Project Martin A-30 Baltimore

[smilo]

first and foremost, my apologies,
to you, Stephan, for adding to the confusion.
being as i'm unfamiliar with the subtleties
of af99 building, i can only plead ignorance.
i was thinking of packaging the finished product.
an a-20 baltimore study, as it were.
a task much easier accomplished
after each model is completed.

side note;
have you ever seen Joe Amodea's Spit V Study?
it's a prime example of what i'm talking about.

~~~~~~~~~~~
second, to Ivan, about my "silly" statement
and why i've never done more.
it's not that i can't.
i think that's been proven.
what it all boils down to
is time, space and focus.
other projects, interests and real life
can easily distract one from the task at hand.
sometimes, i'm so scattered,
i can't help but think i might be adhd.
bottom line, i have other things taking up my time.

 

[hubbabubba]

(...)second, to Ivan, about my "silly" statement
and why i've never done more.
it's not that i can't.
i think that's been proven.
what it all boils down to
is time, space and focus.
other projects, interests and real life
can easily distract one from the task at hand.
sometimes, i'm so scattered,
i can't help but think i might be adhd.
bottom line, i have other things taking up my time.

Ditto.

Actually, my best "aeroplane" was the jeep.

I'll never line-up aircraft one after the other but CFS1-related ventures (like my fun-work with the defunct AAC) are also important. To cite only one, the patch for W7 gave a chance to many to see your, and Aleatorylamp, creations.

When you have fun alone, you may go blind (so I was told...).

 

[smilo]

...and what an "aeroplane" your jeep is.
well done, sir.

yes, my friend, i fondly remember
the many hours spent with you,
building missions, testing aircraft,
(and driving your jeep), perfecting
the AAC fleet, figuring out what
the range was for a rocket fired
from a submarine, so we could
use it as a torpedo, constructing
and testing v-1 launch sites,
armed factories and other scenery objects,
just so our friends at the AAC
could come destroy them on sunday afternoon.
not to mention, our home base, Ripe.
truly a scenery masterpiece.
lest i forget, just "lazy flying"
no hunting, no shooting, no bombing,
just multi-player flying with a friend.
how i miss the good old days.

and here i thought
my progressing blindness
was due to old age.
"Put that thing down!
You'll poke your eye out!"

 

[Ivan]

Hello Aleatorylamp,

I generally don't do different paint schemes until after the basic AF99 work is finished because things get so much easier when working with BMP format files instead of R8 or even PCX. If I have multiple paint schemes during the design stage, I create a sub-directory inside the AF99 project folder to keep a basic gray panel line scheme as well as a real camo paint scheme.
Unlike your current project, I try not to do too much paint until after the 3D modelling is done because often a paint feature can hide a shape problem or small bleed.
Regarding square textures, what I meant is that the textures say for a Left-Right texture would cover perhaps 12 feet Fore to Aft and only 6 feet Top to Bottom.
Whatever it is on the long side, it should be half that on the short side. I try to keep the same scale on the entire Fuselage but the Stabilizers and Wings probably each have a different scale. The Fuselage for certain should be scaled in such a manner that textures can be matched at least vertically from one section to another. It would be cool to match them fore and aft as well, but I have never bothered to do that.
Smio wanted me to write up a little texturing tutorial but I got lazy and never got around to it.


Hello Smilo,

I do understand about the conflicts of real life. That is why I haven't been following the threads lately. At the moment, I am at an Air Rifle Range with Anna Honey while my Son is practicing. I have also been working with the kids on their homework more than usual lately.


Hello Hubbabubba,

There are many other reasons for going blind......
As for sharing the subjects I am working on, I have tried repeatedly. My current topics are the old BV 141B, Propeller Tables, and Gauge Programming.
Except for the BV 141 updates, I have generally found that the other topics end up as monologues when I bring them up in these forums, but that is what is needed to finish up a couple of my projects that were started very long ago.

- Ivan.

 

[smilo]

yes, it can be discouraging,
talking to oneself on the forum.
but, consider that just because
there are no comments,
it doesn't mean people aren't paying attention.
i know from experience,
sometimes it's better to shut up and listen
than to blurt out meaningless, distracting comments.
who knows, one might learn something.

