A Star(fighter) in the making!

[crashaz]

Up on Facebook.... A2A has posted some pics of the 104 in development! WoWoWoWoW!!!!:jump::jump::jump:

48296

48298

48299

48300

48301

[Tim-HH]

Wow! Excellent work, Michał :applause:

Greetings
Tim

[jeansy]

WoWoWoWoW!!! indeed

[Lawman]

God, I do hope they have the common sense to model the "G", cause those (admittedly good looking) liveries look like they belong to "C"-models:a1089:.

[hae5904]

God, I do hope they have the common sense to model the "G", cause those (admittedly good looking) liveries look like they belong to "C"-models:a1089:.

Well if you look closely to the top picture, it does have the shorter rudder tail of the -A & -C model.......
But with the refueling probe fitted, would give us a nice looking -C model.:salute:

Hank

[lucas81]

Empeck did an incredible job... wow!

[Bone]

Definately going to get it, and definately would like to have it Accusim'd.

[ColoKent]

...no "G" = limited appeal (truth in advertising however...I'll be buying it either way).

K

[peter12213]

Yeah just saw these on Mike FB page and well what can anyone say buy wow!:applause:

[CG_1976]

Toss a RCAF on it and it's on my list.

[Bob.sc]

Yes, they definitely need to create the AR Probe to allow us a proper -C.

Fingers crossed.

[Roger]

Looking good Michal:ernae:

[Pips]

Now THAT'S an aeroplane! :jump:

[TeiscoDelRay]

Been waiting for this one. That first picture looks like the real thing, great textures!

[Scratch]

Dang that's perty:applause:

[JAllen]

Oh YES!!!! Bring it on!!! :jump::jump::jump:

[Phantom88]

:jump::jump:WOW!!:jump::jump:

[roger-wilco-66]

Awesome, my credit card is ready!

[W. Bleddyn]

Toss a RCAF on it and it's on my list.

Agreed. It looks outstanding.

[bstolle]

YES, that's THE jet I'm waiting for!!!

[Bjoern]

I feel kind of bad for the italian guys that have done a F-104.
And Alphasim/Virtavia.

[bstolle]

Most significant sales happen within the first 1-3 month, so it will not do much harm to other developers 104s. However I'm of course glad that I didn't buy any of the presently available 104s! The A2A looks like a worthy successor to the fs9 CS 104.
Talking about the CS 105 I'd love to see a F-104D !!!

[delta_lima]

I know I'm a die-hard Zipper fan .... but I'm not biting on this - assuming it's only an A/C model. I get the whole complexity of modelling multiple variants thing - but from a product marketing point of view, the proposition of what will likely be a $50+ addon that features a model representing less than 10% of the total manufactured model range is very self-limiting.

Having just discovered that my first ever addon (CS F-104) works splendidly in FSX, I'm going to keep milking that investment for a while longer ...

Nicely modelled for sure, and the fact that up till now, there hasn't been a short tail FS Starfighter, it's cool that they're doing an A/C. Just hope/wish they'd add at least a D and G to really make waves in the market.

Just my thoughts - wish them the best ....

dl

[Carbine1]

You just know how good this is going to be.

Cheers.

[ColoKent]

The A2A looks like a worthy successor to the fs9 CS 104.

It will be-- if they include a -G...

Kent

[empeck]

Thanks guys. :wavey:

It's a privilege to work with the A2A team. :salute:

[fsafranek]

I feel kind of bad for the italian guys that have done a F-104.
And Alphasim/Virtavia.
Why? The Alphasim "G" release was five years ago. Time moves on. Things get better. If they don't they are replaced. And I believe the Italian one is going to be an "S" model. Unless you're saying that people don't typically seem to know the difference between one version of an aircraft and another? Now that point I'll agree on. :salute:

For USAF versions (and not the squadron of "G" models in USAF paint that the Luftwaffe based over here for training) this looks to be a fantastic model with tremendous potential. Thank you A2A. Now to start saving up for it.
:ernae:

[Bjoern]

Why? The Alphasim "G" release was five years ago. Time moves on. Things get better. If they don't they are replaced. And I believe the Italian one is going to be an "S" model. Unless you're saying that people don't typically seem to know the difference between one version of an aircraft and another? Now that point I'll agree on.

Fair enough on the Alphasim one*, but if I had the -104S, I wouldn't buy an extra -C, -A or -G model just because it has minor performance or configuration differences.
Of course people won't care if the latest rendition has an "A2A" badge.

