SOH Team Project - Grumman Tracker, Trader, Tracer - Page 23
Page 23 of 119 FirstFirst ... 1315161718192021222324252627282930313373 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 575 of 2967

Thread: SOH Team Project - Grumman Tracker, Trader, Tracer

  1. #551
    Quote Originally Posted by Milton Shupe View Post
    .....it seems that I need to rebuild the fuselage to include the flatter bottom and bulged top, and....
    OK, I guess by the "bulged top" you mean what I referred to as the "fairings" behind the side-cockpit-windows? Since you are not modeling the interior (beyond the cockpit), can't you simply add a fairing to the already-constructed fuselage?

    - H52
    A tad high and a tad hot is better than a tad low and a tad slow - H52

  2. #552
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    A bunch of color profiles from squadron-signal.
    Lazarus, I've D/L'd the Profiles Zip file five times and it always cuts off at 6 MB rather than continue to the full 10.4 MB.

    Is anyone else having this problem?

    If so, can you re-upload the file, please?

    - H52
    A tad high and a tad hot is better than a tad low and a tad slow - H52

  3. #553
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    I know where the boot disc goes in. You won't like it.....

    Oh, man. you made coffee come out my nose!
    Lazarus - I realize that we hardly know each other, but, really?

  4. #554
    Quote Originally Posted by Milton Shupe View Post
    I thought that might be the case; it really urks me that I have read no mention of this in any of the "differences" docs or websites, and it doesn't show clearly on the 3-views.
    After all the hours I now have in the S2F-3, essentially done for my part, it seems that I need to rebuild the fuselage to include the flatter bottom and bulged top, and therefore the interior-vc, windows, doors, animations, and remap it all.
    This is very frustrating.

    I guess the good news is that I haven't sent the texture templates out to the painters yet.

    Milton,

    I found a brief reference to it on the Tailhook Topics blog as follows. "The TF-1 had a deeper and wider fuselage than the S2F-1 but shared its wing and vertical fin/rudder. It had the same horizontal tail as the S2F-2 and -3. One result of using the S2F wing is that there is no deice boot where the searchlight was located on the ASW aircraft" The E-1 was derived from the TF-1 (C-1A).

    The blogs link is http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2...more-time.html

    This is but one entry pertaining to the Stoof and it's progeny.

    Save your current model to be shortened and used as the basis for the C-1A!

    I have posted a comment on that blog to try and find out how much of a difference between the two. If I find out I'll post the info.

    I thought it looked a little round and smooth but wasn't sure from the views. Don't be discouraged, this is a fantastic project!

    Dave

  5. #555
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    Hawkeye posted this picture of my favorite Trader. But then I got a ride in it just before it's retirement to the Naval Aviation Museum. When one talks of the Lexington's Trader, this is the one that I think of.
    Let Being Helpful Be More Important Than Being Right.

  6. #556
    Charter Member 2012 nigel richards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Greece
    Age
    66
    Posts
    2,498
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Willy View Post
    But then I got a ride in it just before it's retirement to the Naval Aviation Museum. When one talks of the Lexington's Trader, this is the one that I think of.
    lucky man Willy. :salute:

    Lexington's Trader paint scheme? Yeah, I could live with that.
    Most men often say what they think!
    An honest man usually means what he says!
    A gentleman always says what he means!

    "Αίεν Υψικρατείν "

    A fool is not he who asks a simple question, but he who would simply have its asking denied. (Richards 2012)

  7. #557
    yup, be able to paint it soon.... paintkit is 99.999999% done, just gotta finalise the layering and flatten a few layers down and then it's off to uncle Milton for you 'oiks' to get your grubby paws on as for today.... i'm off to the Skydive Centre got some packing and jumping to do.... for once.... (Been 5mo since my last jump) so Milton, expect Kit tomorrow or Saturday!.... or maybe even late tonight at a severe push:salute:

  8. #558
    Members +
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Posts
    1,461
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by hawkeye52 View Post
    Lazarus, I've D/L'd the Profiles Zip file five times and it always cuts off at 6 MB rather than continue to the full 10.4 MB.

