• 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

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

Ohh looky here what I just found on my HD (part FSx) conversion

M

michael davies

Charter Member 2012
Ohh looky here what I just found on my HD (part FSx) conversion

Totally forgot I'd started this, very clunky by todays standards but easy to clean and smooth out, cut out intakes and cannon ports, detail landing gear etc, might have a play with it for a few days and see what pops out of the oven LOL. It'd require a new cockpit/pilot and VC but it'd be nice to see the old girl back. Got bits for a G model kicking around somewhere as well if my dim memory serves me well.

I think the F model had the most repaints of any aircraft I ever made, 20 or 30 or something bizarre like that.

Kindest

Michael
 
Jim Domzalski made some of the best paints like this example of the 391th FBS/366th FBW, Alexandria AFB, 1952:
 
You did do some very nice paints for the F-84. There's one that comes to my mind, it's a very highly polished aluminum USAF livery. Oy, a new VC that could accomodate some guages would be awesome. :)
 
Looks great! An FSX version, finally! :jump:

I'd give you a :medals: and :icon29: if you could pull out the Thunder-Flash version.
 
michael davies said:
Totally forgot I'd started this, very clunky by todays standards but easy to clean and smooth out, cut out intakes and cannon ports, detail landing gear etc, might have a play with it for a few days and see what pops out of the oven LOL. It'd require a new cockpit/pilot and VC but it'd be nice to see the old girl back. Got bits for a G model kicking around somewhere as well if my dim memory serves me well.

I think the F model had the most repaints of any aircraft I ever made, 20 or 30 or something bizarre like that.

Kindest

Michael
Click to expand...

The reall life sistership to your screenie. Ship 877, her name's Marilyn. (That's the Spruce Goose in the background.)

marilyn.jpg
 
Yes, this is a wonderful bird in FS9 and an FSX native build would be equally wonderful. I would love to have a model without the pylons....just a clean plane. In both FS9 and FSX....that way I could fly the clean plane in FS9 along side the tanked version.

OBIO
 
I'm sure there was a clean version in FS9, and a tank less one as well?, will check back but suspect all those files are long gone, were talking about a model built in 2003 now!, eight years old, amazing LOL, granted not a patch on todays fidelity, but boys is FPS good LOL.

Kindest

Michael
 
Michael, I'm sure I'm not the only one who will say that sometimes a plane without all the bells and whistles is just what I'm looking for. If the visual model is good, and it flies good, and I can just kick the tires, light the fires and go, sometimes thats just what I'm after. I would definately add this to my hanger.
 
Astoroth said:
Michael, I'm sure I'm not the only one who will say that sometimes a plane without all the bells and whistles is just what I'm looking for. If the visual model is good, and it flies good, and I can just kick the tires, light the fires and go, sometimes thats just what I'm after. I would definately add this to my hanger.
Click to expand...

I still think there is a place for what I call 'FS9 poly limit models' in FSx, low tech, clean shapes part XML, part modeled gauge, low buck, fun to fly models. There is a place for the in depth $50-60 model but I think there still a place for the $15-20 low tech default systems type of model.

If I finish the F-84 it'll be freeware, it'll be a basic cleaned up, a little extra detail here and there, parts smoothed, new bump maps etc, VC tarted up and some baked textures, the idea is as you suggest, a little 'lite project' you can just throw around or delete when you get bored.

Lets see happens in a few days once I have cleaned it up and see whether its worth progressing to completion. The mapping will remain the same, so all the old textures only need converting to dds to work.

Best

Michael
 
outstanding Mike! I have always said that a "light" model with kickass textures will make it to my hanger everytime. There have been a few models with the original paints looked kinda blah...but when one of the many talented artists gets their hands on it.....its an all new model to me.
 
Michael, can I talk you into adding the wings and tail structures into the VC model? I think a pilot should be able to see his plane when he looks over his shoulders....just my opinion, anyway.

I'm looking forward to it, at any rate.
 
While looking at the history of this aircraft and it's derivatives, I ran across the XF-84H Thunderscreech; an F-84 fitted with turbine engine coupled to a supersonic prop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H

I particularly liked this section:

"The XF-84H was quite possibly the loudest aircraft ever built, earning the nickname "Thunderscreech" as well as the "Mighty Ear Banger".[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H#cite_note-12[/SUP] On the ground "run ups", the prototypes could reportedly be heard 25 miles (40 km) away.[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H#cite_note-Wilkinson_p.1-13[/SUP] Unlike standard propellers that turn at subsonic speeds, the outer 24–30 inches of the blades on the XF-84H's propeller traveled faster than the speed of sound even at idle thrust, producing a continuous visible sonic boomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_boom that radiated laterally from the propellers for hundreds of yards. The shock wavehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_wave was actually powerful enough to knock a man down; an unfortunate crew chief who was inside a nearby C-47 was severely incapacitated during a 30-minute ground run.[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H#cite_note-Wilkinson_p.1-13[/SUP] Coupled with the already considerable noise from the subsonic aspect of the propeller and the dual jet turbines, the aircraft was notorious for inducing severe nausea and headaches among ground crews.[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H#cite_note-usaf-9[/SUP] In one report, a Republic engineer suffered a seizure after close range exposure to the shock waves emanating from a powered-up XF-84H."[SUP]
[/SUP]

"The pervasive noise also severely disrupted operations in the Edwards AFB control tower by risking vibration damage to sensitive components and forcing air traffic personnel to communicate with the XF-84H's crew on the flight line by light signalshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_light_signals. After numerous complaints, the Air Force Flight Test Centerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_Flight_Test_Center directed Republic to tow the aircraft out on Rogers Dry Lakehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Dry_Lake, far from the flight line, before running up its engine.[SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H#cite_note-Hendrix_p._408-10[/SUP] The test program did not proceed further than the manufacturer's Phase I proving flights, consequently no USAF test pilots flew the XF-84H. With the likelihood that the engine and equipment failures coupled with the inability to reach design speeds and subsequent instability experienced were insurmountable problems, the USAF cancelled the program in September 1956."

I'm not even sure Piglet would want to touch that beast and who could even come close to doing the sound set.
 
Hello Michael,

Great news - looking forward to whatever this turns into. But, especially so if the RF photo model was to materialize ....

Rf84+887019.jpg


Love the old 'Flash ... :)

dl
 
Being that I grew up just a few miles away from Grumman and Republic Farmingdale it's great to see this beauty refurbished. As happenstance would have it, I just happen to drive by Republic the day that the C-5 was sitting out on the runway. It was quite a sight for sure.

Here are a few memory joggers of the glory days at Republic. I miss 'em.

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/963republic225F_845000thc.jpg

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/134republic230F_84armamen.jpg

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/299republic231F_84sinflig.jpg

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/599republic242F_84Fviewof.jpg

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/697republic243RF_84Flasta.jpg

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/283republic245F_84Fprotot.jpg

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/260republic246RF_84Fweigh.jpg

http://fsfiles.org/flightsimshots/images/519republic249XF_84HBldg2.jpg
 
I'm steadily building a new paint kit for the "F" model, which is my favorite. I found a good "walkaround" site that gives me good closeups of the placards and decals, so I'm adding as much of that as I can make out. All in 2048x2048. . . .up from the 512x512 original textures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top