 

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Smilo,
Not to worry, my friend, by no mean are any apologies needed! - I was only explaining the process, that although at the moment the three versions of the aircraft have only one texture each, I will be able to provide two or three liveries for each of them once they are finished, and I´ll put on different registration numbers (of course), because all three will have both Green/Brown camo and Desert camo colours. Then there will be the an extra Mk.IIIA done as a Mk.IV with RAF Coastal Command livery.

Hello Ivan,
Thanks for the clarification on textures - I also try to get the height to coincide. Round things are always difficult though!
...and OK on the different colourings AFTER the models are finished! I´ll have to see if I can package everything at that point then, because for the moment it´s not working, and I only have 3 models, one .air file, and one texture-set per model, so I wonder what will happen with 8 texture sets for 3 models! But we shall see!

Hello Hubbabubba,
Your W7 patch will come in handy for me once I get my new W8 laptop set up for my birthday in 10 days. The plan is to put in AF99 with Virtual Player emmulating WinXP, and CFS1 in W8.
For the moment, it´s waiting on the shelf and my wife won´t let me use it yet! I got it at the end of September because in October every year, computer shops here runs out of stock, and their new mid-range Christmas laptops are all about 200 dollars more expensive, and then they come down in the summer. That´s the way it goes. This one´s a nice 2.9 Mhz QuadCore for all of 396 dollars!

Well, at the moment I´m putting in the RAF Coastal Command textures for the Mk.IV (same model as Mk.IIIA), and the different dorsal Gunner´s cockpit for the Mk.II.

So, all´s well and underway!

Part of the fun of doing it is talking about it and sending eye-candy screenshots. Building in silence would make me go deaf and blind. Actually I wouldn´t be able to do it for lack of motivation, so
thanks again to all for your interest, your support and your comments!

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

 

[aleatorylamp]

Mk.II ready!

Hello folks,

The Mk.II version is now ready! Slightly reducing the Hp and increasing the speed went well, as did taking out the dorsal turret and partially covering the well with glass and some struts. But, when I moved the dorsal guns in a bit, instantly there was a compilation error and I had to back track.

So, the gun positions are like those of the turret but with a different bodies, and they look quite OK, I think.
I can´t make them too complicated because of bleedthrough issues. The dark grey base on the fuselage section, with the strutted glass arch behind is already quite complicated, and fortunately there are hardly any bleeds!

Anyway, now it´s there! Parts count is at 141.4%, which means there are still (in theory) 69 parts to do things with. I put in the radio-goniometer too, and I may try a gunner´s head (??!), and see what happens!

For the time being, though, here´s a screenshot!

Smilo, your account on the AAC experiences with the V1´s, torpedoes and bombing sounds like it was lots of fun!

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

 

[Ivan]

Hello Aleatorylamp,

If I were you, I would keep each version in its own directory and just have three uploads.
It would make changes and versioning much less confusing.
The sharing of directories makes some tools not work, so generally if I get a multiple directory aeroplane download, I will just pick the nicest version and delete the rest of them. Others may not run into the tools problem.

By the way, with Fore-Aft and Top-Bottom textures, I also generally do about a half pixel shift because if you don't the smoothing process in the simulator will make the texture not quite match the model even when all the numbers are the same from left to right.
This task is helped by all the little multi coloured stripes I put on the join lines when I am laying out the textures. I am sure you have seen them in my screenshots. Sometimes it is necessary to use a 0.01 foot mismatch from an exact square to make things look right but generally this is not necessary.

Hello Smilo,

It isn't the monologue part that bothers me. It is more a matter of really just documenting a series of experiments, tool development and backtracking .
If I am not posting about a work in progress, I work a whole lot faster and take shortcuts that I know work well enough but are hard to justify in a public post.
One example is flight testing. I may only test maximum speed at 3 or 4 altitudes because I know that the ones in between are predictable. A post with that little information would be somewhat hard to follow for someone who is less familiar with the project I am working on.
There are also many places where a design decision is made only to be reversed in a day or two which would be a waste of space to document.
