SOH A-26 Invader, the story continues ...

[fliger747]

Really glad to see this classic aircraft having it's life extended. I think it was one of the very first aircraft that I worked on for Milton, still a great plane!

T

[stansdds]

Made a few changes...

That does look better, but if you want to go for the ultimate in realism...

[gman5250]

Working from this reference.

[fliger747]

I guess I should pint out that the bolted nose section as shown in the photos is a "C" series R2800 (R2800-52W). Only originally used in the B26-K model. The WWII versions used a "B" series engine, the R2800-71/79. The B series engine has many differences, but the most obvious is the rounded, tapered nose housing the gear train.

T

[stansdds]

Working from this reference.

That is a C-series R-2800, but an earlier version. The B-26K used a later version of the C-series, known commercially as the R-2800-CB16/17. The major visual differences are the magentos and prop control unit.

[fliger747]

Page 421 of Graham White's R2800 in the A/B 26 section lists the 52W for only the K model. Indeed the CB 16/17 are found in many of the current flying warbirds because of parts availability and general dependability. Some of my old flying buddies still steer them around the skies here in Fairbanks Alaska in the DC6 and C46. According to White (page 245) the CB 16 was never installed originally on any military aircraft. The K was an upgraded aircraft. The Navy R6D was sold with a DWCB17 which the Navy designated as a 52W. The 52W is considered a military engine.

Clear as mud? Cheers: T

[stansdds]

Clear as Mississippi River mud. The B-26K "Special Kay" is a survivor and her engines have the magnetos and prop control unit that looks like those on the CB-16/17 engine. Every picture of a B-26K in service that I have seen have the same engine. According to FAA documents, the R-2800-52W is the same as the R-2800-CB16/17.

[gman5250]

Just an FYI...

Quite frankly, it's a lot easier to model the R-2800-CB16/17 mags and PCU than the 52W, which I have already put together for this model. Once there is a decision as to which is more appropriate to the SE Asia variants I'll commit to that. At this stage, it seems that I'll now be modeling the later CB16/17 set...that way I'll have both radials in my archive for later use.

Of course, since both variants will be modeled I suppose that we could just make two distinct variants that would fit both bills. The work is already done.

You guys bump back in here with your data and I'll work things out on my end.

Keeping things up to date.

The last Windows update terminated my GMAX...as in FUBAR...so I'm in the process of finalizing the 3D Studio mesh and animations for both the exterior and interior models. That's a bunch of work, but I'm closing in on it. Any other inputs will be taken under consideration by the team.

In the meantime...anyone interested in some hyper detailed data on the undercarriage....I'm studying this very closely and taking screen caps.



That is all...

[stansdds]

Here are three additional B-26K's in service in SEA. All three appear to share the same type of engine; R-2800-52W/CB-16/17.

[ferondoe]

Beautiful work done on the B-26, I liked the video we believe the effects of rain are staggering smoke engines. a small question will you add that squealing of the brakes to rolling?
Bravo Marty

[fliger747]

I am not anywhere near a rivet counter, but a note on the prop domes, there is a dome breather hole on the very tip of the dome. A nut and a breather held in with a circlip. Absolutely amazing the technological advances in aviation and technology in such a short period!

T

[fliger747]

I don't know if you guys have these drawings or not? If so no worries!

T

[gman5250]

I don't know if you guys have these drawings or not? If so no worries!

T

You must be psychic.

I'm working on the nose gear right now. Moving to mains next. Those drawings would be great help, at the moment I'm using Kermit Weeks video as reference. High quality video...up close and personal

[Milton Shupe]

You must be psychic.

I'm working on the nose gear right now. Moving to mains next. Those drawings would be great help, at the moment I'm using Kermit Weeks video as reference. High quality video...up close and personal

These may be useful.

[gman5250]

These may be useful.

Beautiful...TY sir.

[gman5250]

NO modeling changes yet to the R-2800 C52W, but the existing looks good in black...just add grime.

[PhantomTweak]

but the existing looks good in black...just add grime.

Yes, they really do, and yes please do!

I like planes with grime. Makes them look more real to my eye.
The one's you show look like they just came out of the box from the factory. Bright shiney paint. Yes, it looks very good, but after it's first start, no radial looks anything like that. The paint on the cylinders will start to bake a bit, even high temp paint, and there will be oil. Everywhere. Radials leak. They're like Harleys And oil attracts dirt like a magnet.
THAT'S what a real plane looks like. Not factory fresh, shiney-new, but used. Flown. Maintained.
Mechs bang things around, wrenches slip and hit painted surfaces, screwdrivers slip, fluids leak and are spilled...
You know what I mean.
The only really clean part, I mean REALLY clean, is the canopy/windscreen. They get cleaned by the plane captain every morning, at least. VERY thoroughly.

But it overall looks great so far!
Pat☺

[Milton Shupe]

Dirt and grime are easy to ask for and tough to deliver realistically but that will change with new texturing tools.

One must choose whether to get it now in its beautiful condition or wait another 6-12 months for all the things we would like it to have, striving for perfection versus a dang'd good likeness and fun to fly.

Meanwhile the developers have fun flying and showing and ultimately get burned out or jump into another project before its delivered. Wait some more ...

Careful what you ask for. :-)

[gman5250]

Dirt, Grime and Technically Perfect Radials

The value of a thread like this for a developer is the feedback. In my case, I take the feedback and determine what is realistic for me to invest in a project. My primary work is developing future payware. My secondary projects are like the one we are discussing here, the B-26K Counter Invader.

I'm taking the feedback on which radials are most authentic, armament, paint schemes and other bits that go into the release version. In real world terms it is impossible to release a one size fits all version of an airplane.

My solution is to build the model, in this case a freeware, to a level that I am satisfied will provide enjoyment to the community in general. To do that I create the model at a near perfect level of finish, the way all of the parts would assemble and roll out the door at the factory. In the case of the K, there will be a paint kit included that will give everyone the ability to dirty up the airplane to their own requirements. Included in the PK will be layers that can be applied to existing paints to add wear, grime and paint chips for those who want to use a "turn key" approach.

BTW...Mr. Shupe is correct that new tools, PBR, particle physics and a bunch of other goodies will make future airplanes hyper realistic. That comes at a cost to the developer and end user. The developer is forced to choose which platform they will support, the inevitable backlash from their consumer base and cost benefit of their final decisions. The end user will need to consider the investment required to operate a state-of-the-art simulation. There are already hot debates on the forums about this very issue, and at the end of the day it comes down to the devs and end users final decisions as to what suits them best.

The airplanes I show are intended to inspire people to create their own skins from basic foundations. I encourage people to learn to use the PK and explore the possible. For an even more fulfilling experience, learn how to use the SDK and available tools...then begin to explore the new frontier. It's satisfying and keeps the brain cells stimulated.

[fliger747]

The old joke about Radials is to stop and fill the oil and check the fuel, if it's not leaking it's empty? With modern seals etc the R985's which I have driven a lot aren't too bad though they blue smoke for a bit on startup. Last Summer we got to fire up one of Cliffy Everett's (sadly he died in Dec.) C46's. Talk about blue smoke the Mx stand used to board at the rear was actually covered in oil, rather heavily! These large (155 cu in) cylinders have to have quite a bit of cold clearance due to the thermal expansion differences between the Alloy pistons and the Steel Cylinder barrels. One reason you want to warm them up before takeoff!

The C series engines were quite an advancement over the earlier B engines. They were considerable more highly stressed, allowing higher takeoff and Mil Power applications and ratings up to 2800 Hp WEP with Water Meth injection. One of the major upgrades was to the lubrication system, with improved scavenging. One estimation was that the B engine used as much as 400 hp slinging oil around inside the engine at high rpm. Of course everything has it's costs, less heat carried away by the oil, but improved forged cyl heads helped somewhat.

Amazing these engines, the R2800 are still being used in commercial service now nearly 80 years since their initial inception! A lot of the commercial operators have disconnected the high blower as they don't need the altitude performance any more.

Great project!!

[PhantomTweak]

I sincerely apologize if I came across as complaining. I didn't mean that at all!
I was just giving my feedback, my take on the plane as it is, especially given the sentence about adding grime. I tend to stay in the VC anyway, so the outside is strictly, to me, secondary. NOT that I don't appreciate the hard work put into the outside of these planes at all. I really do. Especially since I have all the artistic capabilities of a small rock. I can't even draw a straight line with a ruler. If it weren't for all the painters out there providing all the different paints for planes, I'd have a hangar full of base models, probably all pure white, or something.

I really do appreciate the hard work put in on this, and every other freeware plane out there, whether I fly them or not. If it weren't for them, I'd only have the FSX default planes.

Keep up the good work. I will fly, and enjoy this plane when it's published.
Thank you!
Pat☺

[gman5250]

I sincerely apologize if I came across as complaining. I didn't mean that at all!
I was just giving my feedback, my take on the plane as it is, especially given the sentence about adding grime. I tend to stay in the VC anyway, so the outside is strictly, to me, secondary. NOT that I don't appreciate the hard work put into the outside of these planes at all. I really do. Especially since I have all the artistic capabilities of a small rock. I can't even draw a straight line with a ruler. If it weren't for all the painters out there providing all the different paints for planes, I'd have a hangar full of base models, probably all pure white, or something.

I really do appreciate the hard work put in on this, and every other freeware plane out there, whether I fly them or not. If it weren't for them, I'd only have the FSX default planes.

Keep up the good work. I will fly, and enjoy this plane when it's published.
Thank you!
Pat☺

Don't apologize Pat, I understood the intentions of your comments and appreciate your observations.

My post, in general, describes my approach to my development style. I am primarily focused on building the canvas for others to work out from. When I say that the SDK and tools are available for everyone, I'm really encouraging more people to dive in and learn the skill sets for the enjoyment and satisfaction derived from the process.

It has changed how I look at the entire simulation experience.

[roger-wilco-66]

Thanks for your hard work on the Invader (and other aircraft or sceneries), Gordon! To me, this always has been a great source of inspiration for my own efforts. You're among those who always raise the bar!

Luckily I had no problems with the latesst Win10 updates and 3dsmax, although I somehow think that it has gotten slower.

Cheers,
Mark

[gman5250]

Update on the K.

A Gmax/Microsoft SNAFU rendered my Gmax DOA, even with a new download and fresh install. Subsequently...I've brought the 3DStudio interior and exterior models up to snuff and the project is picking up where we left off prior to the glitch. The re-boot took a bit of time...I'll bill MS once Congress gets done with Mr. Zuckerberg and moves on to bigger fish. (sorry...).

Also, I've finally sorted out the source of my constant Win10 misery. Turns out its a nifty little feature MS uses to keep their various paying errr...clients updated on my every key stroke. I removed the offensive feature, and I'm able to actually get a bit of work done. Windows Compatibility Telemetry
More on that in a separate thread.

Back on point...
The props have been mapped specifically for the square blades, the nose and main gear have been massaged, tires are bump mapped, the radials have been poly optimized and other improvements are included. The model has been outfitted with TrueGlass rain effects and the lighting will support P3D Dynamic Lighting effects.

The model is performing beautifully in P3Dv4, and I'm currently working on squeezing the model into FSX.

A couple of happy snaps........dirt optional

[blanston12]

Looks fabulous Gordon! Still waiting with great anticipation.