F-111E/F and EF111A (JY)

[phantomfreak]

A buddy of mine was stationed there in the early 80's. He told me about the time he had to kindly escort an old woman away from some of the aircraft shelters.

[John Young]

The FB-111A build is progressing well although extending the wings took much longer than expected because of the disturbance to the slats, flaps and spoiler mapping. Got there though. I'm including two paints for the earler SAC scheme and two for the later "DarkVark" scheme (that's 2 paints for each of the 2 Bomb Wings):



I'm using two load-outs that are interchangeable between the earlier and later SAC schemes: twin fuel tanks (seems to be the most common arrangement) and 4 x AGM-69 ASRAMs. Hope that's OK.

Still quite a bit of work to do to carry through all the modifications to LODs 2-7 and into the FSX version. I'm also making the "C" version, but I need some help with the load-outs. Studying photographs on the net, the most common is a clean aircraft (pylons ony). Next seems to be 12 x Mk82 Snake Eyes (which is useful because I already have those). Pave Tack with Paveways I think is also an option (have those too), but I haven't seen any photos of that combination. What would our Australian friends prefer please?

John

[sr01]

The FB-111A build is progressing well although extending the wings took much longer than expected because of the disturbance to the slats, flaps and spoiler mapping. Got there though. I'm including two paints for the earler SAC scheme and two for the later "DarkVark" scheme (that's 2 paints for each of the 2 Bomb Wings):



I'm using two load-outs that are interchangeable between the earlier and later SAC schemes: twin fuel tanks (seems to be the most common arrangement) and 4 x AGM-69 ASRAMs. Hope that's OK.

Still quite a bit of work to do to carry through all the modifications to LODs 2-7 and into the FSX version. I'm also making the "C" version, but I need some help with the load-outs. Studying photographs on the net, the most common is a clean aircraft (pylons ony). Next seems to be 12 x Mk82 Snake Eyes (which is useful because I already have those). Pave Tack with Paveways I think is also an option (have those too), but I haven't seen any photos of that combination. What would our Australian friends prefer please?

John

YES ,loooks more than great !!! John, how about 2 ASRAMs and 2 tanks instead of 4 ASRAMs ?

[John Young]

Yes that was my initial thought but I think the tanks have to go outboard of the ASRAMs. In which case the missiles can't really be seen. I guess 4 nukes externally and 3 internally was not that common, although I have seen a few photos of that external arrangement. I don't suppose the aircraft would get very far without the tanks or a lot of AAR. I'll do whatever users prefer.

[sr01]

Yes that was my initial thought but I think the tanks have to go outboard of the ASRAMs. In which case the missiles can't really be seen. I guess 4 nukes externally and 3 internally was not that common, although I have seen a few photos of that external arrangement. I don't suppose the aircraft would get very far without the tanks or a lot of AAR. I'll do whatever users prefer.

That they wouldnt ! At Pease when I did my High Altitude Indoctrination, I "casually" observed some in the alert area with 2 missiles and 4 tanks. 2 tanks'll do though.

[Firebird]

John, how many loadouts do you want to do for the C?

[John Young]

OK, then we'll go for 2 load-outs for the FB-111A - 2 tanks for configuration 1 and 2 tanks plus 2 missiles for configuration 2. For the "C", I'll do clean (pylons) and one other, plus a third if it's really wanted.

John

[Firebird]

On the C if I had to choose one load I would choose a load that included the Pave Tack. If there were another option available I would include a harpoon loadout, as I think thy were the only versions that carried them.
How often they actually carried them though is another thing and best answered by people that know.

[sr01]

On the C if I had to choose one load I would choose a load that included the Pave Tack. If there were another option available I would include a harpoon loadout, as I think thy were the only versions that carried them.
How often they actually carried them though is another thing and best answered by people that know.

Harpoon loadout ! Me like !!

[sr01]

By george, I think (note that) I may have cracked it!!!!

Have attached my aircraft cfg - can someone (with the bouncies) test it on their system please?

For those technically minded I changed the following;

From

reference_datum_position = 0, 0, 0
empty_weight_CG_position = 0, 0, 0

To

reference_datum_position = 0, 0, 0
empty_weight_CG_position = -5.00, 0, 1.0

+++++++

From

;Moments of Inertia
empty_weight_pitch_MOI = 50000
empty_weight_roll_MOI = 45000
empty_weight_yaw_MOI = 70000
empty_weight_coupled_MOI = 0.0


To

;Moments of Inertia
empty_weight_pitch_MOI = 90000
empty_weight_roll_MOI = 45000
empty_weight_yaw_MOI = 90000
empty_weight_coupled_MOI = 0.0

From

Center1 = -41.4, 0.0, -1.5, 359.0, 0.0
LeftMain = -36.3, -10.0, -1.5, 268.5, 0.0
RightMain = -36.3, 10.0, -1.5, 268.5, 0.0

To

[fuel]
Center1 = -6.9, 0.00, -1.5, 359.0, 0.0
LeftMain = -1.8, -10.0, -1.5, 268.5, 0.0
RightMain = -1.8, 10.0, -1.5, 268.5, 0.0

Contact points remain the same as John's update.

Now I haven't got a clue, which (if any) of these changes did the trick, but together with the change in contact points from John, it seems to perform okay dokey on my system.

Stew
I'll add my thank's to those that have already posted . I didn't have a chance until last night to check out the A/C in game . As far as the "smoke just before lining up " issue I'd raised that question on the RAAF F-18 Williamtown thread and the answer was it was just an anomaly with FS9 .

[LEBTowerGuy]

John, I am quite impressed with the FB, I definently see a 380th and 509th in the not to distant future.

[John Young]

You mean like these Matt:



4 aircraft each from the 380th and 509th. Early and late SAC paint schemes with a choice of 2 fuel tanks or two fuel tanks plus 2 AGM69 ASRAMs on the inboard plylons. All done for FS9 and FSX.

Now for the "C" model....

John

[Firebird]

Oh wow! I seem to be saying that a lot at the moment.

[petebramley]

Oh wow! I seem to be saying that a lot at the moment.

And long may it continue

[sr01]

You mean like these Matt:



Now for the "C" model....

John

and another
and the Yapple is ready

[LEBTowerGuy]

[phantomfreak]

John,
Is there going to be an update to the package that corrects for the unusual ai behavior or should we just use the numbers given in the thread?

Great job on the -111's!!

[John Young]

Yes, I'm going to release a version 2 of the packages that will contain all the F-111s again, the corrected aircraft.cfg file to prevent the bounce at lower frame rates, the mapping correction to the right wing glove vane and of course the new FB-111As and the Australian "C" version. Incidentally, the FSX aircraft.cfg file that is in the original zip also suffers from a similar bounce problem when the sim is run at around 20fps, but not as severe. It can be corrected for now by using the FS9 file posted in this thread and adjusting the height of the main wheels to match the nose wheel. I'll include the revised file in the new release too. Shouldn't be very long.

John

[f47420]

Hi all I have been working on the EF-111A textures .I have added some bits like shadows and markings etc.

Here are some shots.

MW

[f47420]

TWO MORE..