Stealthiness of the F-35 Lighting II...

[Dino Cattaneo]

Hi, all. I just wanted to share with you the latest images of my new project, the F-35 Lighting II.

This will be my first payware project ever - but I'm confident that you will find the price very resonable.

A brief history of the project:
I've been tinkering with an FSX version of the F-35 for a couple of years... but never come up with anything good enough, mainly due to the absence of accurate drawings and sections. Then I decided to acquire the excellent 3D mesh by Camelot Inc. - which is on sale on several modeling sites - hoping that I could use that for my project. The mesh wasn't cheap so I decided it would have been a payware project.

Unfortunately, my first "venture" into acquiring commercial 3D meshes was not completely positive. The data from Camelot Inc. is far too complex for being used proficiently in FSX so I had to redo all the 3D model - which took much more time than I expected as the shape of this machine is pretty complex... I also had a hard time in making the textures (and getting them to look "right") and a resonable flight model.

So here we are. The project its currently starting is Beta stage. For now, it will depict the CTOL version of the Lighting II, that is F-35A. Main features will be:

- 3 accurate external models: AA-1 (first prototype), AF-1 (weight optimized test plane) and a "production" F-35A (based on the latest information).

- Accurate virtual cockpit (based on the information and pictures publicly available at present). NOTE: the functionality of the multifunction display will be much simplified (i.e. will have some "touch screen" functionality but you will not be able to change/resize/swap its windows)

- "Reasonable" flight model (for obvious resons it will be built on a lot of guessing)

F-35B and F-35C are being left out (at least from the initial release) due to time constraints.
The plane is designed to work with FSX:Acceleration but should work, with some restrictions, with SP2.
It should be available in a month or so - probaly through SimMarket (but I have not made the final decision yet).

[Naki]

Wow ...amazing work:ernae:

[djscoo]

:jump: Been waiting for this one for a long time!:applause:

[Piglet]

Can you base payware on some one else's model? Impressive, but the fun is making it ALL yourself!:applause:

[Thrawn]

Great job Dino, it looks absolutely amazing!!!

[Dino Cattaneo]

@ Piglet

I've been told that acquiring professional meshes is common practice in the industry. Most professional meshes are intended for photoreal rendering and are way too complex for FSX usage (as I sadly verified) and usually, as long as you pay for the them, their licence allows the usage in videogames provided that the "3D content" is within a format that does not allow a third party to extracting/rip the geometry.

And yes, I agree that the fun is making it ALL by yourself...but since several attempts turned into bulgy winged potatoes, I had to confess I gave up and turned to Turbosquid. Much less fun was to discover, after a short while, I could make little use of the mesh I had just paid for...
Then, "fun" is not the first word that comes to my mind if I think about the hours unsuccesfully spent trying to understand why a couple of the F-14D MFD buttons don't work :mixedsmi:

BTW, provided that FSXI will be more graphically efficient than FSX, I see a growing usage of "professional" meshes - at least for the most popular planes - while I see rare/exotic planes as the main territory for freeware/individual developers

@ Thrawn

I hope I will find the time to make the F-35C to land on your fantastic ships :mixedsmi:

[Ferry_vO]

Looks great Dino, finally a CTOL F-35! :applause:

All it needs are some fictional (For now at least) RNLAF paints.... :mixedsmi:
But with a paintkit I'm sure someone will take care of that! :engel016:

[Sixghost]

Looks beautiful Dino, those will be a familiar sight around here in a few years since at Cameri AB will be built a second production line! Can't wait to see 'em side by side with our Typhoons!:applause:

[jmig]

Based on the quality of your T-45 I will purchase the F-35. I had to enlarge the attachments to tell if they were FSX or real photos.

[IanP]

If people couldn't base commercial products on purchased meshes, a certain very well known military visual modelling company that is seen regularly around these parts wouldn't exist... ;)

Looking nice, Dino.

[Railrunner130]

Super cool!