    Is anyone else having this problem?

    If so, can you re-upload the file, please?

    - H52
    Any one else getting an error on these?

  9. #559
    Charter Member 2012 nigel richards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Greece
    Age
    66
    Posts
    2,498
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    Any one else getting an error on these?
    Unfortunately too often Lazarus. Someone recently was kind enough to send me a textures folder; it must have taken 12 or so attempts!

    As you state, it just kept 'completing' someway short of the actual full download.

    I got it eventually, so just keep punching that download button!
    Most men often say what they think!
    An honest man usually means what he says!
    A gentleman always says what he means!

    "Αίεν Υψικρατείν "

    A fool is not he who asks a simple question, but he who would simply have its asking denied. (Richards 2012)

  10. #560
    Quote Originally Posted by p3aewguy View Post
    Milton,

    I found a brief reference to it on the Tailhook Topics blog as follows. "The TF-1 had a deeper and wider fuselage than the S2F-1 but shared its wing and vertical fin/rudder. It had the same horizontal tail as the S2F-2 and -3. One result of using the S2F wing is that there is no deice boot where the searchlight was located on the ASW aircraft" The E-1 was derived from the TF-1 (C-1A).

    The blogs link is http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2...more-time.html

    This is but one entry pertaining to the Stoof and it's progeny.

    Save your current model to be shortened and used as the basis for the C-1A!

    I have posted a comment on that blog to try and find out how much of a difference between the two. If I find out I'll post the info.

    I thought it looked a little round and smooth but wasn't sure from the views. Don't be discouraged, this is a fantastic project!

    Dave
    Thank you Dave for that. The C-1A will be done and parts from each of what I have done will be useable to do that and the S2F-1 (Jan Visser volunteered to do this variant).
    Not sure yet how I will proceed on the -3.

    Thanks to everyone for the support; it is most appreciated.
    Milton Shupe
    FS9/FSX Modeler Hack

    My Uploads at SOH - Here
    Video Tutorials - Gmax for Beginners

  11. #561
    Lazarus, I have an S2F-3 (S-2E) 3-view which shows a section through the upper bulge about 2-feet aft of the cockpit side-window. Scaling off the drawing (always a bad idea!), the bulge appears to be 5 to 6 inches wider than the frame (below the lap line). Does that match what you know?

    - H52

  12. #562
    Members +
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Posts
    1,461
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by hawkeye52 View Post
    Lazarus, I have an S2F-3 (S-2E) 3-view which shows a section through the upper bulge about 2-feet aft of the cockpit side-window. Scaling off the drawing (always a bad idea!), the bulge appears to be 5 to 6 inches wider than the frame (below the lap line). Does that match what you know?

    - H52
    At least that. Its pretty distinct. Which is the TF-1? We used a number of TS-2A's. The airframe was identical to the S-2A/CS2F-1 except that all the DeHavilland built birds had the early style fastback aft nacelles, where as Grumman built machines used the flat top fastback nacelles on the very early production block,then switched to the 'Hawksbill' high to nacelles- more room for larger tube and a few kts faster in cruise.

  13. #563
    Members +
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Posts
    1,461
    Blog Entries
    1

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    At least that. Its pretty distinct. Which is the TF-1? We used a number of TS-2A's. The airframe was identical to the S-2A/CS2F-1 except that all the DeHavilland built birds had the early style fastback aft nacelles, where as Grumman built machines used the flat top fastback nacelles on the very early production block,then switched to the 'Hawksbill' high to nacelles- more room for larger tube and a few kts faster in cruise.
    edit: section C lokslike a bulge at the top of the torp bay, its not. Thats the piano hinge og the door. It stands proud a bit, but only as a half round of the hinge.
    The zip is downloading though. I think the systemwas feeling mal-adjusted last night.Kept kicking me off as soon as I went into the message manager. Doing it again. The only way I can stay logged is by reply with quote.