There's still undone fighters out there (e.g. F-8, F-9, F-10, F-11, F-89, F-100, F-101 and probably many more), which may not be the best known examples of their kind, but still would sell thanks to the "by A2A" badge.



But oh well, I guess they had their reasons.



*Kind of. Except maybe for systems modeling, it looks just fine to me.

[rcbarend]

As a sidenote (a general observation):

I have never understood, why so many simmers get enthousiastic just by seeing a few pictures of a new aircraft addon if it's from a certain designer.
Like this A2A Zipper.

As with many aircraft addon's, it depends strongly what your interrest in an aircraft addon is. Like:
- The exterior visual model ?
- The VC ?
- The accuracy of overall flight dynamics ?
- The detail of systems modelling ?
- Overall performance, like: does it run with a decent framerate on a non-highend PC, or in multi-player mode ?
- Number of specific variants of the aircraft ?
- Number of provided liveries ?
- Other aspects .... ?

Again, it's what one finds important in the balance of the above, if you compare one addon to another.

Now, comments like "this is the one I have been waiting for ..." are quite premature and very subjective, if only based on pictures or reputation of a certain developper/publisher. I won't even start to give examples.

Hope you get my drift.
My post has nothing to do (by itself) with this A2A Starflighter (Zipper) addon; I can't judge that yet.
I have the "italian" Zipper (Sim Skunk Works) installed, and my personal interrest in an aircraft addon is on most realistic flightdynamics, systems emulation and performance. If this A2A addon will be any better or worse in these aspects, I can't tell yet.
Not even mentioning the fact that I'm not a real-world F-104* pilot, so even on the point of "realistic flight dynamics" my "opinion" if it 'feels right" would be quite irrelevant.

Again, just trying to put this thread into perspective ...:)
Also, there's no particular reason whatsoever why I chose this thread for my reaction; just felt like it now :)

Regards, Rob

[huub vink]

Now THAT'S an aeroplane! :jump:

A real aeroplane has wings, this one just has fins.

Cheers,
Huub

[cortomalteseit]

As a sidenote (a general observation):

I have never understood, why so many simmers get enthousiastic just by seeing a few pictures of a new aircraft addon if it's from a certain designer.
Like this A2A Zipper.

As with many aircraft addon's, it depends strongly what your interrest in an aircraft addon is. Like:
- The exterior visual model ?
- The VC ?
- The accuracy of overall flight dynamics ?
- The detail of systems modelling ?
- Overall performance, like: does it run with a decent framerate on a non-highend PC, or in multi-player mode ?
- Number of specific variants of the aircraft ?
- Number of provided liveries ?
- Other aspects .... ?

Again, it's what one finds important in the balance of the above, if you compare one addon to another.

Now, comments like "this is the one I have been waiting for ..." are quite premature and very subjective, if only based on pictures or reputation of a certain developper/publisher. I won't even start to give examples.

Hope you get my drift.
My post has nothing to do (by itself) with this A2A Starflighter (Zipper) addon; I can't judge that yet.
I have the "italian" Zipper (Sim Skunk Works) installed, and my personal interrest in an aircraft addon is on most realistic flightdynamics, systems emulation and performance. If this A2A addon will be any better or worse in these aspects, I can't tell yet.
Not even mentioning the fact that I'm not a real-world F-104* pilot, so even on the point of "realistic flight dynamics" my "opinion" if it 'feels right" would be quite irrelevant.

Again, just trying to put this thread into perspective ...:)
Also, there's no particular reason whatsoever why I chose this thread for my reaction; just felt like it now :)

Regards, Rob

I completely agree with this policy. Why declaring "it's good" or "it's a sh*t" months before it's published? Mysteries of the human mind...

[Daube]

As a sidenote (a general observation):

I have never understood, why so many simmers get enthousiastic just by seeing a few pictures of a new aircraft addon if it's from a certain designer.
Like this A2A Zipper.

As with many aircraft addon's, it depends strongly what your interrest in an aircraft addon is. Like:
- The exterior visual model ?
- The VC ?
- The accuracy of overall flight dynamics ?
- The detail of systems modelling ?
- Overall performance, like: does it run with a decent framerate on a non-highend PC, or in multi-player mode ?
- Number of specific variants of the aircraft ?
- Number of provided liveries ?
- Other aspects .... ?

Again, it's what one finds important in the balance of the above, if you compare one addon to another.

Now, comments like "this is the one I have been waiting for ..." are quite premature and very subjective, if only based on pictures or reputation of a certain developper/publisher. I won't even start to give examples.

