Just playing a bit with FSDS

swp53 · Post by **swp53** » 20 Oct 2008, 21:34

Hi max2202.

Found the site. www.flightlevel350.com do a search for Zhukovsky and go to page 6 its just over half way down the page, or vid id is 4427. Mig 31 on page 4 vid id is 6281.

Regards,
Steve.

max2202 · Post by **max2202** » 21 Oct 2008, 08:41

The different versions I'm planning:

1970 MIG-25R Small nose, Outer wing missile pylon, 2 R40's
1970 MIG-25R Small nose, No wing pylons
1980 MIG-25RBT Small nose, Inner wing bomb pylon, 8 FAB-500's, 4 under fuselager, 4 on wings
1981 MIG-25RBF Small nose, No wing pylon, 4 FAB-500's under fuselage
1984 MIG-25BM Small nose, Both wing pylons, 4 Kh-58's

The above has a wing span of 13.38m

1970 MIG-25P Big nose, Both wing pylons, Wing fences. 4 R40's
1971 MIG-25P Big nose, Both Wing piyons, 4 R40 missiles
1979 MIG-25PD Big nose, Both wing pylons, 4 R40 missiles or 2 R40's and 4 R-60(M)

The above has a wing span of 14.01m

1972 MIG-25PU Double Cockpit, Both Wing pylons, 4 R40's
1973 MIG-25RU Double Cockpit, No wing pylons

The above has a wing span of 14.01m

All can be fitted with a large center drop tank. Unless there are 4 bombs under the fuselage.

If I'm forgetting some, please let me know. I'm still not sure which versions used a speedbreak. I think all of them had speedbreaks, with a deflection of 45 degrees.

Ford Friendly · Post by **Ford Friendly** » 21 Oct 2008, 09:00

That's quite a plan.

It'll be interesting to see them in the currently relatively barren skies over the Russian landmass.

Is there enough similarity with the Mig-31 to be able to use parts of your model as a starting point? Is that even a consideration?

max2202 · Post by **max2202** » 21 Oct 2008, 09:08

Ford Friendly wrote:That's quite a plan.

It'll be interesting to see them in the currently relatively barren skies over the Russian landmass.

Is there enough similarity with the Mig-31 to be able to use parts of your model as a starting point? Is that even a consideration?

I think that's possible, the engines are a bit longer, there is a different cockpit. The shapes of the wing and vertical/horizontal stabalisers are a bit rounder and longer. I think it is definitely possible, atleast there aren't as many versions as the MiG-25

MACC · Post by **MACC** » 21 Oct 2008, 09:20

Keep up the super work Max!!

Post by **gsnde** » 21 Oct 2008, 09:34

Max,

After being stuck in hospital for over a month I just had the chance to read this thread. I very much want to congratulate you for the work done - a great addition to the AI world.

The former Soviet aircraft were in dire need of a godfather. So whatever is on your plate in future, Backfire or Blackjack or anything else, it is most welcome.

Looking forward to your releases. Fantastic work!

MIKE JG · Post by **MIKE JG** » 21 Oct 2008, 14:49

Martin, YIKES! Glad to hear you're doing better.

Post by **gsnde** » 21 Oct 2008, 15:55

Thanks, Mike.

Yes, I am doing much better now. It was not the best time of my life, though.

Ford Friendly · Post by **Ford Friendly** » 21 Oct 2008, 19:44

Welcome back to "the world outside the hospital" Martin.

max2202 · Post by **max2202** » 21 Oct 2008, 21:10

How is this for a speedbreak? I think it is very close as seen in the video.

MIKE JG · Post by **MIKE JG** » 21 Oct 2008, 22:53

Looking good Max. Looks like your texture mapping is also coming along.

mr.bean · Post by **mr.bean** » 22 Oct 2008, 00:43

I love the speedbreak.

Post by **Firebird** » 22 Oct 2008, 07:13

If you have got any pics of the MiG landing and it does so with the speed brake out then there is a little trick that Nick uses in xml.

If it doesn't keep that in mind for when you model a plane that does.

One area that I think does need to be altered slightly is the canopy. I think that their is slightly more frame than glass on the opening section, especially at the rear and also the canopy section is not one piece of glass as there is a bar down the middle. Its not easy to see, but if you have a look at page 38 of that pdf that I sent you the pic of the two seater shows it quite well as does the 3-view on page 64.

Ford Friendly · Post by **Ford Friendly** » 22 Oct 2008, 07:19

That video shows the speedbrake out while landing.

max2202 · Post by **max2202** » 22 Oct 2008, 12:23

Firebird wrote:If you have got any pics of the MiG landing and it does so with the speed brake out then there is a little trick that Nick uses in xml.

If it doesn't keep that in mind for when you model a plane that does.

One area that I think does need to be altered slightly is the canopy. I think that their is slightly more frame than glass on the opening section, especially at the rear and also the canopy section is not one piece of glass as there is a bar down the middle. Its not easy to see, but if you have a look at page 38 of that pdf that I sent you the pic of the two seater shows it quite well as does the 3-view on page 64.

You a good point there, I didn't notice that before. I will make a new canopy this evening. Hopefully I can finish LOD 1 this week, and make a start on the other LOD's, I think 6 would be enough, wouldn't it?

And I still need a pilot

MIKE JG · Post by **MIKE JG** » 22 Oct 2008, 12:38

Depends on how complex the LOD1 model is. If you go all out and add a ladder, fire extinguisher, engine covers, remove before flight banners, you may want an extra LOD just for those things.

Over at the AIAardvark website they have a great tutorial on LODs. That might give you a better idea of how many you should aim for. Seems like 7-10 is the norm for military models these days.

Thank heavens that FSDS lets you copy parts from one LOD to the next. I can't imagine having to model each part from scratch for each LOD.

max2202 · Post by **max2202** » 22 Oct 2008, 12:46

MIKE JG wrote:Depends on how complex the LOD1 model is. If you go all out and add a ladder, fire extinguisher, engine covers, remove before flight banners, you may want an extra LOD just for those things.

Over at the AIAardvark website they have a great tutorial on LODs. That might give you a better idea of how many you should aim for. Seems like 7-10 is the norm for military models these days.

Thank heavens that FSDS lets you copy parts from one LOD to the next. I can't imagine having to model each part from scratch for each LOD.

The problem is that it already got 4500 polygon's or something like that. I'm not really sure, if I should add all that stuff. I'm thinking of a seperate model, with a parachute, but I think a ladder and fire extinguisher is to much.

Post by **Firebird** » 22 Oct 2008, 13:09

Well I haven't made a study of the plane but it does seem that apart from adding the pitot tube you more or less have the Foxbat-A captured, from the drawings that you have shown.

Of course a beta test may throw stuff up, but you are a bit off from that yet, but it does seem to look right.

KevinJarvis · Post by **KevinJarvis** » 22 Oct 2008, 16:09

max2202 wrote: but I think a ladder and fire extinguisher is to much.

Not at all. While it may take some extra work, little things like that make it even more realistic..but that's just me.

MACC · Post by **MACC** » 22 Oct 2008, 16:12

KevinJarvis wrote:
max2202 wrote: but I think a ladder and fire extinguisher is to much.
Not at all. While it may take some extra work, little things like that make it even more realistic..but that's just me.

Concur with that, 5000-5500 aint to much polys, s long as its well LOD'd

Macc