-
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
Hello Helldiver,
The number one reason why we made a Harvard was that it was the type my Dad flew while training in the RCAF during WW2.
Technically the plane Mary Dilda flew is an SNJ6, but it's also modified for flying at Reno. It'll be in the third FSX bundle.
One of our primary reference sources during the building of the models was the Squadron/Signal book T-6 Texan in action and from reading it I got the impression that there was little or no outward visual difference between the AT6 and SNJ versions. The primary source for modeling the front VC came from Navy training films made during the 1950 which used SNJ aircraft. I couldn't spot any difference between a USAAF cockpit and the SNJ cockpit. So it seemed to me the only thing required to have an SNJ instead of an AT6 was to have a different texture map made.
Concerning tailhooks. Once I read that only 80 SNJ's were equiped with tailhooks it was easy to decide that we would build a copy of the SNJ-4C, but wait until volume 2 to do it. I have enough photo reference to model the external model of the tailhook, but haven't found any images showing how the controls for raising and lowering it were done in the cockpit. I did read one account of a Naval pilot in training who said that raising and lowering the tailhook was a matter of pulling in or letting out a rope. No hydraulic or mechanical devices, just a rope. I've not found any other accounts so I don't know if that was true of all the tailhook equipped SNJ's or just a handfull. Any recollections you might have would be greatly appreciated.
Our paintkit is pretty straight forward. You could ask one of your re-painter friends to help and you could have a FSX SNJ-5 in just a few hours or less. The next two FSX bundles will have models that will allow you to have the SNJ-6 and SNJ-7 as well. The LT-6G FAC model has visibility switches that allows you to turn the smoke rockets, launchers, pylons, and antennas on and off which will give you a great amount of flexibilty in it's appearance.
I served in the Navy from 74-78 as a QM. Nobody at SkyUnlimited is giving the Navy anything except respect.
The number one reason why we made a Harvard was that it was the type my Dad flew while training in the RCAF during WW2.
Technically the plane Mary Dilda flew is an SNJ6, but it's also modified for flying at Reno. It'll be in the third FSX bundle.
One of our primary reference sources during the building of the models was the Squadron/Signal book T-6 Texan in action and from reading it I got the impression that there was little or no outward visual difference between the AT6 and SNJ versions. The primary source for modeling the front VC came from Navy training films made during the 1950 which used SNJ aircraft. I couldn't spot any difference between a USAAF cockpit and the SNJ cockpit. So it seemed to me the only thing required to have an SNJ instead of an AT6 was to have a different texture map made.
Concerning tailhooks. Once I read that only 80 SNJ's were equiped with tailhooks it was easy to decide that we would build a copy of the SNJ-4C, but wait until volume 2 to do it. I have enough photo reference to model the external model of the tailhook, but haven't found any images showing how the controls for raising and lowering it were done in the cockpit. I did read one account of a Naval pilot in training who said that raising and lowering the tailhook was a matter of pulling in or letting out a rope. No hydraulic or mechanical devices, just a rope. I've not found any other accounts so I don't know if that was true of all the tailhook equipped SNJ's or just a handfull. Any recollections you might have would be greatly appreciated.
Our paintkit is pretty straight forward. You could ask one of your re-painter friends to help and you could have a FSX SNJ-5 in just a few hours or less. The next two FSX bundles will have models that will allow you to have the SNJ-6 and SNJ-7 as well. The LT-6G FAC model has visibility switches that allows you to turn the smoke rockets, launchers, pylons, and antennas on and off which will give you a great amount of flexibilty in it's appearance.
I served in the Navy from 74-78 as a QM. Nobody at SkyUnlimited is giving the Navy anything except respect.
Helldiver, I think we know by now the US Navy and Marince Corps always get the short shrift; especially in the sim community! I wish the rest of the world would wake up and realize what was overcome to win the war in the PTO, and give the just and overdue respect!:d A SNJ would have been nice addition............