Hope you get my drift.
My post has nothing to do (by itself) with this A2A Starflighter (Zipper) addon; I can't judge that yet.
I have the "italian" Zipper (Sim Skunk Works) installed, and my personal interrest in an aircraft addon is on most realistic flightdynamics, systems emulation and performance. If this A2A addon will be any better or worse in these aspects, I can't tell yet.
Not even mentioning the fact that I'm not a real-world F-104* pilot, so even on the point of "realistic flight dynamics" my "opinion" if it 'feels right" would be quite irrelevant.

Again, just trying to put this thread into perspective ...:)
Also, there's no particular reason whatsoever why I chose this thread for my reaction; just felt like it now :)

Regards, Rob

I fully understand what you are trying to say here. Normally, we should wait and see the final product before claiming how great it is, or how much it sucks, I agree with that.
However, there are some exceptions.
It's like seeing a freeware plane from Tim Conrad, Milton Shuppe or any other well know names that are creators of the best freeware planes out there. Even if the plane is not finished, you KNOW what you can expect from it.

Here, the story is the same, excepted it's payware. It's not just a Zipper, it's an A2A Zipper, and more importantly, it an ACCUSIM Zipper. What does it mean ?

The exterior visual model ? => As far as I've seen, the exterior models of the A2A Accusim planes are always great and full of details, and their models keep getting better and better at each new release, so we can expect this 104 to look real good.
The VC ? A2A planes have excellent virtual cockpits, some of the most detailled and most interactive VCs you can find on the market. Just look at the B-17, the Spit, the P-47 etc... the VC of this 104 will be great.
The accuracy of overall flight dynamics ? Knowing how A2A produces their addons (by studying the real aircraft, placing cameras in it, involving real pilots etc...), I'm pretty sure the flight model of this plane will be extremely interesting.
The detail of systems modelling ? => Accusim. Need I say more ?
Overall performance, like: does it run with a decent framerate on a non-highend PC, or in multi-player mode ? => Can't tell about multiplayer, but the Accusim planes are known to be surprisingly easy on the frame rates, that's a fact.
Number of specific variants of the aircraft ? => Variants may be a problem, but I prefer one variant that is precisely modelled in all aspects, than multiple variants that just differ visually and all fly the same.
Number of provided liveries ? => A2A planes come with good repaints, but they are also quite popular to repainters, so the amount of liveries is not a problem.
Other aspects .... ? => Immersion: on that precise point, Accusim planes are the top level.


So yes, even if this plane is not available yet, I am already convinced it will be a fantastic addon, because I know who makes it and what can be expected.

[icycle]

As a sidenote (a general observation):

I have never understood, why so many simmers get enthousiastic just by seeing a few pictures of a new aircraft addon if it's from a certain designer.
Like this A2A Zipper.

As with many aircraft addon's, it depends strongly what your interrest in an aircraft addon is. Like:
- The exterior visual model ?
- The VC ?
- The accuracy of overall flight dynamics ?
- The detail of systems modelling ?
- Overall performance, like: does it run with a decent framerate on a non-highend PC, or in multi-player mode ?
- Number of specific variants of the aircraft ?
- Number of provided liveries ?
- Other aspects .... ?

Again, it's what one finds important in the balance of the above, if you compare one addon to another.

Now, comments like "this is the one I have been waiting for ..." are quite premature and very subjective, if only based on pictures or reputation of a certain developper/publisher. I won't even start to give examples.

Hope you get my drift.
My post has nothing to do (by itself) with this A2A Starflighter (Zipper) addon; I can't judge that yet.
I have the "italian" Zipper (Sim Skunk Works) installed, and my personal interrest in an aircraft addon is on most realistic flightdynamics, systems emulation and performance. If this A2A addon will be any better or worse in these aspects, I can't tell yet.
Not even mentioning the fact that I'm not a real-world F-104* pilot, so even on the point of "realistic flight dynamics" my "opinion" if it 'feels right" would be quite irrelevant.

Again, just trying to put this thread into perspective ...:)
Also, there's no particular reason whatsoever why I chose this thread for my reaction; just felt like it now :)

Regards, Rob


Not trying to be contrarian here, but what is wrong with people expressing their opinions?
If they want get excited and express their opinions about, a preview, what harm is done? The beauty of the internet, you don't care for a post, scroll on, you don't even have to leave your chair! :)

Back to the original line of the post, I, for one, am happy that someone is doing and "A" / "C". For years we've seen various iterations of "G"'s & "S"'s on various FS versions, from various FS addon makers. Finally getting a Zipper to honestly put US markings on, will bring back a lot of fond memories. Especially staring up at the model of a USAF "A", that my uncle made for me, that was hanging from the ceiling in my room as a child.