:ernae:

[Tweek]

And yes, I agree that the fun is making it ALL by yourself...but since several attempts turned into bulgy winged potatoes,

Surely you got it spot on, then? :icon_lol:

Looks like a fine model, but I'm not an F-35 fan at all. Turns out the cockpit is just as ugly as the aircraft itself!

Good luck with your first payware venture, either way!

[JamesChams]

:medals:

:salute:


Hebrews 11:6 "But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him." (http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Spiritual_Journey.html)

Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
From,
James F. Chams

[Dino Cattaneo]

@ Tweek

I have to disagree... at least partially. The top side seems quite sleek...the potato-esque shape of the plane is much more evident on the bottom side...:icon_lol:
Get used to it. It is the shape of the future :icon_lol:

And...after having flown a little with its simulated cockpit, those of all of the other planes seem incredibly complicate. But then, I've also enjoyed the fact it was much easier to model than the F-14 and T-45 cockpits - and a piece of cake after the external model.

Then... believe it or not, I liked the Boeing X-32 design better than the X-35 that evolved into this. And for those who don't know, X-32 was nicknamed "the Fugly Fighter".

@ JamesChams
:salute:

@ Sixghost
Credo che il riuscire ad avere una linea di produzione a Cameri sia stata una delle vittorie più importanti dell'industria aeronautica Italiana (e una buona giustificazione agli investimenti fatti). C'è da dire che, vicino all'F-35, le linee dell'Eurofighter tradiscono "l'anzianità" del suo progetto...

[Cazzie]

Dino, after the wonderful T-45 and F-14, I am sure that, although I am not a jet giy, this will make its way into my stable. Beautiful work. :applause:

Caz

[Dino Cattaneo]

@All

Thanks a lot for the appreciation!
Due to several constraints, unfortunately, the project will suffer from some limitations, mainly in the MFD functionality. I'll make sure that a proper feature list / manual will be publicly available for everyone who might be considering the purchase. To take in account these limitations, and since the target is break even, the price will be relatively low - but still TBD as I have not chosen the distribution method yet.

The current target is to have the test version before the weekend - I had almost finished it yesterday, but I've finally found a good picture of the canopy frame that highlighted some mistakes..and I am to redoing it...

To those who don't like the F-35 too much because of its stubby appearance... Well...remember it could have been a lot worse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USAF_X32B_250.jpg

:icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:

[falcon409]

. . . . .but I'm not an F-35 fan at all. Turns out the cockpit is just as ugly as the aircraft itself
Please explain further? Fighter cockpits are designed to reduce, as much as possible, the workload of the pilot. Allowing him time to multitask without visual overload and still maintain his situational awareness. Remember also that with this aircraft and beyond the HMD plays a major part in how the fighter pilot functions in his airborne environment. What you're not seeing in the cockpit (the HMD) is equally as important as what you do see.

For the most part it's touch screens and HMD's. . .gone are the old round dial gauges and a lot of the switches (especially when cockpit voice activation is refined and standard equipment). Yes it takes a bit to get used to, there is a learning curve, but as Dino said. . .it's the future, get used to it. Ugly. . .I think not. In a few years, when I go to visit my buds at Carswell, I could find myself walking through a flightline full of these. I hope I live to see that.:salute:

[rvn817j]

Awesome Dino. That looks outrageously GREAT!

[Tweek]

Please explain further? Fighter cockpits are designed to reduce, as much as possible, the workload of the pilot. Allowing him time to multitask without visual overload and still maintain his situational awareness. Remember also that with this aircraft and beyond the HMD plays a major part in how the fighter pilot functions in his airborne environment. What you're not seeing in the cockpit (the HMD) is equally as important as what you do see.