  14. #564
    Members +
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Posts
    1,461
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    edit: section C lokslike a bulge at the top of the torp bay, its not. Thats the piano hinge og the door. It stands proud a bit, but only as a half round of the hinge.
    The zip is downloading though. I think the systemwas feeling mal-adjusted last night.Kept kicking me off as soon as I went into the message manager. Doing it again. The only way I can stay logged is by reply with quote.
    Yup. kicks me out except for quote function. I think the confusion about fusilage width is due to variations in cockpit side bubble windows. There were a few variations in depth of the bulge- either based on who manufactued 'em, or maybe operational considerations. I could see no rhyme or reason. The structure and dimensions were constant except for model diferences noted. C/S2F-1 to S-2C were identical in dimension except for-later US production used the hawksbill aft nacelle, and the bulged stores bay of nuclear capable('Betty' depth bomb) -C's. S-2E/G's were a bit longer, more span across the wing and stab, rounded tips.

  15. #565
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    At least that. Its pretty distinct. Which is the TF-1? We used a number of TS-2A's. The airframe was identical to the S-2A/CS2F-1 except that all the DeHavilland built birds had the early style fastback aft nacelles, where as Grumman built machines used the flat top fastback nacelles on the very early production block,then switched to the 'Hawksbill' high to nacelles- more room for larger tube and a few kts faster in cruise.
    The TF-1 is the C-1A.

    Dave

  16. #566
    "...the bulge appears to be 5 to 6 inches wider than the frame (below the lap line)."
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    At least that. Its pretty distinct.
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    Which is the TF-1? We used a number of TS-2A's.
    As p3aewguy stated, TF-1 = C-1A. Prior to September 1962 the designation was TF-1. Post Sep.'62 the utility conversion of the S2F-1 became the TS-2A; the S2F-1 itself became the S-2A. Confusing, ain't it?

    You can thank then-Secy of Defense McNamara.
    This should help:
    Aircraft Designations
    and
    Popular Names

    Background on the Evolution of Aircraft Designations

    http://www.history.navy.mil/avh-1910/APP05.PDF

    The S-2 is on p. 24


    Lazarus, in the side-view u posted, note that sections "C" and "D" are mislabeled.

    - H52
    A tad high and a tad hot is better than a tad low and a tad slow - H52

  17. #567
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    Navy designations confused McNamara so he ordered the change to the USAF system. I found the old Navy system to make more sense than the USAF system to me anyways.
    Let Being Helpful Be More Important Than Being Right.

  18. #568

    Aircraft Designations - Old and New

    Here is a summary on Naval aircraft...for us more "visual" types!

    BTW, the original list was on BuWeps Instruction 13100.7 of September 18, 1962. No clue if it is somewhere on The Net.

    Attachment 49208Attachment 49209Attachment 49210Attachment 49211- H52
    A tad high and a tad hot is better than a tad low and a tad slow - H52

  19. #569
    Quote Originally Posted by Willy View Post
    Navy designations confused McNamara so he ordered the change to the USAF system. I found the old Navy system to make more sense than the USAF system to me anyways.
    I don't know if the story is apocryphal or not, but apparently he is supposed to have been in an Air Force briefing, discussing their new C-130 transport, then in the afternoon he went to a Navy briefing where they were discussing their new transport, the GV-1; he turned to one of his aides & said (very loudly) that the projects sounded remarkably similar, couldn't the two services co-operate - a rather embarrassed aide had to explain to him that they were, in fact, exactly the same aircraft - after that the change was inevitable.
    Andy

  20. #570
    Members +
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Posts
    1,461
    Blog Entries
    1
    My bad. didn't see that. So the bulge on that section is the avioncs/radar cooling scoop. Right about the C-1. Whole new hull, wider, fatter. deeper to give a bit more room under the wing box .