Again, no harm intended just my "opinion"

Bill

[Bone]

Hope you get my drift.
My post has nothing to do (by itself) with this A2A Starflighter (Zipper) addon; I can't judge that yet.
I have the "italian" Zipper (Sim Skunk Works) installed, and my personal interrest in an aircraft addon is on most realistic flightdynamics, systems emulation and performance. If this A2A addon will be any better or worse in these aspects, I can't tell yet.
Regards, Rob

I have the SSW zipper also, and the sceen shots of the A2A F-104 VC far outclass the SSW VC, by a huge margin. That tells me alot about how the rest of the model is going to be...remember this is A2A we are talking about, lol.


I thought the SSW F-104 was the Cloud9 F-104 reworked for FSX, however, it's not even close to the same quality as the Cloud9 model (although C9 paints will work on it). I don't mean to bash the SSW folks, but it can't compete with the C9 model, and in all likelyhood won't be able to compete with the A2A model.


I think it's OK to let the quality of the previous A2A models speak for this one, too. :)

[khaast]

I thought the SSW F-104 was the Cloud9 F-104 reworked for FSX, however, it's not even close to the same quality as the Cloud9 model (although C9 paints will work on it). I don't mean to bash the SSW folks, but it can't compete with the C9 model, and in all likelyhood won't be able to compete with the A2A model.

I fully agree.

[Bob.sc]

Did someone mention the "D" ? How will pilots get trained otherwise! OH the Horror!!

Hope they listen!!

[LUCE1]

I have the SSW zipper also, and the sceen shots of the A2A F-104 VC far outclass the SSW VC, by a huge margin. That tells me alot about how the rest of the model is going to be...remember this is A2A we are talking about, lol.


I thought the SSW F-104 was the Cloud9 F-104 reworked for FSX, however, it's not even close to the same quality as the Cloud9 model (although C9 paints will work on it). I don't mean to bash the SSW folks, but it can't compete with the C9 model, and in all likelyhood won't be able to compete with the A2A model.
I think it's OK to let the quality of the previous A2A models speak for this one, too. :)

Hi,
No polemics, but just to clarify, which version of the SSW Zipper do you mean?
Are you speaking about version 2.6 (which is freeware) or version 3.0.2 ?
It is true that version 2.6 is a rework of C9, however dynamics, gauges and systems was remade from scratch since C9 gauge dll was proprietary.
Version 3.0.2 is a completely different model, nothing to do with C9 and 2.6
- Model was made from scratch using Gmax while C9 modeler used FSDS
- C9 VC was not 3D modelled but had all texture planars, 3.02 VC is fully 3D modelled, more others big differences on model...
- Dynamics rewritten, C9 dynamics were wrong and unrealistic, just as an example it was capable to above Mach 1.6 at very low altitude.
- Sounds resampled from real
- Systems rewritten, C9 was a very good model but far from what F-104 G really was.
- Textures remade from scratch, all 3.02 texture are 2048x2048, no way that C9 paint could fit it unless complex stretching operations.

However some screenshoots that help you guys to judge.
cheers

4850648507485084850948510
48511

[icycle]

Did someone mention the "D" ? How will pilots get trained otherwise! OH the Horror!!

Hope they listen!!

Now you're talking!!!

Bill

[rcbarend]

Not trying to be contrarian here, but what is wrong with people expressing their opinions?
If they want get excited and express their opinions about, a preview, what harm is done? The beauty of the internet, you don't care for a post, scroll on, you don't even have to leave your chair! :)

.....

Again, no harm intended just my "opinion"

Bill
Agreed, nothing wrong with people expressing their opinions ....
Hence I wasn't critisizing anyone in my post, I was just wondering why (in general) people get so enthousiast for a new development based on just a few pictures. Especially if I read that it will be the "best ever", just based on expectations or reputations.

Just my opinion; and I'm sure you'll allow me that as well :)

I can understand "Daube"s arguments in this particular case; if I agree or not, is another thing ..
But no comment on that, to prevent getting too OT :)


Rob

[falcon409]

A real aeroplane has wings, this one just has fins.
Cheers, Huub
lol, ain't it the truth Huub. I have the C9 104 (somewhere), but it's an "impulse airplane". . . .an airplane that I'll fly if the urge hits me, but not an every day airplane, after all, it's a rocket with big fins. It's difficult to handle in some situations, takes a lot of practice to master and it'll be too expensive only to become another "sit in the hangar until I feel like messing with it airplane". Nice that A2A took it on and it'll be well done for sure but it isn't an airplane for the masses and there is at least one in the Century Series that deserves more attention than another F-104. Still, I wish A2A much success with this one.:salute:

[kilo delta]

I'm seeing this product as a stepping stone to "The Phantom"....think of it as half an F4.:icon_lol:

[peter12213]

My thoughts as well Kilo!