For the most part it's touch screens and HMD's. . .gone are the old round dial gauges and a lot of the switches (especially when cockpit voice activation is refined and standard equipment). Yes it takes a bit to get used to, there is a learning curve, but as Dino said. . .it's the future, get used to it. Ugly. . .I think not. In a few years, when I go to visit my buds at Carswell, I could find myself walking through a flightline full of these. I hope I live to see that.:salute:

Without wanting to turn this into a 'How ugly is the F-35?' topic, I'm fully aware of how beneficial such a cockpit is to the modern fighter pilot, but I just simply don't like it. Old steam gauges look much nicer to me!

And I don't need to get used to it, as I'll never be a fighter pilot. :icon_lol:

[falcon409]

Without wanting to turn this into a 'How ugly is the F-35?' topic, I'm fully aware of how beneficial such a cockpit is to the modern fighter pilot, but I just simply don't like it. Old steam gauges look much nicer to me!

And I don't need to get used to it, as I'll never be a fighter pilot. :icon_lol:
. . . .and that's what makes this place so interesting.

[MCDesigns]

Interesting project. Myself, I think it's a rather unattractive aircraft also, but yeah, it could have been uglier, LOL. Your images looks fantastic though, makes it look much sleeker than some real images.

Personally I'd love to see the B model with the thrust vectoring nozzle and lift fan for STOVL flight.

best of luck, look forward to the release!! :ernae::ernae:

[DaveKDEN]

Regardless of whether folks feel it's ugly or not, you'll likely be seeing them in the skies above your city in great numbers ~10 years from now. As for me, I'm in line for buying this model from Dino. I'm happy to support him in his endeavors. :salute:

[Dino Cattaneo]

Talking about cockpit functionality, I think that some of the sequences of this video show how revolutionary the F-35 interface will be:

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/perabrown/4344

For one, I am not familiar with the STOVL controls/procedures of the Harrier... but STOVL flying in the F-35 seems incredibly easy.

Then - if you want to read some posts of pure F-35 hate, just browse into some F-16 fan forums...:icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:

[Dino Cattaneo]

...and, at least at the moment, the project is focused on the F-35A... which is arguably the best looking of the three versions :-)

F-35B features a massive hump just behind the canopy (which is shortened) which hosts the fan of the lift-fan engine - a most amazing machine if you ask me...but really not the best looking fighter around...

F-35C, apart from the nose gear and the hook, has a much larger and wider wing...which makes the fuselage look even more stubby...

Back to the model...there are a lot of things that need to be done/fixed for the Beta...

[JAllen]

Dino, your work is awesome. One little thing, the F35 is named Lightning II. Please note the 'n' in the middle?

[Dino Cattaneo]

Oops...I've misspelled the Lightning in making the texture...

[TheOptimist]

This looks excellent, and definately something I'd pay for.

One question Dino, how is it going to be on frame rates? As much as I love your previous projects the aircraft sometimes struggle with interior texture loading and they do have a negative effect on my frame rates. The Goshawk particularly! This is not a complaint by any means, I'm chuffed to have someone out there putting out excellent work for nothing! I just wondered whether the F-35 is frame rate friendly etc?

Thank you.

[Dino Cattaneo]

Well...honestly the model is not very frame rate friendly. The inner and outer model complexity should similar to my F-14D (maybe will be slightly better) - at least for the models without external loads.

Texture loading may be an issue on some systems. I forgot to mention that I took the HD approach, that is main outer texture is 4096x4096 - and most of the other sheets are 2048x2048.

On my system (i920 + X295 + 4Gb + Win7) seems that enabling 4096x4096 textures does not change performance much. Performance assessment will be part of the Beta testing.

[Odie]

Dino, I've enjoyed your Tomcats for years and am looking forward to this one as well ! :applause:

[Stickshaker]

Dino, I will wait with anticipation! The images are very enticing! One question: will it have a head-mounted display (HMD)? Falcon already mentioned it. And if it won’t, will it then have a HUD and will that HUD be collimated?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I flew all versions of the JSF in the Lockheed Martin cockpit demonstrator. The plane flies like on rails. Even landing on a carrier seems easier in the demonstrator than it is behind a small PC monitor. And landing vertically is much easier than with a helicopter. Basically, if you don’t move the controls, the plane stays right where it is. And you have no secondary effects. So if you roll to move to the right, you do not lose any altitude and the nose keeps pointing where you left it.