Just as an example, over the last week or so, I have gone through about 20 revisions of the BV 141B AIR file without even bothering to change the version number because none of the edits are really final and the process I am using is pretty well described in the Engine Tuning Tutorial thread.

- Ivan.

 

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Ivan,
OK, I think it will be more manageable that way!
For the moment, I have been able to do the Mk.II engines. It was a bit strange, because although they are less powerfull, the plane was faster - i.e. more aerodynamic because it didn´t have the turret bulk on the back, and it was lighter - and the bombload was only half.
Anyway, to have an overview, here´s a comparison between the three aircraft. Their FS performance is as close as possible to reality, and the unavoidable CFS1 speed peak is within limits, so the FD are quite pleasing, I´d say:
Mk.V, 1700Hp R-2600-29 radials
-------------------------------
__500 ft 44.0 Hg 1668 Hp 291.8 mph >>> Aim: Estimated WEP max S.L. 289 mph
__500 ft 42.0 Hg 1567 Hp 285.5 mph >>> Non-WEP base setting
_4500 ft 44.0 Hg 1731 Hp 304.4 mph >>> WEP, initial climb
_4500 ft 42.0 Hg 1628 Hp 298.6 mph
11000 ft 41.9 Hg 1726 Hp 325.1 mph >>> speed peak here
13000 ft 38.7 Hg 1585 Hp 321.1 mph
15000 ft 35.7 Hg 1453 Hp 318.2 mph >>> Aim: Specification max. 320 mph
Ceiling:
25000 ft 23.5 Hg _882 Hp 267 mph
RoC: 100 fpm
------------------------------------------------------------
Mk.IIIA/IV, 1660Hp R-2600-19 radials
------------------------------------
__500 ft 44.0 Hg 1571 Hp, 282.4 mph >>> Aim: Specification WEP max S.L. 284 mph
__500 ft 42.0 Hg 1478 Hp, 277.0 mph >>> Non-WEP base setting
_4500 ft 44.0 Hg 1629 Hp, 299.9 mph >>> WEP, initial climb
_4500 ft 42.0 Hg 1534 Hp, 294.2 mph
_9000 ft 41.8 Hg 1597 Hp, 309.5 mph >>> Speed peak here
11500 ft 37.9 Hg 1429 Hp, 305.3 mph >>> Aim: Specification max. 305 mph
13000 ft 35.7 Hg 1341 Hp, 303.2 mph
15000 ft 32.9 Hg 1230 Hp, 298.1 mph
Ceiling:
23250 ft 23.3 Hg _821 Hp, 260 mph
RoC: 92 fpm
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mk.II, 1600Hp GR-2600-A5B radials
---------------------------------
__500 ft 44.0 Hg 1564 Hp, 284.5 mph >>> Aim: Specification WEP max. S.L. 284 mph
__500 ft 42.0 Hg 1472 Hp, 278.6 mph >>> Non-WEP base setting
_4500 ft 44.0 Hg 1622 Hp, 302.4 mph >>> WEP intitial climb
_4500 ft 42.0 Hg 1528 Hp, 296.5 mph
_9500 ft 42.0 Hg 1602 Hp, 314.0 mph >>> Speed peak here
13000 ft 35.6 Hg 1380 Hp, 308.1 mph >>> Aim: Specification max. 308 mph
15000 ft 33.7 Hg 1266 Hp, 304.4 mph
Ceiling:
23250 ft 23.9 Hg _846 Hp, 269 mph
RoC: 107 fpm

...and here a screenshot of the first version of the Mk.IV Coastal Command colour scheme, with the wavy lines. I´m still trying to get them more exact, but I think they make the plane look really smart!
Cheers,
Alñeatorylamp

 

[aleatorylamp]

Roundels now rounder

Hello folks!
I still hadn´t got the roundels round enough. It has taken rather long - a few days in fact, because it is more of a trial and error thing. Finally, I believe they are right.

Then, I finally got the Dp programme to fire the rear gund backwards. I still hadn´t figured that one out, but I got it this time!
I also applied a contour softening option available in the simple but useful artwork program I use. Udo Entenmann, the man who used to do textures for me, used to call it "softwashing", so here are some screenshots of the 3 now "softwashed" models! - Mk.II, Mk.IV and Mk.V.