OT: The next thing we'll see is an HBO special: "How the 506th PIR of the 101st ABD won the war in the PTO!":d Just joking; for all of you who don't have a sense of humor.
If you would look close enough the SNJ and the AT-6 were quite different aircraft. Electric landing gear, non-locking tail wheel, fuel capacities, just to mention a few. Although still fussy, the AT-6 was a lot easier plane to fly than the SNJ. The SNJ did not suffer fools gladly.
jmig
SOH-CM-2025
Maybe that's why the sucker keeps stalling and spinning on me? :costumes:
She needs a steady hand, nothing too sharp or drastic, just smooooooth.
To Helldiver,
Here's a link to a Wikipedia listing discribing the different variants of the Texan/SNJ and Harvard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-6_Texan_variants#SNJ_Texan
The differences you mentioned are the differences between the early built versions and the later built versions, not differences between AT6 and SNJ.
If you look at the description for the SNJ-5 it says they are a bunch of AT6D's transferred from the USAAC.
If you talked to the folks who bought our FS9 package they would tell you that we've incorporated all those differences. Our T6G is quite different from our AT6D, including landing gear, fuel capacity and tailwheels and how they're steered.
Here's a link to a Wikipedia listing discribing the different variants of the Texan/SNJ and Harvard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-6_Texan_variants#SNJ_Texan
The differences you mentioned are the differences between the early built versions and the later built versions, not differences between AT6 and SNJ.
If you look at the description for the SNJ-5 it says they are a bunch of AT6D's transferred from the USAAC.
If you talked to the folks who bought our FS9 package they would tell you that we've incorporated all those differences. Our T6G is quite different from our AT6D, including landing gear, fuel capacity and tailwheels and how they're steered.
eidos. - I not only flew in an SNJ, I also had the fortune of making a belly landing in one at NAS Jax in 1945 because the landing gear wouldn't come down.
Up to 1948, all SNJs were Navy SNJs. I have no idea why the Air Force would give them to the Navy. It makes no absolutly no sense what so ever. But that was after my time in the Navy.
Up to 1948, all SNJs were Navy SNJs. I have no idea why the Air Force would give them to the Navy. It makes no absolutly no sense what so ever. But that was after my time in the Navy.
N
ncleobis
Guest
Hi 
is there any clean harvard paintkit? I mean, with no white dirt, or anything like that? Just the layers, rivets, panel lines and diagram?
It would really help a LOT. Right now it's a bit of a pain to clean the dirt and change colours of stuff as they all are done especifically for the original paint...
thks in advance
is there any clean harvard paintkit? I mean, with no white dirt, or anything like that? Just the layers, rivets, panel lines and diagram?It would really help a LOT. Right now it's a bit of a pain to clean the dirt and change colours of stuff as they all are done especifically for the original paint...
thks in advance
Cirrus N210MS
Charter Member
i would like to help out with ur texan project there jesse if you need any more painting done i have some good ideas :ernae:
To Helldiver,
What I've been trying to explain is that there's no visual difference between a USAAF AT6D and a USN SNJ-5 except what's painted on the outside of the plane. If you went to the NAA plant in Dallas in 1943 and you saw 50 airframes all lined up, all identical, you couldn't tell which one was and AT6D or an SNJ-5 until it came out of the paint shop.
If you went back to the NAA plants a few years later you'd see airframes that were quite different from those made in 43 and they would have all those differences that you mentioned, fuel capacity, cockpit layout, tailwheels and landing gear, and canopies and antennas but when they came out of the paint shop, the ones going to the USAF were call T-6G and the ones going to the Navy were called SNJ-7.
What I've been trying to explain is that there's no visual difference between a USAAF AT6D and a USN SNJ-5 except what's painted on the outside of the plane. If you went to the NAA plant in Dallas in 1943 and you saw 50 airframes all lined up, all identical, you couldn't tell which one was and AT6D or an SNJ-5 until it came out of the paint shop.
