Help with the Falcon...

[Weescotty]

As you know Mike and I are currently prodcuing all the different F-16 blocks.

I could do with a little help....

I need pictures of the nose wheel and main wheels of the pre block 40/42 Falcons.
We think the holes/hole spacing changed between the earlier blocks and 40/42s?

They need to be as square on as possible as I will be using them on the actual texture sheet.
Resolution isn't to important as they will be cropped and reduced in size anyway.

Cheers

[dworjan]

For the F-16 there was four different wheel/tires.

The early blocks (through B32) had narrower tires, and there was two different types of wheels.
-Original wheels had large, round holes (also, at the very beginning of the 80's they were actually painted black, but were repainted in white by the mid-80s).
http://www.arcair.com/awa01/001-100/awa ... 16Rwhl.jpg
-Teardrop-shaped hole wheels had mostly replaced the originals by the mid 90's
http://www.afwing.com/intro/f16_talk/f1 ... awheel.jpg

The late blocks (B40 and up) have wider tires (necessitating the bulge in the gear bay doors, and moving the landing light to the nose gear door), and there were two different types of wheels.
-Early Block 40 came off the assembly line with triangular-holed wheels.
http://www.afwing.com/intro/f16_talk/f1 ... 0wheel.jpg
-All other late block aircraft were built with oblong-holed wheels. This wheel type has also replaced the early-40 wheels on the US aircraft which were built with them.
http://www.afwing.com/intro/f16_talk/f1 ... 0wheel.jpg

I know the original lightweight wheel photo isn't head-on, but it might take me some more time to locate a good photo of that one. I was surprised to find good photos of the other three all in one place.

Chris

[dworjan]

Here's a good side photo of the original lightweight wheel in white:
https://media.defense.gov/2017/Mar/01/2 ... 08-001.JPG

Of course, everything I said about dates in my first post only really applies to the US Air Force. Some nations still had original wheels on their early block F-16s well after the millennium, and it is even possible to find some international F-16's still had the black wheels as late as 2000. I don't believe Israel has ever upgraded from the early-40 wheels on their Block 40 Barak II's, and I think that they also retrofitted the early-40 heavyweight wheels onto their Block 30 Barak's.

Chris

[Weescotty]

Many, many thanks.
Will help a LOT!

[dworjan]

You're welcome! Let me know if there's anything else I can help with on the F-16.

Chris

[Weescotty]

Actually now you mention it

Widemouth v smallmouth.....
The nav lights on the intake, we assumed that they HAD to be further apart horizontally on the widemouth because obviously its wider? Thats why you cant combine the two 'models' into one folder, the lights entries are different.

We are not sure about the two pylons on the intake.

[dworjan]

Well I just attempted to submit a reply, and I have no idea where it went. Frustrating but I'll try again. This time the abridged version.

The difference between the MCID 'Big Mouth' intake and the small-mouth NSI intake at the point where the intake pylons are is really nonexistent, certainly not to the naked eye. MCID is about 12 inches wider at the lip, and slightly taller, but the difference blends away fairly quickly. The nav lights are affected, but not much else would be different.

Also, not sure if you are aware, but some of the Block-30's had the NSI intake. So ALL P&W F-16's have the NSI intake, and MOST GE F-16's have the Big Mouth, but a FEW early GE F-16's had the NSI. That means GE engines and NSI on USAF Block 30's with FY-85 serial numbers, single seat Block 30's up to and including 86-0261, two seat Block 30's up to and including 86-0043, and all of the US Navy F-16N's.

Chris

[Weescotty]

Yeah I think we knew about the early birds with the 'mis-matched' engine and intakes.

Thanks for the pylon info.

Last one for the moment (and this is something I seem to recall from a long, long time ago).

Vulcan gun cooling slots....
Seem to remember -
the later covers have 2 slightly angled slots
earlier ones had 4 vertical slots?

Oh another lol....
The ram panels on the nose - they don't look very noticeable?

[dworjan]

You mean the RAM panels around the two RHAW antennas on the sides of the nose just aft of the nosecone? Nope, not prominent enough to matter. I would include them as panel lines on the Block 25 and 30/32's.

Here's a pretty good photo that shows a Block 30 with the RAM panel as a barely visible outline.
https://media.defense.gov/2014/Jul/11/2 ... 29-341.JPG

And yes, for the gun muzzle, there are two types. The A/B models were delivered with a more complex muzzle. It had four vertical slots just behind the muzzle, four just in front of the muzzle, and a perforated panel behind the muzzle. It was the factory muzzle for MOST A/B's. However, some of the last A/B Vipers that were produced at the same time as the early C/D's had the 'new' muzzle. Also a lot of the A/B that went through an MLU program got the 'new' muzzle.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... cannon.JPG

The muzzle fitted on ALL C/D and later F-16's (and retrofitted onto some A/B) is the one that just has two slightly angled slots behind the muzzle.
http://giaoduc.net.vn/Uploaded/quyhoi/2 ... GDQP_5.jpg

Chris

[Weescotty]

Nice to know my memory isn't totally shot, thanks!

Same seems to go for the 'wing strenghtening plates', can't say I have ever noticed them.
On the other hand the extra plates on the upper fuselage are very noticeable.

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/f16blockssb_1.htm

We are currently trying to decide on the best way of doing the upper fuselage plates.
They don't look right as a seperate layer no matter what you set the layer to (multiply, lighten etc).

But no idea what to do with the 'wing strenghtening plates'

[dworjan]

I think the wing plates would be good as just an outline. They are very thin, so maybe making them a slightly more prominent panel line would be enough to suggest they are there.

https://media.defense.gov/2009/Dec/10/2 ... 3W-502.JPG

The fuselage plates are thicker. Maybe the best way to do them is to pick an arbitrary direction of light and paint the edge shadow accordingly? In that photo you can see that there is a bit of shadow along some edges, but just a thin hint along others.

And you are very welcome. I'm glad I can help.

Chris

[Weescotty]

OK Chris, got another that I can't pin down....

The Block 50/52's and up have a modified panel in front of where the tail 'support' meets the fuselage.
It is apperently slightly larger than the Block 40/42 equivalent.

Can't find anything definate on this, or even a comparison???

As for the strengthening plates....
Ended up using layers, we will make the wing strengtheners less noticable, but we think the 'scab' plates look OK.

Pics will appear in the F-16 preview thread.

[dworjan]

Are you referring to the area on top of the fuselage between the front of the vertical stabilizer and the refuelling door? The Block 50/52s don't have the two reinforcement plates that angle away from the point of the stab and fit between the access panels. I'm not quite sure what area you are exactly referring to.

Chris

[Weescotty]

About 2/3rds way down this web page...

http://www.vodnik.net/pages/F-16CG_CJ/f-16cgcj.htm

Mentions the trapezoidal panel being different on the block 50s and up.

[dworjan]

Ah, now I got it! Yeah, it's an oval panel which is tucked half under the tip of the vertical stab. Here's a couple photos of Greek F-16's which show the outline of the oval. The one with the CFTs is a Block 52 and the other is a Block 50.

http://aerobaticteams.net/UserFiles/pic ... 50AFAB.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/or ... 48422a.jpg

Chris

[Weescotty]

Thats the one!!!!

Thanks

[dworjan]

No problem! Glad I could help with it.

Chris