Plane Design Lancaster in FSX

[ijay]

Have this aircraft and have replaced prop textures and glass, usual portover stuff!

My question is, is there any way to get rid of or tone down the shine slightly and the panel lines, i have one paint Dam Buster Lancaster AJ-S, 617 Sqn by Brian Hill which is painted without the "heavy" panel lines of the other repaints and in DXTBmp i see it has a different Alpha channel image, could this alpha be applied to the other paints or do the actual textures need to be redrawn?

It's not a deal breaker as i constantly fly this aircraft in FSX, was more just wondering



Ian

PS Have the FCS Lanc too, hence the sig pic!!

[DaveB]

I pretty much begged Ed to tone the shine down during development as I didn't feel it was realistic. However.. Ed being Ed.. he'd made his mind up on how he wanted it to look and that's the way it was released. I don't know if anything can be done about it at this stage.

ATB
DaveB

[ijay]

I pretty much begged Ed to tone the shine down during development as I didn't feel it was realistic. However.. Ed being Ed.. he'd made his mind up on how he wanted it to look and that's the way it was released. I don't know if anything can be done about it at this stage.

ATB
DaveB

As i say not a deal breaker, more just curious

[Desert Rat]

Try contacting/PMing RobH aka Brian hill to see if he can answer your question regarding the alpha channel.

PS. he's a real nice guy, so ask nicely, you never know.

[ijay]

Try contacting/PMing RobH aka Brian hill to see if he can answer your question regarding the alpha channel.

PS. he's a real nice guy, so ask nicely, you never know.

Thank you, i may do, but as i say not a major problem

[RobH]

Have this aircraft and have replaced prop textures and glass, usual portover stuff!

My question is, is there any way to get rid of or tone down the shine slightly and the panel lines, i have one paint Dam Buster Lancaster AJ-S, 617 Sqn by Brian Hill which is painted without the "heavy" panel lines of the other repaints and in DXTBmp i see it has a different Alpha channel image, could this alpha be applied to the other paints or do the actual textures need to be redrawn?

It's not a deal breaker as i constantly fly this aircraft in FSX, was more just wondering



Ian

PS Have the FCS Lanc too, hence the sig pic!!

Ijay, yes you should be able to add the alpha texture from my paints to the original textures with no problems. I'm pretty sure I added those to the stock paints on my computer in FS9. I made those alpha textures generic, so they can be used with any nose art or squadron markings. Good luck, let me know if you need any help.

[RobH]

Try contacting/PMing RobH aka Brian hill to see if he can answer your question regarding the alpha channel.

PS. he's a real nice guy, so ask nicely, you never know.

Thank you very much Jamie!

[ijay]

Ijay, yes you should be able to add the alpha texture from my paints to the original textures with no problems. I'm pretty sure I added those to the stock paints on my computer in FS9. I made those alpha textures generic, so they can be used with any nose art or squadron markings. Good luck, let me know if you need any help.

Thank you for the reply, have added them and the shine on the panel lines especially is now less!

And i would have PM'd you (seeing you're such a nice guy!)
Just rw gets in the way sometimes.

Obviously the grey panel lines in the original textures would need to be re-drawn i assume to tone them down anymore?

[BendyFlyer]

A quick question re the prop and glass textures - which ones did you use or find to replace the originals? The smokey glass and props are an annoyance but then all the textures needed reworking but the model itself is fine.

[ijay]

A quick question re the prop and glass textures - which ones did you use or find to replace the originals? The smokey glass and props are an annoyance but then all the textures needed reworking but the model itself is fine.

The glass texture i actually borrowed from the FCS Lancaster and the prop texture i used are from one of the Dambusters Lancs reworked for FSX by Ross McLennan and at Flightsim.com, think i used this one dambustersorperaid.zip , but would imagine they are all similar or the same.

[BendyFlyer]

The glass texture i actually borrowed from the FCS Lancaster and the prop texture i used are from one of the Dambusters Lancs reworked for FSX by Ross McLennan and at Flightsim.com, think i used this one dambustersorperaid.zip , but would imagine they are all similar or the same.

Thanks for the information. I have all of Ross's stuff on the Dambusters and have done a lot of the flights. Ross did an enormous amount of work getting up the bomb aimer's position, repaints etc. I am not sure what he is up to these days but we did converse for awhile re the Dambusters and the Lancaster.

I do think the Plane Design Lancaster is more accurate in the way it handles and flies and does require proper rudder control and bias on the climb which was a surprise as most models do not. If the textures could be redone somehow the model would become very realistic looking indeed (within portover limits). I have the Aeroplane Heaven version and it is not bad either but not as good in the handling and flight department.

Off to revisit and rework the Lanc. Thanks.

[JensOle]

For me the model looks to dated compared to what the FCS Lancaster gives me with a rather good VC and ok external model. Missing the deep Tallboy door though.. The flight model is something which can be fixed with tweaks and a lot easier to do something with than and old model. Plane design made great stuff, a shame they are not in the business any longer.