If you went back to the NAA plants a few years later you'd see airframes that were quite different from those made in 43 and they would have all those differences that you mentioned, fuel capacity, cockpit layout, tailwheels and landing gear, and canopies and antennas but when they came out of the paint shop, the ones going to the USAF were call T-6G and the ones going to the Navy were called SNJ-7.
txnetcop
Charter Member
Hey, I'm not joking do I hear a OOOOO RAHHHHH for the 101ST!!!! Besides your right, the PTO was a Navy, Marine, and Army Airborne show on the US side. Speak up Mud and Helldiver, don't be so bashful:costumes::costumes::costumes:
Ted
Oh Blast! Another must have...
...just out of curiosity... how does this one compare to the Alphasim? I have already pumped out several "Reno Race" textures for that one.
Are there going to be any "true" post war modified "Civvy" versions? i.e. with the bigger / smoother canopies and "race-tuned"?
...just out of curiosity... how does this one compare to the Alphasim? I have already pumped out several "Reno Race" textures for that one.
Are there going to be any "true" post war modified "Civvy" versions? i.e. with the bigger / smoother canopies and "race-tuned"?
To CBris
For FS9 we had a volume 1 package which had 6 different models
For FSX we're taking those same 6 models and making FSX SP2 versions of them. We're releasing the models 2 at a time. The first bundle has the AT6D and Harvard Mk II. The second bundle will have the AT6D with a WASP pilot and a LT-6G FAC with visibility switches which will allow you to turn the rockets and antenna off and have a regular T-6G (or SNJ7). The third bundle will have the two Reno racers, Mary Dilda's Two of Hearts, and a modified Harvard MkIV.
For FS9 we had a volume 1 package which had 6 different models
For FSX we're taking those same 6 models and making FSX SP2 versions of them. We're releasing the models 2 at a time. The first bundle has the AT6D and Harvard Mk II. The second bundle will have the AT6D with a WASP pilot and a LT-6G FAC with visibility switches which will allow you to turn the rockets and antenna off and have a regular T-6G (or SNJ7). The third bundle will have the two Reno racers, Mary Dilda's Two of Hearts, and a modified Harvard MkIV.
Just poking fun at some of the twits out there!:d I've read just about every book published on the 101st! Much respect for anyone who wants to jump out of a perfectly good aircraft!:d
Panther_99FS
Retired SOH Administrator
Is there an alternative prop out for it?
Not that I know of ...
While Banana Bob did a custom texture map for our FS9 racer FAZGB, he didn't make any prop disc texture.
The prop is made up of 3 separate meshes to give some substance to the prop when viewed from the side. Nothing says "I'm not real, I'm a flight sim model." quicker than a 2d prop disc.
If you don't care for parts of the 3d prop disc they can always be turned "off" by making the alpha channel in the texture map 100% black.
If you like I can make a list of which texture map applies to which part.
While Banana Bob did a custom texture map for our FS9 racer FAZGB, he didn't make any prop disc texture.
The prop is made up of 3 separate meshes to give some substance to the prop when viewed from the side. Nothing says "I'm not real, I'm a flight sim model." quicker than a 2d prop disc.
If you don't care for parts of the 3d prop disc they can always be turned "off" by making the alpha channel in the texture map 100% black.
If you like I can make a list of which texture map applies to which part.
C
Cerberus
Guest
I really do not know if we will be able to do a CFS3 version. In the past Pratt did the work expecting little in return, I do not know if anyone will be available to do the conversion work, it certainly hasn't proved to be worth the effort as far as profit goes. And compared to FS9 even after it had been out for a year I am beginning to wonder if FSX is. Whats worse is there were probably a lot more options back then for people with limited incomes to choose. Maybe it is the outrageous amount of pirating I see now days, or the failing economy. I noticed one site had made more money in donations last month than all of our products combined sold. I also noticed the majority of texan sales have been outside of the U.S.
I am very thankful for the supporters we have here.