Milviz F-86

[kcgb]

wow

http://www.milviz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2034&p=17713#p17713

[SirBenn21]

Nice! :applause:

Ben

[fsxar177]

Good grief...and what point has fs just simply gone too far?? Holy moly, the detail in those textures is incredible.

Joseph

[Dain Arns]

Good grief...and what point has fs just simply gone too far?? Holy moly, the detail in those textures is incredible.

Joseph

To quote Ferris Bueller,"You can never go too far!" :icon_lol:

I know those are rendered shots too, not actual in FSX ones, but still, can I just pre-order right now? ;)

[Phantom88]

I LOVE RIVETS!!:jump:
66140

[MenendezDiego]

To quote Ferris Bueller,"You can never go too far!" :icon_lol:

I know those are rendered shots too, not actual in FSX ones, but still, can I just pre-order right now? ;)

These are not renders. That's exactly how it will look in FSX :jump:

[Geomitrak]

I'd like to see some close-up shots of a real F-86 just to compare the model to. I stand to be corrected, but is the riveting maybe a little bit over done ? Technically its quite an accomplishment, but they seem a little bit too prominent for what was flush-riveted construction.

And no, this is not rivet counting. Its an observation and query.

[falcon409]

I would have to say that MilViz has taken bump mapping to a whole new level. The detail is amazing and my only concern (for those who do purchase it) might be the drag it might cause on lesser systems. Time will tell. I would also have to say that I did some minor work on the Cavenaugh Museums F-86 around 2008 and the rivets (for obvious reasons) are flush and not at all as prominent as they are on this model. These appear to be domed rivets. . . .not what the skins on the '86 are applied with. Still, it does make for a very impressive rendering.

[Naruto-kun]

KC asked me to post this....

http://clip2net.com/clip/m121575/1338024200-clip-283kb.png?nocache=1

We know about the rivets being flush. This will be fixed before it goes into FSX by Gunnar.

FPS should also be good on lower end systems due to some tweaks we found to improve performance.

[DagR]

Looks real nice but in general I would buy this and redo the normal maps.
Will the slatted long winged -40 type wing be made also, as seen on JASDF and later RNoAF aircraft?


Best
Dag

[Naruto-kun]

Um....I did post above stating that the intensity would be reduced so the rivets will become more flat....

[DagR]

Thanks. Also have a look at the size of the stencilled text, they look too big and prominent.


Best
DagR

[peter12213]

I actually think the opposite to be honest, I love all the stencilling lol.

[mohawk3]

The Milviz model looks stunning. I've pointed to the 'bumped' rivets because it will be a pitty to have such an error to this beautiful and very detailed model. Also mind that I've used 'flush rivets' term, not ' bump', so I've seen the commnent with ' too bumped at the moment' , but for me, as long as 'bumped' does not equals 'flushed', my comment stays.
If you are familiar with LSP (Large Scale Planes) forums, then the term ' mad Trumpeter riveter' might tell you smth.
All I want is correct, detailed and complex planes and I must congratulate Milviz again for raising the level of complexity ( at least visual, up to now) with their new F-86.I know that I'm asking much, but also I am ready to pay for it and I'll never comment about price.
Lots of money goes also in hardware to keep with the raising levels of detail and functionality, so I don't understand people that keeps whining about performance with every new release after hoping for a miracle: it's eccentrical to race today with a 1914 sportcar, but if you want to win...

[Naruto-kun]

Lots of money goes also in hardware to keep with the raising levels of detail and functionality, so I don't understand people that keeps whining about performance with every new release after hoping for a miracle: it's eccentrical to race today with a 1914 sportcar, but if you want to win...