  21. #571
    ok paintkit is done for my liking, currently it's 2048*2048 Milton.... will need reducing to 50% scale for FS9 if you want me to do that for you let me know :salute:

  22. #572
    Quote Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
    At least that. Its pretty distinct. Which is the TF-1? We used a number of TS-2A's. The airframe was identical to the S-2A/CS2F-1 except that all the DeHavilland built birds had the early style fastback aft nacelles, where as Grumman built machines used the flat top fastback nacelles on the very early production block,then switched to the 'Hawksbill' high to nacelles- more room for larger tube and a few kts faster in cruise.
    Yes, I have this 3-view as well. Aside from the labeling error, you might also pay attention to the bottom view that shows 2 bomb bay doors. :-/

    There are lots of errors in any 3-view, not the least of them is the left and right sides rarely mirror each other, and the opposing views, say top versus bottom, or left versus right views do not match each other in shape, height, or width. It's just something we developers have to live with and adjust to accordingly.
    Then when scaling up the 3-views to real world dimensions, the lines drawn are about 4" wide. So a 4" error on both sides can yield quite the spectacle if not careful. We usually model one side then mirror it for the other side so that at least we have symmetry. And although we can model to the 1/1000th of a meter, those lines are still 4" wide. There is just no substitute for having the aircraft in your back yard.

    In all fairness to the craft of doing the 3-views, I believe we have better tools for modeling than they have for converting their raw drawings to 3-views.

    EDIT: adding another 3_view I thought you might like pouring over. You might note that this drawing also shows 2 bomb doors. That's why I ended up doing the doors 3 times before I got them right, with only one set on the port side. All the other drawings also show 2 sets of doors.

    EDIT2: Now note the S2F-1 drawing that shows that nice rounded bottom. Fiddle sticks!

    EDIT3: Now note the nice flat bottom of the CS2F-2 from this excellent web site: http://jproc.ca/rrp/rrp3/tracker_exterior_features.html

    My error in producing the S2F-3 was not from the 3-views however. I modified the E-1B to create it, and although I flattened the bottom (side view), I did not "un-round" it. So, I will correct the bottom and the forward top bulge.
    Milton Shupe
    FS9/FSX Modeler Hack

    My Uploads at SOH - Here
    Video Tutorials - Gmax for Beginners

  23. #573
    Quote Originally Posted by Smoothie View Post
    ok paintkit is done for my liking, currently it's 2048*2048 Milton.... will need reducing to 50% scale for FS9 if you want me to do that for you let me know :salute:
    Well thank you sir

    Actually, I do not use the paint kit so it is not an issue for me. I suspect that texture artists will have no trouble modifying them for their work however.
    Milton Shupe
    FS9/FSX Modeler Hack

    My Uploads at SOH - Here
    Video Tutorials - Gmax for Beginners

  24. #574
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    On what few paints I do, I prefer to paint in oversize, then adjust down to fit.
    Let Being Helpful Be More Important Than Being Right.

  25. #575
    Quote Originally Posted by Willy View Post
    On what few paints I do, I prefer to paint in oversize, then adjust down to fit.
    That's exactly what I did when making skins for F4U Corsairs in Il-2: Pacific Fighters and Il-2: 1946. It's an extra step, but I though it made making detailed skins a little easier as I wasn't working with blurry stencils or textures until finished and scaled down to 1024 x 1024.
    My computer: ABS Gladiator Gaming PC featuring an Intel 10700F CPU, EVGA CLC-240 AIO cooler (dead fans replaced with Noctua fans), Asus Tuf Gaming B460M Plus motherboard, 16GB DDR4-3000 RAM, 1 TB NVMe SSD, EVGA RTX3070 FTW3 video card, dead EVGA 750 watt power supply replaced with Antec 900 watt PSU.

Similar Threads

  1. SOH Team Project - Grumman Tracker, Trader, Tracer works great ..
    By newcomer in forum FSX General Discussion
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: October 4th, 2016, 09:53
  2. Are there any voicepack mods for Tracker, Trader and Tracer?
    By Maarten - in forum FS 2002/2004 General Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: May 8th, 2012, 23:41
  3. Milton Shupe and SOH Team Project awesome Grumman Tracker!
    By TuFun in forum FSX General Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: February 22nd, 2012, 09:33
  4. Grumman Tracker, Trader, Tracer FSX Prop Fix
    By Cirrus N210MS in forum Warbirds Library
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 21st, 2012, 04:36
  5. What have you Gentlemen...Grumman Trader anyone?
    By nigel richards in forum FS 2002/2004 General Discussion
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: August 6th, 2011, 15:28

Members who have read this thread: 131

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •