'Shooting the Duck'

[Bomber_12th]

Some screenshots of the superb new freeware Grumman Duck.

[big-mike]

Great shots!
Michael

[RobH]

Excellent shots John!

[OleBoy]

Nice shots indeed. I happen to like this Ducks feathers myself :ernae:

[res non verba]

very nice duck!

:ernae:

[fsafranek]

Thanks for the screenshots. I was hoping someone would post one of how she sits in the water.
:ernae:

[dvj]

These are all great shots. This is such a great model. I especially like the first one. BTW. My Duck sits much lower in the water toward the tail. Did you adjust your CG contact point?

[beana51]

Yes Nice pics....Great "QUACK,QUACK,QUACK"......So to is ROBH's fine MUSTANG!..
This RAUCH MUSTANG is a ZOOOMER BOOOMER also!...Cheers1

[Cees Donker]

The file is removed from the Avsim.ru site!

Cees

[Z-IanMCD]

The file is removed from the Avsim.ru site!

Cees

Pitty, I like the rivets on this one!!

[Bomber_12th]

Wow, I had forgotten about this thread! (Note that I started it before the whole 'alleged event', which should have never happened, began). Thank you all for the comments! The aircraft is extremely photogenic, at least that I find...personally I can't get enough of it, as I've been a long-time 'Duck fan', and there is finally one that I really, really like.

Speaking of the way she sits in the water - I didn't do any .CFG tweaks, I simply installed the FSX Aircraft.cfg files that come separately with the original download. (Note that with the FSX Aircraft.cfg files installed, you have to change the Panel entries in the J2F-4 duck Aircraft.cfg file, erasing the 1's, otherwise the J2F-4 variants won't show up)

Here are some other screenshots I have compiled together of my favorite variant in the pack, a depiction of Chuck Greenhill's J2F-4, which was at Pearl Harbor at the time of the infamous attack, and is today painted exactly as it was at that time.

A very fine, and a very accurate rendition of the Grumman Duck, if there ever was one.

[Bomber_12th]

And two more that I like, as posted elsewhere.

BTW, I've got Swingman's e-mail still from the original download files, which I still have as well, so if no one else has yet, I plan on sending him an e-mail this afternoon, which will hopefully help to push forward the re-release of this fantastic aircraft, if it isn't already in motion.

[Lateral-G]

So the download is available again?

where?

[Z-AZ1USN]

I thought it was determined that this "freeware" duck was in fact payware duck.
It walks like a duck, flys like a duck, but is it a free duck? I'm confused.

Please enlighten....

[Bruce Thompson]

Pleased to hear that Bomber_12th it is a very nice model.
I have tried it with the sound from the old Vega and quite like it.

Pleased for Swingman also.

[Bomber_12th]

I was hoping that this wouldn't be brought up in this thread, but I'll just say this...

It is clear as day (as shown in my later thread) that this freeware Grumman Duck, as produced by SWingman, has nothing to do what-so-ever with the payware Grumman Duck by IcarusGold. Why the allegation was made by the representative of that company, is anyone's guess at this point. The only reason why it was removed from the site that it was available at, is due to that single, unsupported directive.

At this time, it appears that the files are still not available.

I have done what little I can do, to try and clear that up here in the forums. I have also just sent an e-mail to SWingman, and I am hopeful that his excellent gift to our community will be restored/re-released as soon as possible, so for those who had yet to be able to download it, can. His work is only deserving of praise and enjoyment, and despite never corresponding with the developer of this aircraft before, I can't help but feel the need to restore the wishes he had for this production of his, and that is to have it freely available (justifiably so!) to the flight sim community.

Furthermore, while the subject matter (aircraft type) of this topic might not be important to everyone, I hope that the issue behind this situation is.

[Z-IanMCD]

Mate, this is freeware!! No worries here!

I don't think SOH forums would let pirated software be complimented on!!

[Cirrus N210MS]

cant get the J2F4 to show up

[Bruce Thompson]

cant get the J2F4 to show up

Please read post No 11 in this thread, it mentions it in there.

Bruce

[wombat666]

I thought it was determined that this "freeware" duck was in fact payware duck.
It walks like a duck, flys like a duck, but is it a free duck? I'm confused.

Please enlighten....

Investigations are ongoing.

[dvj]

Wow, I had forgotten about this thread! (Note that I started it before the whole 'alleged event', which should have never happened, began). Thank you all for the comments! The aircraft is extremely photogenic, at least that I find...personally I can't get enough of it, as I've been a long-time 'Duck fan', and there is finally one that I really, really like.

Speaking of the way she sits in the water - I didn't do any .CFG tweaks, I simply installed the FSX Aircraft.cfg files that come separately with the original download. (Note that with the FSX Aircraft.cfg files installed, you have to change the Panel entries in the J2F-4 duck Aircraft.cfg file, erasing the 1's, otherwise the J2F-4 variants won't show up)

Here are some other screenshots I have compiled together of my favorite variant in the pack, a depiction of Chuck Greenhill's J2F-4, which was at Pearl Harbor at the time of the infamous attack, and is today painted exactly as it was at that time.

A very fine, and a very accurate rendition of the Grumman Duck, if there ever was one.

I did make a slight point adjustment to the float position to raise up the rear a wee bit. And.... I added the A2A Aircraft Factory Corsair sound set to complete my mods. Talk about big radial sound filling the house. Wow! What a model. Too bad about the big flap over this freeware. I hope it gets resolved soon as this is a wonderful freeware model.

dvj

[Bomber_12th]

Actually, if you have a good/accurate Wildcat soundset (similar gear sound too I would imagine), or even a T-28 soundset, it would go very well with this aircraft.

Some good videos to watch here of the real articles (good sound):

Kermit Weeks' "Candy Clipper":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCI6SOJ84yo
Startup:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5qfIQd7Jmw

[Lawman]

Edit: Oops, I thought I'd posted my comment in the relevant thread, but I see now that one is closed. Don't want to derail this one and get it closed too. Sorry, everyone.

[michael davies]

I thought it was determined that this "freeware" duck was in fact payware duck.
It walks like a duck, flys like a duck, but is it a free duck? I'm confused.

Please enlighten....

There exists some debate as to whether the freeware duck is a modified payware Duck, ie someone grabbed the payware and ran it through a mesh decompiler and produced this, I've seen it done before with minor changes to throw people off the scent, but the changes needed to produce the freeware one make it almost certain its a bonafida mesh, or in more simpler terms, the alleged rework to throw people off the scent is so dramatic it'd have been easier to make it a fresh yourself. Personally if your clever enough to make the changes then your clever enough to make your own, same mesh or not it'll be the mapping which will tell you the most, clones generally keep the same mapping, especially large surface areas. The legality and legitimacy of the above debate is still being discussed behind closed doors I believe.

I've been through the clone loop many times before, at one time it was about all I did at Alphasim, especially when a similar model suddenly appeared as freeware a few weeks after ours was released, only one was confirmed as genuine when the source files were 'accidentally' given away LOL, for a different platform it must be said, but it all got smoothed over in the end , as I'm sure this will.

Best

Michael

Addendum, note to self, read all the thread before replying! [palm slap] apologise for partial reiteration of some aspects.

[Willy]

I've seen the texture mapping for both. They're not anywhere near the same. They're so far off that one takes one bitmap for exterior textures, the other takes three bitmaps to cover the exterior.