I am still working on some features which i dont know whether they will affect performance or not (more than likely will take a couple frames down) but so far framerates wise (if i remove the frame limiter on my setup) it is runs well over the 40-50 fps range on my non overclocked system. Thanks to some new techniques i mastered i can now optimise things much more easily and to a much higher level. So we are doing what we can to allow it to run on old setups ;)

[mohawk3]

I know that one of the main developer's concern is performance over detail relationship:applause:

[JIMJAM]

Thats good to hear. I know they make great screenshots but all that detail is worthless to me if sim performance is reduced. In my case even one frame seeing that I rarely other than watching landing replays even look at external shots. Maybe a new trend will be 2 models, one thats super detailed and one thats for better performance. I know I have some models that offer low res and even though u the increase is usually small, with fast movers every little bit helps as they are demanding on scenery draw rates.
But yeah. LOOKS INCREDIBLE. If a aircraft is a real winner even though my computer and FSX dreads it, I will make exceptions and start moving sliders left!

[stovall]

Wow, has development come a long ways or what. The F-86 is a real favorite of mine. The detail will probably slow down some machines but if it is anything like the F-15E it won't be much. There is always P3D for performance as well. I will bet this baby will fly fantastic in Prepar3D. Thanks for the preview.

[mohawk3]

I have no doubt that in 1-2 years many of us shall fly in P3D.Better performance, stability, support-and not from MS but from Lockheed(!)- all that in a professional flightsimming platform.The evolution of FSX in P3D and ease of integration on FSX add-ons to P3D brings also benefits to our developers.

[Naruto-kun]

We learned a few lessons on the E....has about 3/4's of the textures that the Eagle E has and no glass(and my coding skills improved quite a bit...). We will also offer a half size texture set and a version with no bumps in the VC(which is sad because they are so nice....). The F-86 should work in Pr3D but possibly not the weapons... if we have weapons. Might either wait for TACPAC or do them myself since the previous system cant be adjusted to fit the Sabre....

[Dain Arns]

These are not renders. That's exactly how it will look in FSX :jump:

LOL! Semantics. :icon_lol:
By my definition, when something is obviously being displayed in an external program, not actually in sim, I'll personally still consider it a rendered image, okay? ;)
But you boys over at Milviz, you feel free to call it whatever you want. LOL.
Give you all an A+ for enthusiasm.
BTW, I really do hope now it looks exactly like that in FSX, because I love it! :wavey:

[Shylock]

OH my
:jawdrop: :jawdrop: :jawdrop:

[kilo delta]

Apologies for mentioning this..but re-check the spelling on a few of the stencils eg above the FU code on the rear fuselage.:engel016: I'm guessing it was an Easter Egg.:icon_lol:

[Naruto-kun]

we will go over all of them and make sure the spelling is correct... of course, that might take a week or two...

[PRB]

"OMG"! (as they say) It'll probably have a flight model that's as good as the T-38. And the VC will probably be at least as good. Yeah, I'm getting this one. Is it done yet?

[Bomber_12th]

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Sea%20Fury/F-8620sabre.jpg

[Bone]

the vc is pretty darn awesome, as well

[hairyspin]

Simply astonishing WIP, VC shots please?

[MenendezDiego]

If you ask, you shall receive: http://www.milviz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1589

Funny...no one has yet to ask for shots in FSX...HINT HINT!

[Gdavis101]

WOW! :applause::applause:

[Roadburner440]

Thank you guys for the comments. They are well received by all of us at Milviz... While I will not officially comment on things such as the future (Prepar3d and the like). All that stuff is in the talking stage, but we are looking toward areas we may go in the future. For the near term though we are firmly rooted in FSX. Although I have been debating getting Prepar3d for my personal use to play with... That screen of Norfolk, VA almost has me sold....

Back to the F-86 though there will be much more to come on that. Still heavily involved in coding. I myself am flying another revision (hopefully the last) of the B-55. So that is pretty much short term stuff you guys can expect from us. Jon may be kind and show you guys some screens in FSX. If not I will when I get my hands on it I promise. Happy Memorial Day from us also in case I do not get a chance to say so else wise. Especially to those that have served in the years past, and most importantly to those that have given their lives so we can enjoy the life that we have today. :USA-flag:

[hairyspin]

If you ask, you shall receive: http://www.milviz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1589

Funny...no one has yet to ask for shots in FSX...HINT HINT!