[djscoo]

Am I weird for liking the XF-32? It looks like a modern interpretation of the SLUFF to me. I had been secretly hoping for the F-35C for carrier operations, so here's hoping that works out!:ernae:

[wilycoyote4]

Thanks for the updates. :medals: :ernae: Looks very interesting as a modern hot jet.

[Sundog]

I like the F-35 and liked the X-32 as well. Anyway, will you also include a production version in the package without the test probe and the two piece nose gear door (The preproduction versions have single piece nose gear doors)?

[EgoR64]

:wavey:

Super nice Dino - Very nice model indeed - I look forward to the release - So Many Nice toys coming out - :ernae:

Many Cheers - :guinness:

[mfitch]

Regardless of whether folks feel it's ugly or not, you'll likely be seeing them in the skies above your city in great numbers ~10 years from now. As for me, I'm in line for buying this model from Dino. I'm happy to support him in his endeavors. :salute:

Unfortunately we won't see them in skies here: we lost out in the congressional bidding for F-35s. They would have been up in Fairbanks (Eilson) anyway. I will have to be content with watching real F-22s and flying Dino's F-35.

[VFR Reviews]

Wow!

Very nicely done, I love this plane. Your work looks beautiful!

:ernae:

[Thrawn]

@ Piglet

@ Thrawn

I hope I will find the time to make the F-35C to land on your fantastic ships :mixedsmi:


Then you'll force me to release a new version of the carriers with lots of F-35C's on the deck :icon_lol:

[Dain Arns]

...
Personally I'd love to see the B model with the thrust vectoring nozzle and lift fan for STOVL flight...

If you do a 'B', Dino, I'll be standing in line for that one. :salute:

[RD]

Being a Marine, I would pay for the F35-B.

Looking good Dino, let us know when you're ready to make it available.:salute:

RD

[jdhaenens]

Did someone say F-35C? I'm in!

[Dino Cattaneo]

All, thanks for your appreciation and encouragement - here are some replies to your questions.

CTOL Models:
The models will be accurate to the best of my knowledge - rest assured that I'm "scanning" each new image from Lockheed Martin like Harrison Ford in Blade Runner. At present, I've planned:
AA-1 Prototype (BTW it turned out to be 5000lbs heavier than the design goal)
AF-1 Pre-production (weight optimized). With respect to AA-1 visual differences will be: two-piece nose gear doors, different APU exhaust location, different shape of probes, different fuselage/nozzle interface design. Livery TBD. Current prototype is flying unpainted (primer only). I've seen some cool renderings of the "official" AF-1 livery and they are cool...but I'm not sure they will ever use that scheme.
F-35A Operational - same design as AF-1 but: nose test probe removed, EOTS mounted, gun (although I'm missing some details of the gun exhaust design). Livery 58th Fighter Squadron "Mighty Gorillas" (AFAIK confirmed as main training unit for the F-35).

Flight model:
Lots of guess work here...but every source indicates that the F-35 is extremely easy to fly.

Head Mounted Display:
Current solution I'm using is this: the "moving" parts of the "HUD" are projected onto a distant 3d surface and "fixed" with respect of the a/c. The rest of the HUD is a 2d translucent gauge you bring up with SHIFT+1 so that it follows the head movement (works well with Freetrack / track IR).
Neutrino is lending a hand (for free :mixedsmi:) on a 100% accurate HUD/HMD but it is not confirmed that it will make its way into the final product. If so, the new HUD will be probably released as freeware and my model will be configured to accept it perfectly.

