XF-103 is up at Flightsim!!!

Hopefully, he'll finish his XFV-12A next. I'll pick up the XF-103 as soon as I get home from work.
 
Took it for a little flight out of Edwards today.

Pro: Gorgeous VC, well-done model, the periscope system is really well done, very good animations, flies very well

Con: Switch programming is a little buggy (they don't always do what they're labeled to), ramjet system is confusing

Overall a win. Already considering what ADC squadrons need F-103As.
 
I love this plane, especially the VC. The main issue I found is the weapons switches aren't really tied to the specific weapon. Take the whole row of the weapons switches and divide into four equal segment areas, from left to right and that is how you open them, 1 through 4. Don't actually click on the switches. Having said that the actual switches move for the appropriate weapons. Such as, when you click the right most area, 4, for the FFARs, the proper switches move in the VC and open. Not a big deal when you figure it out. The switch areas could be a little larger as you have to click a very specific spot with regard to some of the other switches.

My other gripes are a massive phugoid above about Mach 2.5 and the metal textures need to be lightened up. Granted, I fly it in P3D, so that may be part of it. I also changed the sounds to my Alpha F-105D (The newest release of it, not the free one). The sound fits it, IMHO.

I'm just being picky with the above issues, as I never thought I would fly this in FS and I love the view from the VC, it's very immersive, especially when the safety capsule closes.

Also, at least in P3D, I had to change the ATC ID and tail number to be strictly numbers without any other character to get it to work.
 
Sundog said:
Hopefully, he'll finish his XFV-12A next.
Click to expand...
But do you do a realistic flight model there, or an imaginary one where they somehow made the vertical thrust work?

(The XFV-12A never made it past hover testing because it didn't create enough thrust for VTOL.)
 
Beast

NEGcz9U.jpg
 
I'm thrilled to see projects like this. I had a quick look myself last night, and it is a real gem, just his XF-91. Apart from my personal interest in 50s/60s era experimental aircraft, I'm thrilled there's still folks who are willing to make these off-the-beaten path creations, freeware, no less.

Rallymodeller, some repaints of this would be delightful. Would you consider either a mid 50s NACA or late 50s NASA flashed prototype? Something like the Douglas D-588-2, Bell X-2, or even the later XB-70 - would be a perfect guise for testing at Edwards ...

Thanks to Uenoshing for a great set of experimental aircraft. He's been working on these literally for years - they're worth a look.

dl
 
DennyA said:
But do you do a realistic flight model there, or an imaginary one where they somehow made the vertical thrust work?

(The XFV-12A never made it past hover testing because it didn't create enough thrust for VTOL.)
Click to expand...

I would make it as if it didn't suffer the duct losses and it worked. I was always disappointed that they never at least flew it in CTOL mode.
 
delta_lima said:
I'm thrilled to see projects like this. I had a quick look myself last night, and it is a real gem, just his XF-91. Apart from my personal interest in 50s/60s era experimental aircraft, I'm thrilled there's still folks who are willing to make these off-the-beaten path creations, freeware, no less.

Rallymodeller, some repaints of this would be delightful. Would you consider either a mid 50s NACA or late 50s NASA flashed prototype? Something like the Douglas D-588-2, Bell X-2, or even the later XB-70 - would be a perfect guise for testing at Edwards ...

Thanks to Uenoshing for a great set of experimental aircraft. He's been working on these literally for years - they're worth a look.

dl
Click to expand...

What if she were accepted by the Air Force? What squadrons would she have flown for? Where? Export versions?
 
warchild said:
Does it have the same or similar adverse yaw characteristics as the X-3 and F-104???
Click to expand...
Those aircraft didn't have adverse yaw problems, their wingspans were too short. They had roll-yaw coupling issues if one tried to roll them too much, which lead to the fuselage's inertia overcoming the low aerodynamic damping of the flight surfaces. Having said that, I only rolled it once, not multiple times, but it did seam to diverge a little during that one roll, so it might be modeled.

Coupling Dynamics in Aircraft: A Historical Perspective. That's a NASA PDF on this phenomena, if anyone wants a deeper dive into the subject.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top