I meant screenshots, not the original bird! :173go1: :icon_lol: Kudos to Dmitriy, that's some of the very best modelling and texturing I've ever seen. :applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:

And I'll bite, FSX screenshots please!

[olderndirt]

It appears to be quilted. Those rivets should be flush and not nearly so noticeable. This is THE F86, unfortunately not yet for FSX.66173

[Roadburner440]

It appears to be quilted. Those rivets should be flush and not nearly so noticeable. This is THE F86, unfortunately not yet for FSX.

We are going back over the bump maps and reducing the boldness of the rivets if you will.. As you say jets are built with counter sunk rivets, and as such should not appear like it is built using button heads like the bumps would believe. Excellent painting though of an F-86 going vertical. Got to love doing that in fighter jets.

[dvj]

Rivits or no rivits, I'm giddy over the fact a native F-86 in on the way! Make it soon!!!!:running:

[ViperVFX]

Guys thanks for comments...about rivets dont worry...I all will be fix...so it is not problem :)

[DagR]

I try once more, will there be a model with the -40 long slatted wing as used by the JASDF and retrofitted to many others like for instance the RNoAF?
Many countries also modified theirs (Luftwaffe/RNoAF) with Martin Baker Mk.5 seats but this involved modifying the canopy rail so that it slopes upwards when the canopy rolls past and clears the seat top. Can this be done ?

PS: Vc looks superb but the torn arm rests are a bit over the top, don't you think...... ?

Best
DagR

[Geomitrak]

PS: Vc looks superb but the torn arm rests are a bit over the top, don't you think...... ?



I would agree with that. And Oldendirt's observation about quilting too. Is there a danger of going too far and making a front-line fighter in service with a major air force look like an abandoned derelict awaiting restoration ? 'More' is not always better.

[mohawk3]

I would agree with that. And Oldendirt's observation about quilting too. Is there a danger of going too far and making a front-line fighter in service with a major air force look like an abandoned derelict awaiting restoration ? 'More' is not always better.

I completely agree with that:salute:

[Roadburner440]

I think you guys would be surprised at how some war time aircraft look. Especially in these current budgetary times. Pilot/aircrew comfort items are the last thing on the list of important parts to order. Granted I think before that arm rest got that bad someone would have taken it to the paraloft shop and had a piece of leather sewn over the initial tear, but that is besides the point. :icon_lol:

[Bone]

I try once more, will there be a model with the -40 long slatted wing as used by the JASDF and retrofitted to many others like for instance the RNoAF?
Many countries also modified theirs (Luftwaffe/RNoAF) with Martin Baker Mk.5 seats but this involved modifying the canopy rail so that it slopes upwards when the canopy rolls past and clears the seat top. Can this be done ?

PS: Vc looks superb but the torn arm rests are a bit over the top, don't you think...... ?

Best
DagR

Since no one else has answered your question, I'll respond, but I'm just a beta tester. Colin hasn't said anything so far about retrofitting this model to reflect the standard of numerous foriegn air forces. He may, but right now his modelling and coding team has had their hands full with one version.

As far as arm rests being a little over the top, even airliners get torn up arm rests. Of course we write them up when they get really torn up, but sometimes we just go ahead and keep flying with them that way if getting them replaced is going to take too long and jack up the schedule, or we may not even be at a maintenance hub that even has a new arm rest. Then we'll write them up at a more opportunistic time.

I do agree with you that the torn arm rest texturing should be toned down, though. Worn is OK, but the really torn up look doesn't translate well in fs models (my opinion, not Milviz official by any means).