F-35 B
I am Italian and since the Italian Navy will employ the F-35B for our brand new carrier I'd love to make one. Difficulties are both related to flight modeling and 3D modeling: despite the popular belief (and what LM was advertising) there are significant changes to the airframe design between A and B (major differences being canopy, center fuselage, refueling system, VTOL system, engine). Besides IRIS was doing this model. So, for now, the focus is deliver a good F-35A. If it turns out that the Beta has no major defects, then we will see. In any case, if I'll do it, it will probably use the "superflap" pseudo-hovering "workaround"... I know it is lame...but I need to keep things simple in order to deliver in a reasonable time.

F-35 C
I know it would be cool...and I'd love to make it...and thus forcing Javier to make a new version of his Nimitz :icon_lol: ...but also in this case there are significant differences (nose gear and gear doors, completely different and much larger wing with folding mechanism and spoilers, different arresting hook) so it is not impossible...but it is much more work than one could imagine.


Sorry if I've missed anything. BTW, I will not have much time for replies on this forum in the next few days...but I'll be checking this thread regularly.

[falcon409]

Just one correction: HMD refers to a Helmet Mounted Display, not Head Mounted Display. . . .I know, I know, the helmet is on the head so technically, lol, lol. . .but it is a Helmet Mounted Display:salute:

[Dino Cattaneo]

:salute:
You are right
Still, I don't feel this mistake as embarassing as misspelling "LIGHTNING" on both the texture of the aircraft and the title of this post... Honestly, I've probably always misspelled (misspelt?) this word for all my life...
:salute:

[Dag]

Hi,

This surely looks like something I would buy and make fictional paints of. I think I see photoreal in the previews. If there's a repaint kit made available, please include the UV maps/wireframes showing parts. That would benefit non-photoreal repaints and repaint flexibility in general.

Thanks for the info, you have a winner me thinks :ernae:

[BASys]

Hi Folks

re: HMD
The HMD itself is an impressive piece of kit.

I've seen a BAESystems video from the CATB proving aircraft.

One of its awesome features is the pilot's external view.

There are several multi-spectral cameras mounted around the aircraft.

The HMD presents a totally seamless view
allowing the pilot to see externally
the entire 360, (in all axis), around the aircraft
without any part of the aircraft obstructing that view.

It provides an eerie perspective, as if one is sitting in mid-air.

Dino -
It would be impressive if you could mimic that.

Maybe by making the cockpit model itself
a conditionally displayed object.

HTH
ATB
Paul

[peter12213]

Same here, I'm really looking forward to this, I'm also looking forward to a B model as this will be the RAF's version, but having seen the Iris wips that also looks amazing! :salute: Great work Dino!!

[Gibbage]

If people couldn't base commercial products on purchased meshes, a certain very well known military visual modelling company that is seen regularly around these parts wouldn't exist... ;)

Looking nice, Dino.

Bingo. Its common for people to buy models from Turbosquid and re-package them for other uses. As long as the license allows for it. The biggest problem with TS, is they are in no way made spacifically for FSX. They may LOOK great, but they dont WORK great.

The F-35 is looking great. Im sure the original model he purchased was not a total waist, in he could of used the model for referance and textures, saving a lot of time in the long run.

Keep up the great work!

[Dino Cattaneo]

@ Gibbage

In fact using the TS model as reference was indeed its main usage.
As for the textures they are 100% new (and photoreal). Camelot mesh looks exceptional in renderings but useless in FSX.

@ Dag
Yes - textures are photoreal, so there is no paintkit actually. I will, however, provide the information I can and a "blank" texture I made as "template"

[Carbine1]

Great looking work so far, well done.

Cheers.

[Dag]

@ Dag
Yes - textures are photoreal, so there is no paintkit actually. I will, however, provide the information I can and a "blank" texture I made as "template"


Thanks, great :applause:

[warchild]

it's looking really beautiful for an F-35, but regarding that FDE, theres no need to guess. Everything about how that plane flies is sitting right there in front of you looking back.. all you gotta do is the math.. i know, easier said than done.. Theres a lot of math there.. but still, it's very much worth the time it takes with a calculator, a compass, an architects scale and a pencil to do..
Pam

[Stickshaker]

I wrote two short articles about my flights in the JSF cockpit demonstrator (with explanation of the VTOL flight controls). Warning: they are in Dutch. If anyone wants them send me a PM with your mail address. If anyone wants to translate them with an on-line translator I can send the Word-file.