[DickB]

Thanks for this thread. I fly the PD Lanc all the time. The VC textures are indeed a bit dated, but in all other respects I still think it's the best flightsim Lancaster out there. For some reason I didn't pick up on Brian's repaints - I think I assumed they were just a lettering/nose art change. But having checked them out I agree that the external textures do look better overall than the originals. So I have now re-liveried my regular Mk III as "Grog's The Shot". Thanks all !

[BendyFlyer]

Jens and others with the PD Lanc. You can get all the Lanc variants via Ross McLennans great set of packages on the Dambusters (Parts 1, 2, 3) and the Tallboy version in the Tirpitz Raid (another download), plus there are also the 70th Anniversary packages. All the various textures for 617 Squadron are in these packages plus a variety of views and panel setups to allow for the special bomb sight used in the Dambuster raids. Ross's packages are not fully functional aircraft (PD allowed them to be provided but with limited functionality) but it seems you can put them into the PD folder sets without too much trouble. There are some portover issues doing this and I am currently working on these (artifacts from the exhausts show up in front of the props) but it may be an Acceleration issue. The main benefit of the Ross McLennan packages is that you will also get an updated air file and aircraft cfg files for the Merlin 28 versions. So all up you basically have all the various versions of the Lancaster from the Mark 1 through to the Mark III and the Special. You will have do a search via FlightSim.com for them but they are meticulously researched and include a formation tool as well as scenery for WWII airfields and the dams themselves.

I am not sure about the cockpit textures etc. If you have a look at original photographs of the Lancaster of the period they were all had a high to gloss black and very smart indeed and it is hard to see the panel lines as per these textures. The VC is pretty authentic but again the textures let it down and I am not sure if these can be improved, I am sure they can.

[DickB]

I actually found the updated flight model in the McLennan package not as good as the original, although I admit I have done some tweaking to that too.

Agree it would be good if the VC textures could be updated. Any offers ?

[JensOle]

Jens and others with the PD Lanc. You can get all the Lanc variants via Ross McLennans great set of packages on the Dambusters (Parts 1, 2, 3) and the Tallboy version in the Tirpitz Raid (another download), plus there are also the 70th Anniversary packages. All the various textures for 617 Squadron are in these packages plus a variety of views and panel setups to allow for the special bomb sight used in the Dambuster raids. Ross's packages are not fully functional aircraft (PD allowed them to be provided but with limited functionality) but it seems you can put them into the PD folder sets without too much trouble. There are some portover issues doing this and I am currently working on these (artifacts from the exhausts show up in front of the props) but it may be an Acceleration issue. The main benefit of the Ross McLennan packages is that you will also get an updated air file and aircraft cfg files for the Merlin 28 versions. So all up you basically have all the various versions of the Lancaster from the Mark 1 through to the Mark III and the Special. You will have do a search via FlightSim.com for them but they are meticulously researched and include a formation tool as well as scenery for WWII airfields and the dams themselves.

I am not sure about the cockpit textures etc. If you have a look at original photographs of the Lancaster of the period they were all had a high to gloss black and very smart indeed and it is hard to see the panel lines as per these textures. The VC is pretty authentic but again the textures let it down and I am not sure if these can be improved, I am sure they can.

As far as I know so is there no Tallboy version, either for the PD or FCS model. The Tirpitz package for the PD is the same standard B.1 model as in the original package, but there is a dropable Tallboy model included. The standard PD B.1 model is missing the deeper Tallboy bomb doors and does have the top turret, which had been removed on the Tirpitz attack Lancasters. For simulating a Tirpitz bomber (external model) the closest you will get is the FCS MR3 model (missing the deeper bay doors) which does not have the top turret.

As for engine power, that is easily edited in the stock cfg file without the need for additional files. Engine specs is a separate section.

The black underside was to my knowledge far from glossy, it was a dull matt black color made to minimize the shine from ground searchlight. I would imagine the current flying Lancasters have more glossy paint as it is easier to clean (as most warbirds).

[BendyFlyer]

Jens agree re engine configuration and mods. I am looking at them all but my main and most significant issue with all the available Lancasters (and I have them all but prefer the PD version) is the takeoff acceleration is excessive in other words too fast. This a 30 ton aircraft with a full load with propellers power plants it takes part of the run to get the props into the higher relative airflow so they achieve their correct angle of attack (static v dynamic thrust) and then there is rolling resistance and the Lanc had two very large single main wheels and having the engines get to full power to overcome the weight and increasing drag on the take off run was a bit more sedate initially than the FSX experience (I can say from my own aviation background that all multi-engine aircraft are the same and vary in degrees, they all get up and get going but the take off roll acceleration is well behind that of a pure turbine). These models all accelerate far too quickly initially a bit like a fighter and the Lanc whilst quite an impressive performer was still a 4 engine bomber. I am not sure how this can be fixed in FSX any ideas would be appreciated.

[dhasdell]

the takeoff acceleration is excessive in other words too fast

There's a very good sequence of a Lancaster taking off at around the 33 minute mark in "Night Bombers"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUQ7A19iPU0

[BendyFlyer]

There's a very good sequence of a Lancaster taking off at around the 33 minute mark in "Night Bombers"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUQ7A19iPU0

Thanks. Off to have a look. RAF Bomber Command in WW2 has always been a keen interest of mine, had the good fortune in the past to do an annual check ride for an ex RAAF Bomber Command pilot who had gone into business and owned a Baron for personal flying only. For an old bloke and at the time he would have been in his early seventies his flying was still solid as a rock a very competent pilot, handled everything thrown at him with aplomb, a great experience and one I always treasure. Oh and flying his Baron was good too a nicely equipped BE58.

[Sundog]

If you guys are interested, I can try and put together some files of the original Lancaster PS textures. I made the original external textures and I can look to see if I have any of the internal masters as Ed did those.

The FDE is only our second FDE and a new version would be much better based on what we learned from Jerry Beckwith's work on our Spitfire.

Also, Ed was working on a new Lanc awhile back, where every system worked as on the actual WW2 version and every position could be manned, including working turrets. But, real life...

[DickB]

If you guys are interested, I can try and put together some files of the original Lancaster PS textures. I made the original external textures and I can look to see if I have any of the internal masters as Ed did those.

The FDE is only our second FDE and a new version would be much better based on what we learned from Jerry Beckwith's work on our Spitfire.

Also, Ed was working on a new Lanc awhile back, where every system worked as on the actual WW2 version and every position could be manned, including working turrets. But, real life...

Yes please !!!

Agree what you say about Ed's new Lancaster. I did some testing on it, and it was going to be awesome. The nav and bomb aimer positions in particular.

[BendyFlyer]

Dick B and Sundog. This sounds very promising, painting is not my skill set but I am reviewing all the technical data of the Lancaster PD to see if that can be improved at all I have not laid my hands on a maintenance manual yet as this is where you get all the key data such as control surface movements, size, angles etc which are all catered for in the aircraft.cfg file. I am also investigating the acceleration issue.

[DickB]

Dick B and Sundog. This sounds very promising, painting is not my skill set but I am reviewing all the technical data of the Lancaster PD to see if that can be improved at all I have not laid my hands on a maintenance manual yet as this is where you get all the key data such as control surface movements, size, angles etc which are all catered for in the aircraft.cfg file. I am also investigating the acceleration issue.

I have all that data for the MkI and MKIII. PM me with what you need.

[Sundog]

Hi Bendyflyer. The key to getting a good FDE, from my and Ed's experience with what we learned from the Lancs and then applied to the Spit, is getting the propulsion dialed in first; Horsepower/blower/supercharger versus throttle and altitude and proper RPMs for those settings and the thrust from the prop. Once you know you have that set-up accurately, you can adjust the aerodynamics for the proper performance figures. If the propulsion model is off, you will always be way off somewhere in the flight model. Then you end up tweaking something in the propulsion model to fix something in the aero, which then throws everything off in another part of the flight envelope.

I'll get those PS kits put together within a week and upload them here.

[BendyFlyer]

Hi Bendyflyer. The key to getting a good FDE, from my and Ed's experience with what we learned from the Lancs and then applied to the Spit, is getting the propulsion dialed in first; Horsepower/blower/supercharger versus throttle and altitude and proper RPMs for those settings and the thrust from the prop. Once you know you have that set-up accurately, you can adjust the aerodynamics for the proper performance figures. If the propulsion model is off, you will always be way off somewhere in the flight model. Then you end up tweaking something in the propulsion model to fix something in the aero, which then throws everything off in another part of the flight envelope.

I'll get those PS kits put together within a week and upload them here.

Sundog, I agree completely. I managed this with Jens Kristensen's Hythe when converting it back to a Sunderland. My experience there validates what you say above. The fascinating thing I discovered doing the Sunderland (yes its nearly ready for release here at SOH) was that all but one of the published data sites or references on the internet re the Aircraft's dimensions etc was incorrect (not much but everywhere from the span to the aileron sizes, elevator angles etc etc) when referenced back to the original UK Air Ministry Maintenance Manual and Data, so I learnt a a valuable lesson, just because it is on the internet does not means its right and the way errors get copied across various websites and so on. I don't know if you can send me a PDF of the Lanc or would you rather I just list the data that needs to be checked? The engines are more of a problem only because various versions of the Merlins were used so I guess it is a question of deciding on a variant and sticking with that. I also discovered on another model the DHC-3 Otter that FSX does not have a reliable algorithim for dealing with propellor angles and in particular a peculiarity long gone from aviaiton of non feathering props that could have the pitch altered between fine and coarse but were not fully adjustable across the range so were not constant speed units once I figured that out a bit of tweaking on the cfg file produced the correct power and rpm outputs.

At the moment I am not doing much having come down with a serious dose of the flu and concentration is not high at the moment or enthusiasm for anything. Cheers.