[ColoKent]

....I saw that too-- it's almost like the F-86 has been made into a testbed for effects. I didn't get too upset over the armrests and the other items-- perhaps we can get some of the cockpit details included in a paint kit so that we can tone things down as desired? Or perhaps just give us a set of cockpit textures that are new....

Just a thought-- cause the airplane looks good-- like everything else you guys have put out...

Kent

P.S. Too bad they didn't use baggage pods in those days!!!!! (Snicker)

[DagR]

I think you guys would be surprised at how some war time aircraft look. Especially in these current budgetary times. Pilot/aircrew comfort items are the last thing on the list of important parts to order. Granted I think before that arm rest got that bad someone would have taken it to the paraloft shop and had a piece of leather sewn over the initial tear, but that is besides the point. :icon_lol:

Pilot comfort and safety is a number one priority in a modern air arm, anything else is rubbish. You do not send people to war unless they have the best possible gear, at least that's the philosophy of our air force. But that is besides the point.


Best
DagR

[DagR]

P.S. Too bad they didn't use baggage pods in those days!!!!! (Snicker)

LOL !!!


Best
DagR

[DagR]

Since no one else has answered your question, I'll respond, but I'm just a beta tester. Colin hasn't said anything so far about retrofitting this model to reflect the standard of numerous foriegn air forces. He may, but right now his modelling and coding team has had their hands full with one version.

As far as arm rests being a little over the top, even airliners get torn up arm rests. Of course we write them up when they get really torn up, but sometimes we just go ahead and keep flying with them that way if getting them replaced is going to take too long and jack up the schedule, or we may not even be at a maintenance hub that even has a new arm rest. Then we'll write them up at a more opportunistic time.

I do agree with you that the torn arm rest texturing should be toned down, though. Worn is OK, but the really torn up look doesn't translate well in fs models (my opinion, not Milviz official by any means).

Roger that, fully understood ;-) Thanks and do not get me wrong, the aircraft inside and out looks superb !


Best
DagR

[ColoKent]

....aircrew comfort--that couldn't POSSIBLY be true in the RoNAF-- they retired the F-5s from frontline service!!!! (REALLY miss RoNAF F-5Bs in particular...).

I have a book "Tiger Meet" and it is about the 1985 Tiger Meet at Kliene Brogel...beautiful RoNAF F-5B-- and Tiger helmet to match! Any AF that flew F-104s and F-5s can't be bad!

K

[jp]

The sabre looks great!

This is knida off topic, but since we're on sabres may as well ask. Would you guys consider doing an FJ-4 Fury?

-jp

[Stickshaker]

I think this model sets a new standard for detail and will certainly buy it.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
One thing struck me: is the windshield frame not a bit too ‘flat’, i.e. elliptic instead of circular? I can imagine that the frame is a bit flattened at the top, but in photo’s I have seen it definitely looks more circular. A good photo is on page 3 of Aviation Classics Volume 9 (published in 2011) which is dedicated to the Sabre. I have only the digital edition so I cannot reproduce the photo here.<o:p></o:p>
Of course, it could also be the perspective from which the screenshots are taken. By the way: he fact that the windshield frame does not make a 90 degree angle with the fuselage (so that the canopy ‘bulges outwards’ a bit) is quite good, as far as I know.

[Bone]

ARMRESTS

A quote from Krazycolin on the Milviz Beta Testers Forum:

''we will "fix" the armrest...''


I just want to take the time to say something about Krazycolin. He's not just a great model builder, he's a great guy at running a team. The Beta Testers Forum is an awesome place to interact, especially when everyone is in the groove on a model. It flows really well, Colin is a great facilitator, and he LISTENS to people. I hope you guys will always keep that in mind when you see something that you don't like on an early stage and rough version model.

[bstolle]

IMHO it's about time that the SOH staff lets Colin back into the SOH forum!!!