...And one last thing I keep forgetting - the little square window on the sides looking out onto the wings. Once I have that I suppose the models will be ready for upload, unless someone has any further suggestions.

I also have a 4th model here, the Mk.IIIA model, but it is essentially the same as the Mk.IV, but with desert textures like the Mk.V. I haven´t done anything special with it, and it is impossible to produce the slower Mk.III with the 4-gunned Boulton-Paul turret. There are insufficient parts, so I´ll have to give that one a miss!

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

 

[aleatorylamp]

Ready!

Hello all!
After putting in the little side windows, correcting the pilot´s view point, and correcting the DP gun-firing positions (see the screenshots, it looks quite spectacular - I didn´t know the instant would be captured!).

I´ve just SCASMed the models to correct their virtual Cockpit views, and the .air files are very satisfactory, corresponding to the specified performances. The Mk.IV substitutes the Mk.IIIA (but is essentially the same plane) and with the Mk.V, both .air files are the same as those of the planes posted here in the thread a couple of weeks ago, except of course for the new Mk.II, which is slightly different.

Well, then..., unless someone knocks me on the head to remind me of something, I suppose the aircraft are ready for upload, which I think I´ll undertake tomorrowmorning, just in case I discover some last minute omission due to my forgetfulness. Hopefully, for example, I won´t leave in the Beckwith Gauge Stack or leave in erroneous data in the Checklists!

Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

 

[hubbabubba]

You way too fast for me!

I'm still working on the MkIIIA cockpit but don't wait for me. I may publish it as a separate download, if I finish it...

You probably have other aircraft in the making, God speed.

 

[Ivan]

Hello Hubbabubba,

Aleatorylamp works much faster than I do for sure.
I ran into a rather interesting phenomenon a couple evenings ago:
At least for the last couple months, Combat Flight Simulator has not been able to stay running.
It crashes to desktop within about a minute after starting.
Some file operations and utilities seemed to still work though.
About two weeks ago, I noticed that the Autopilot section of my test panel had disappeared.

I left my development machine running for a few hours the prior night and came back to see a screen full of flashing multi coloured blinking letters.
Even the reset button did not wok to restart the computer, so I just switched it off for the evening.
I was sure the machine was pretty close to finished at this point.
The next evening, I tried to boot the machine and although the operating system appeared to load, it ended up with a message on a pop-up on the desktop saying that the operating system was corrupted and had been restored to an earlier check point and required a reboot.

After rebooting, the machine seemed to be stable in a manner that has not been the case in months.
I did a little troubleshooting for the Autopilot (Lear Jet) Gauge on the Test Panel and found that the gauge simply did not exist in my CFS Gauges folder.
How is this possible, it HAS worked in the past????
I copied it over from my FS98 installation on the same machine and the panel seemed to work perfectly again.

The machine was stable enough that I spent a couple hours adjusting the BV 141B flight model and almost finished it.
Later that evening I found the machine had crashed again with what appears to be another hardware error.

So..... In the same time as it has taken Aleatorylamp to finish up the texturing on two or three different Baltimore bombers, all I have managed to accomplish is to get some partial flight testing and tuning done on my BV 141B....

Yes, He works pretty fast!

- Ivan.

 

[smilo]

...complete with bomb-aimer panel?

 

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Hubbabubba, hello Ivan,

I did have the sensation that there was something pending... but I didn´t remember what! My memory is definitely not what it was...
But not to worry! I´ll wait until the bomb aimer´s panel is finished, no problem.

If anyone is impatient for the Baltimore I can always upload just one version and leave the other two for when the bomb aimer´s panel is finished. Let me know if this is a good idea!

The only reason I work faster, is only because now I have more time than before. Taking the kids to school in the mornings, sometimes the shopping, sometimes the cleaning and always the cooking, and then one or maybe two teaching hours in the afternoon leaves me quite a lot of time for airplanes.

The problem with hardware errors is that things disappear from the hard disk in sectors which are most used - usually by the operating system and also like in our case, CFS1! I found that it often has to do with the wearing out of the main hard-disk bearing or spindle, but also problems with the memory controller faults that crash Windows and thus create hard-disk sector errors. Good luck, Ivan! Too bad old computers have no SSD connectors!