[GB]

The accuracy of overall flight dynamics ? Knowing that SSW is a product of love of some real F-104 riders, who actually were flying this particular aircraft, IMO there won't ever be any MS FS F-104 product with FD as accurate as SSW's (within FSX's limitations). Try following each Functional Check Flight checklist step with SSW F-104S V3.0 and you'll need no more to agree.
The detail of systems modelling SSW's F-104S systems are a representation of real F-104S's ones, flying up to some years ago in Italy . If A2A devs want to match its level of accuracy they have to find the only F-104's still flying (STARFIGHTER TEAM) and study the real stuff and then model f-104G and not F-104A/C.

Model/VC/textures: Maybe A2A will show better than the current F-104S V3.0 (maybe), however SSW had promised constant upgrades to the model and also V3.0 is already pretty enough.

MY CONCLUSION: Once A2A's F-104 is ready and F-104S is upgraded I'm expecting two very nice planes asking you to have both (like AEROSOFT's and IRIS's F-16's), Each one will have its advantages, but, Flight Dynamics and System's modeling of the SSW is really hard to beat.

[warchild]

Guys?? I'm going to ask, whats wrong with having two superlative craft to choose from by seperate companies. I see it as nothing shorter than a boon for the community. I for one am glad to have both SSW AND A2A doing these planes.. However, what i am NOT glad at is seeing this thread turn into a pissing match. Its no longer a discussion as much as it is an argument. Get it civilized or I lock the thread.
Pam

[khaast]

STARFIGHTERS are CF-104/Ds, not Gs.

[Lawman]

STARFIGHTERS are CF-104/Ds, not Gs.

Your CF-104/D's have a lot more in common with the "G" than with the "C":). I don't mind A2A doing a "C"-model if they also do a "G" (I'd even settle for the TF-version of the G). You just can't leave out the most succesful variant that made the Starfighter the "Deal of the Century" (long before the F-16) instead a mere footnote in aviation history. Trust me on this, you can't:engel016:.

[khaast]

Your CF-104/D's have a lot more in common with the "G" than with the "C":). I don't mind A2A doing a "C"-model if they also do a "G" (I'd even settle for the TF-version of the G). You just can't leave out the most succesful variant that made the Starfighter the "Deal of the Century" (long before the F-16) instead a mere footnote in aviation history. Trust me on this, you can't:engel016:.

Agreed, any G-model is a must.

[Bob.sc]

STARFIGHTERS are CF-104/Ds, not Gs.

Yes sir. The Team STARFIGHTERS are CF-104D and a couple CF-104. With more in the future...As in "S".

Yep, the "F-104D" will have the large tail but modeling the systems would be easier for the A/B/C/D. No INS for starters.
Cheers

[Bjoern]

"Deal of the Century" (long before the F-16)

With the minor difference that Starfighters had to best the competition via bribery in more than one case.


The so-called "Deal of the Century" produced substantial income for Lockheed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Corporation). However, the resulting Lockheed bribery scandals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_bribery_scandals) caused considerable political controversy in Europe and Japan. In Germany, the Minister of Defence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Ministry_of_Defence_%28Germany%29) Franz Josef Strauss (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Josef_Strauss) was accused of having received at least US$ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_dollar)10 million for West Germany's purchase of the F-104 Starfighter in 1961.[28] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-104#cite_note-27) Prince Bernhard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_of_Lippe-Biesterfeld#The_Lockheed_Scandal) of the Netherlands later confessed to having received more than US$1 million in bribes. In the 1970s it was revealed that Lockheed had engaged in an extensive campaign of bribery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery) of foreign officials to obtain sales, a scandal that nearly led to the downfall of the ailing corporation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-104

[huub vink]

That's why it was the deal of the century. You buy a highly sophisticated aircraft and get a few free millions on top! :icon_lol:

I knew I Prince had been naughty, but I didn't know "der Franz" had received some pocket money as well!

Cheers,
Huub

[Bjoern]

The fat Bavarian needed more lunch money.

(Not talking about Göring here...)