[Roadburner440]

The Air Force spends its money on its people first, and then asks for more to fix its aircraft. :icon_lol: I can assure you it in no way shape or form works like that in the US Navy. We fix aircraft first, and then anything that is left in the budget I can order seat cushions, arm rests, etc.. If it doesn't fall into the downing discrepancy, or partial mission capable discrepancy category then it usually is not considered important.

[Bone]

The Air Force spends its money on its people first, and then asks for more to fix its aircraft. :icon_lol: I can assure you it in no way shape or form works like that in the US Navy. We fix aircraft first, and then anything that is left in the budget I can order seat cushions, arm rests, etc.. If it doesn't fall into the downing discrepancy, or partial mission capable discrepancy category then it usually is not considered important.

It's funny, the USAF guys always say that the USN spends it's money on golf couses and recreation/club facilities first, and then the other stuff. However it REALLY works, I know that most USAF planes are kept quite immaculate. Some appear to be so clean you could eat food from the landing gear and wheel hubs...and I'm not talking about the planes they send out to air shows, either. There are always going to be those planes that on occasion are the exception to the rule, though.

[hairyspin]

...And I'll bite, FSX screenshots please!

Okay, I read on in the linked thread and found them. :jump: I must concur about the burst cushioning, completely spoils a fine model, not enough frayed threads hanging from it, shocking lack of care of a vital aircraft, blah blah blah blah. :a1451: :mix-smi:

My compliments to Colin, Dmitry and the team, superb effort!

[elcamino]

The sabre looks great!

This is knida off topic, but since we're on sabres may as well ask. Would you guys consider doing an FJ-4 Fury?

-jp


Great idea . . Haven't seen a fj for a long while.

The sabre looks terrific. The only thing missing are footprints on the wing from maintenance guys walking around.

[jocko417]

Very, very stoked to finally see a native F-86 for FSX. I flew the heck out of SectionF8's F-86E and I'm very pleased to see a hard edged 6-3 wing version will be available soon. :jump:

Congrats to the team for a great modelling and texturing, that's some of the nicest natural metal effects I've seen.

Now, I don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth, but I have been accused of being a rivet counter in the past ;)

My Dad flew Sabres so I've been sort of surrounded by them in the form of pictures and books etc, for most of my life. There are a few minor things that stand out to me, again, this is not bashing but just honest observations.

If you look at the photo of the Sabre posted above by Bomber_12th, you'll notice the gun blast pane and gunports are a little off. The upper gun port on the model is too far forward, note it should only extend to about the halfway point of the blast pane. The shape of the blast pane needs to be adjusted, it's too squished under the lowest gun port and should be more rectangular. Probably not a big deal as the repaint artist could change the lines and normal map to reflect that.

Wing fences look a bit too high? Pitot tube a bit long?

I'm writing this on my phone so sorry for lack of photos to back this up.

VC: Stunning. A work of art, the best I've seen in a FSX cockpit.

My Dad has a B-8 stick grip and a throttle grip from the Sabre, I think the ones in the VC are slightly off, the throttle especially. The throttle grip is actually almost triangular in shape at the top, not a cylinder with a quarter arc attachment on it for the cage and mic buttons. The stick grip's handrest needs to extend outward from the grip a bit more and the grip itself is a bit too thick. Again, when I get home I can post some pics.

Please do NOT think I am bashing this aircraft, the Sabre has been a long favourite of mine and these small items are just things that jump out at me immediately. I am not a modeller, I have no idea how labour intensive it would be to make changes at this point in development. I only bring these points up as it means the difference between a great product and an outstanding one.

BTW, great job on the nose/intake. You've nailed it, and captured the aggressive shark-like look the Sabre is famous for, something SF8 didn't quite get right, especially the little radome.

I did a bunch of RCAF paints for the SF8 Sword and I'm looking forward to doing some Canadair Mk.5 paints for this one!

:applause:

[JIMJAM]

I suggest a contest to win a free copy when its released.

The one who can come closest to the actual number of rivets used. My wildly off the top of my head guess.... 5284.