• 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

Vertigo Studios F9F Panther

sparouty said:
Hi!
That's a great news!
I love the Panther and, may be it'd help a certain "USS Essex" carrier project to start again...:kilroy:

Regarding the secret projects, I would say Crusader!! :jump: ... oh?!? With a F8U, a class Essex carrier will be needed too!! ... Michael if read me....:bump:

Regards
Sylvain
Click to expand...

I hear yah LOL, but real life is a bitch right now, you'd need a Korean Essex to be prototypical, several served with WII weapons fit, many had ugraded and reduced weapons fits though, USS Boxer with enclosed bridge and a tweak to the weapons fit would be the closest I have right now. There is some talk on another forum that I just release as it stands as a stop gap, dont know though, time to Max is very limited right now.

Michael
 
Gibbages comments are correct, the wing root is not blended to the fuselage neither is the moving secion of the canopy, all in all a very nice model and a difficult shape to get correct with that blended tail fuselage section. This now means of course that mine can now be retired LOL, though it may convert easily enough into a low poly static for the above mentioned carrier.

Good luck chaps.

Michael
 
Thanks for all the observations, I will look into these in more detail and then create a fix list for the obvious bugger-ups
 
michael davies said:
Gibbages comments are correct, the wing root is not blended to the fuselage neither is the moving secion of the canopy, all in all a very nice model and a difficult shape to get correct with that blended tail fuselage section. This now means of course that mine can now be retired LOL, though it may convert easily enough into a low poly static for the above mentioned carrier.

Good luck chaps.

Michael
Click to expand...

Why not make it a low poly AI model, instead of static? And the carrier, welllll.....
 
Theres '2' right there that we're working on :) and should have a render in the next 5 days or so.

DennyA said:
While the model doesn't match the detail of what I've seen in Vertigo's F6F, the Tiger has been modeled in FSX native format already.

For fans of 50's Navy jets, these guys are already available in payware, FSX-native models:
Grumman F11F Tiger - Alphasim
McDonnell F2H Banshee - Razbam
McDonnell F3H Demon - Alphasim
Douglas F4D Skyray - Alphasim
Vought F7U Cutlass - Alphasim

Given that, I'd hope that Vertigo would hit planes we haven't seen in detailed FSX-native models yet. For Navy fighters, off the top of my head, that includes:
FH-1 Phantom (Paul Clawson has a very nice freeware Phantom, but it's pretty basic)
FJ-1 Fury
FJ-2/3/4 Fury
F5D Skylancer (okay, I admit, the market for this is probably just me. :) )
F8U Crusader
Click to expand...
 
Deano said:
http://data3.primeportal.net/hangar...1136/images/f9f-5_panther_141136_03_of_42.jpg
Click to expand...

Dean, be carefull with preserved birds, some times they don't go back together like they were when operational, I've been caught out many times before over little details, only to find its as simple as someone not paying attention to historical references. Not sure on the gun muzzles, many images of F2's show shorter muzzles, but nearly all F5's images I have found show the slightly longer type, hard call really.

Further to my above on the canopy, there is a small smoothing fillet between the base of the canopy track and the fuselage, much like yours but smaller radius, from a distance it looks like a hard edge but in close up is blended a little.

Best

Michael
 
mal998 said:
According to all my Grumman photos, most Panthers did not have wing strakes. However, upon further investigation, I see a few planes did have them...interesting. I have not been able to find any info on why some had them, and others did not. It does not seem to be connected to the model, dash 2 or dash 5. I've seen them on both and I've seen both without them. Small point I guess...lol

View attachment 6926 View attachment 6925 View attachment 6924
View attachment 6923

Dean,
I have quite a few Grumman pictures of both the Panther and Cougar. If you would like to see them for reference, PM me with your email.
mal
Click to expand...

There appears to be two types of wing as well, wings with small strakes (fixed to the inner wing) and a straight leading edge through out, however later on it appears the strake was enlarged forwards and the wing leading edge had a pronounced kink to match, which produced a noticeable knuckle effect on the fixed part, thus changing the intake shape at its outer end. It looks like the VS one replicates this later wing format.

Likewise I cannot find easy reference why and how but I know a book that will and will try to find it when I get home and check.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top