[JamesChams]

@Dino Cattaneo,

I think the PhotoReal Textures are a "MUST HAVE" for this bird. Bravo!
However, I would like to see (have added) more in the way of avionic systems (if not this version, perhaps later ones). I'm sure that most everyone would agree that all the Navigation displays and basic-flight systems should be included. And, when you get around to all your emails, perhaps some (MFD) HOTAS and VC&C capabilities too. Also, glad to hear the Mr. J.R. "neutrino" is doing the HMD; hope its included at the time of release. :salute:

Also, for the F-35B's VTOL Thrust vectoring systems, will they be automated with the click of a button (like the real one)? I read that you are thinking of the "Old Flap method" ... what does that mean, exactly; Manual deployment?

And, will you be able to use a realistic sound set (recordings) for this model or are we limited to default F/A-18 stuff?

I know you've got a lot to do... Grazie & Ciao! :wavey:


PS: @Mr. Javier "Thrawn" - Yes, I would very much like to have a Nimitz Class carrier with F-35's onboard. Muchas Gracias! :applause:

=====================================

Mr. "Stickshaker,"

I wrote two short articles about my flights in the JSF cockpit demonstrator (with explanation of the VTOL flight controls). Warning: they are in Dutch. If anyone wants them send me a PM with your mail address. If anyone wants to translate them with an on-line translator I can send the Word-file.

Sure it might be fun, if its a quick read... Could you just post a link?



Hebrews 11:6 "But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him." (http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Spiritual_Journey.html)

Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
From,
James F. Chams

[Rezabrya]

Mr. "James"
If you had read, he said he is opting to not do a F-35B at the time of release because it would take longer, and also because Iris is doing one. He is only doing the F-35A for the release.

[JamesChams]

Mr. Ryan "Rezabrya,"


Mr. "James"
If you had read, he said he is opting to not do a F-35B at the time of release because it would take longer, and also because Iris is doing one. He is only doing the F-35A for the release.

That's NOT exactly what he said... He's made it clear from the begining (on all his Blog's: HERE (http://indiafoxtecho.blogspot.com/)) that the first release was ONLY the F-35 CTOL's, which many somehow didn't catch. As to what he'll do for the future with the F-35B VTOL and F-35C, I'll leave that up to him to mention. His focus, currently, is on this first release of the F-35A CTOL AA-1 and AF-1, but mine extends on to the entire package(s) while it is still in the discussion/concept/development stages.


Hebrews 11:6 "But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him." (http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Spiritual_Journey.html)

Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
From,
James F. Chams

[Rezabrya]

Ok I apologize. I seem to be in a fighting mood today and I have decided to stop posting until I cool down. I apologize for anyone I offended.

[strykerpsg]

Mr. "James"
If you had read, he said he is opting to not do a F-35B at the time of release because it would take longer, and also because Iris is doing one. He is only doing the F-35A for the release.

I think we'll see Dino's release long before Iris's appears. I know Pam is or has been tweaking their FDE, but have been loosing faith with Iris of late and their release record. There was even talk about not releasing it because some other developer was working an F-35 as well. But if they do release their F-35B, I'll be the first in line to purchase.

Matt

[Rezabrya]

Same here, my uncle was the chief engineer on the whole project and I really look forward to having an F-35 in FSX.

[Gibbage]

@ Gibbage

In fact using the TS model as reference was indeed its main usage.
As for the textures they are 100% new (and photoreal). Camelot mesh looks exceptional in renderings but useless in FSX.



Outstanding work on the textures then! From working on the YF-23 and texturing it myself, its REALLY hard to get that new look they use on the 22 and 35 with just grey shades. Great job capturing the way it looks!