For the moment I have no other planes in the making other than the Tupolev Tu-95 Bear, which is of debatable use... but there were at two or three on a to-make list I had with Ivan... the thing is to decide between the Ventura/Harpoon and the Tigercat.

Anyway, we shall see!
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

 

[smilo]

i don't know if hubba is making a bomb-aimer panel.
my comment was just an instigators suggestion.

while i'm in the mode,
here are a few aircraft suggestions;
harpoon/ventura first, then tigercat.

back in my construction days,
i thought it would be cool
to rebuild the cfs ai models,
starting with the do17,
which is exceptionally horrendous
and then, move on through the list.
but, that was my fantasy
and, of course, never got done.

 

[aleatorylamp]

Hello Smilo!

I know the Baltimore is one of the planes you like a lot, so I suggest uploading the Mk.II now, (green/brown Khakhi), and the Mk.IV and Mk.V will wait for Hubbabubba´s bomb aimer´s panel. What would you say to that?

I thought Hubbabubba was only making a bomb-aimer´s panel, but it appears he´s making the whole panel (probably including one), so now I don´t really know what to do...

As regards the stock AI aircraft, I had a look at all of them making them flyable, and they look like the simplified models that were cool back in AF5 - FS5 times. Improved version, unless available elsewhere, would of course be interesting! I can put them on the list starting with the do17, after the Harpoon and the Tigercat.

OK, then,
Cheers,
Aleatorylamp

 

[hubbabubba]

A bomb-aimer panel was always to be part of my project. If you remember, it took me about six months to make the Lancaster MkIII (special) with a bomb-aimer panel for dam-busting missions, and the firsts versions released would crash other AAC pilots machines because, mainly, some of my gauges were writing into the register, still permissible under W98SE but a big no-no in later OSes for security reasons.

A bomb-aimer panel was always in my thoughts, but I never got there since I had no aircraft of my own making to use it for. Next in line was the Harvard MKIIB when my dear old machine died.

I always start a new project with a lot of research and, since it is a hobby and not a job, I do this at my own leisurely rythm. With my actual situation, namely having to maintain three machines updated on a 56Kbit modem line (and my wife own "in-line" time), it basically leave very little time for such research. The He 162 was surprisingly easy to work on because sources abound! I never had an actual blueprint of the main board before! But the Baltimore, who was much more produced and used during WWII, has left very few traces. Not even one has found a place in a museum somewhere.

So far, the only MkIIIA panel picture I have came from the link that Ivan pointed me to. The picture is grainy and fuzzy and, the lines traced over to indicate secondary instruments are marring the main instruments so much that I'm still left guessing at some of them; I'm not even sure how far the ASI needle go!

And, as I understand it, Aleatorylamp had quite a head-start on his Batimores' stable when he asked me if I would be interested in doing a panel. So better publish now than wait for my panel as it could take a while.

I'm not sure of what is going on with your machine, Ivan, but I would check for possible hacking. Since we rekindled our email conversations, I'm receiving an inordinate amount of junk mail and, at least on some cases, they point to subjects that I know you have an interest in (and I don't). So I'm pretty sure hat your email contact list has been stolen, which does not bode well for the rest of your system.

 

[aleatorylamp]

OK, Hubbabubba! Thanks for the confirmation.
Aleatorylamp

 

[smilo]

in the end, Stephan, the decision is yours.
please, don't rush uploading on my account.
after all these years, patience
is something i have an over abundance of.

about making the ai's flyable,
buried somewhere is a how to do it tutorial.
as i recall, i have several flyable ai's.

my problem was, i couldn't stand to look
at many of them, even just to shoot them down.
i replaced many with "after market" examples.
but, thought it would be nice to have
simple, but accurate ai visual models.
the do17 being the worst offender,
with the mosquito and b-25 fighting for second.

then, of course, with the can o worms opened,
there are the air and dp files to deal with.

unfortunately, i became distracted
and the project moved into the woulda,
shoulda, coulda....didn't, daydream folder.