the Spit IX with small rudder is 9.51m, NOT 9.47m. The use of these commonly and erroneously quoted measurements found in books leads to errors which exacerbate themselves dramatically as more of the aircraft is modelled.

Having brought my new, accurately scaled model into GMAX to compare with the old one, I discovered the latter to be overscaled significantly. I've therefore decideded to press ahead with the new model, this time starting with the Griffon powered variants.

IR6nuY6.jpg

As for the two-stage Griffon nose, I'm relatively happy with how the general shape and bulges have come out. The single-stage nose can be made by removing an edge loop near the base and bringing the whole front back - the forward part of the cowl is exactly the same.

a0o25Oa.jpg

I am extremely happy with the new wing however.

paWzDNo.jpg

I'd also like to demonstrate how simple the needed change in geometry is in order to produce the later Mk 21 wing - up to station 21 (the removable wingtip) the airfoil and geometry are identical. All one needs to do is fit the wingtip to shape using a freeform modifier. The larger aileron was fitted to the shape of the Mk VI-VIII extended wingtip, but when it was decided to cut the wingspan back to 11.25m, the aileron was not reshaped to the classic planform and the extended tip was simply shortened and rounded off to the original span, thus the broader chord wingtip.

GBxM5IN.jpg
to:
Ilf8yvR.jpg
to:
RHbn2JU.jpg
and then:
nEblJoB.jpg
 
Very nice!

And interesting to hear about the scaling issues and how you dealt with them, and the MK.21 wing shape.
I know this a CFS3 aircraft, but P3D v5 onward could do with a some top class Spitfires models! :jump::wink:

(Flight Replicas should be releasing a very nice MK.I made from the original drawings in the not to distant future).

Cheers

Paul
 
The only thing I have is a set of Mk.XII pilots notes which might be useful for cockpit details and then some flight test data.
 
gecko said:
The only thing I have is a set of Mk.XII pilots notes which might be useful for cockpit details and then some flight test data.
Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware it's essentially a Mk Vc cockpit with the Griffon throttle quadrant, priming pump and a lever for the supercharger above the throttle; it'd be nice to find a drawing for the latter but I'm sure I could model it off photos.

I have the flight test data but until someone can work out two-speed supercharging it'll still be like a single-speed + turbocharging as per usual :/
 
I'd have to check a couple things, but there are a few more differences inside, like the ring pull to reload the Coffman starter breach. Not sure about the supercharger lever, but I do have working code that can be adapted to superchargers with two or more speeds for single engine aircraft.
 
Turns out it's a mess. Most were based on the Mk.VC, but the last 45 were Mk.VIII airframes. The Mk.VC aircraft had a manual radiator shutter control and only the fuselage tanks, while the Mk.VIII based aircraft had an automatic radiator, additional fuel tanks in the wings, and a retractable tail wheel. Somewhere along the way it seems that the supercharger lever was removed, possibly due to a change to an automatic system, but I don't have enough info to confirm the reason for the change.
 
gecko said:
Turns out it's a mess. Most were based on the Mk.VC, but the last 45 were Mk.VIII airframes. The Mk.VC aircraft had a manual radiator shutter control and only the fuselage tanks, while the Mk.VIII based aircraft had an automatic radiator, additional fuel tanks in the wings, and a retractable tail wheel. Somewhere along the way it seems that the supercharger lever was removed, possibly due to a change to an automatic system, but I don't have enough info to confirm the reason for the change.
Click to expand...

This isn't entirely true; the last 45 used the VIII tail-unit/empennage and corresponding retractable wheel, but all 100 used a proprietary Mk XII flush riveted fuselage and Mk Vc wings - so no wing tanks or short span ailerons. The pilot's notes don't mention an automatic radiator so I'll assume the manual control. Going by the pilot's notes, the other differences in the cockpit from the Vc (other than what you've mentioned) are that it uses the VIII/XIV layout of buttons and switches on a dedicated console under the trim wheels, beam approach switch, bomb switches and a fuel transfer selector cock.

As for the model, I built the armoured fuel tank cowl and gave the engine cowling some thickness at the rear;

lBHLJD0.jpg
JxNZiFj.jpg

I then began on the fillet, which will remain a separate part from the wing and fuselage, constructed much like the real thing (note also the rear-view fuselage that I built at the same time as the high-back);

bLeSXf1.jpg
F1aj8Qf.jpg

And here's a quick export to CFS3;

btGn6iu.png
C9E78pf.png
QV22ZC8.png
 
The text of the pilot's notes is as you describe, but the annotated cockpit photos show an aircraft with wing fuel tanks, automatic radiator shutter and possibly automatic supercharger gear change. This doesn't fit with the first part of the pilot's notes at all. I wonder if the aircraft used for the pilot's notes pictures was the prototype Mk.XII during the time when it had the Griffon VI installed. It might explain some of the discrepancies, but not necessarily all of them.
 
gecko said:
The text of the pilot's notes is as you describe, but the annotated cockpit photos show an aircraft with wing fuel tanks, automatic radiator shutter and possibly automatic supercharger gear change. This doesn't fit with the first part of the pilot's notes at all. I wonder if the aircraft used for the pilot's notes pictures was the prototype Mk.XII during the time when it had the Griffon VI installed. It might explain some of the discrepancies, but not necessarily all of them.
Click to expand...

This wouldn't surprise me! I imagine the production Mk XIIs would have had the later rounded blind flying panel too; I know for a fact the entire production run used Mk Vc wings exclusively, so why there'd be such a device in the cockpit, unless it was to do with drop tank operation, I couldn't explain.
 
Well, going with the the fact of the VC wings (which does make sense, because the single stage Griffons didn't need an intercooler between stages, allowing for the rounded oil cooler instead of symmetrical radiators found on Mk.VIII wings) we can rule out wing tanks and automatic radiator and their associated controls in the cockpit. Drop tank controls were mounted on the floor to the right of the seat, so that isn't what is shown in the pilots notes picture. The picture, then, is of a very non-standard aircraft, and it only makes sense that it would be the prototype. The publication date is November 1943, and that aircraft had the Griffon VI installed in June, so that would explain the throttle quadrant being different than described, and the presence of a supercharger ground test button, since the Griffon VI did have automatic gear changing and the III and IV installed on production aircraft did not.

The mystery then is what did the standard Mk.XII throttle quadrant look like, and what the console under the trim wheels looked like, since it wouldn't have had at least two of the controls that the Mk.VIII console had. Perhaps it was the same as the Mk.VC?

I think the rest of the cockpit would have been probably more similar to the Mk.VC cockpit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top