Boeing E-3 Sentry AWACS
-
Awesome Work, Maybe he could add some windows too!!!
-
Maybe he could add some windows too!!!
Actually the mission compartments have no windows except over the wings and aft/fwd entry doors
-
Actually the mission compartments have no windows except over the wings and aft/fwd entry doors
I think he’s referring to the flightdeck windows.
-
good job skinning.
PumpyHead has volunteered to fix the mapping issues
please also detail canopy part, build a new, smoother radar disc, upgrade landing gear, and animate AAR door and control surfaces. thanks.
-
Does anyone know who the modeler for the E-3 is? Before I do any work on it, I’d like their permission. Also, if I have time to add the other engines, I’ll need the name of the modeler for the KC 135.
-
Does anyone know who the modeler for the E-3 is? Before I do any work on it, I’d like their permission. Also, if I have time to add the other engines, I’ll need the name of the modeler for the KC 135.
You may want to contact BaldEagle. He’s our Man.;)
RAM22
-
AFAIK the basic Boeing 707 airframe is converted from freeware MSFS model, probably FS98, by Fred.
extra parts, texture-mapping, and first sets of skins are done by Fred.the model has been available to SP/FF/OF for long time.
-
That is one amazing skin in every detail and I can only imagine how long that must have taken with all that texture area! Outstanding skin! Thank you.
-
Donwloading que es gerundio!!!
Thanks!!!
-
Here’s a suggestion for the refueller’s skin
That one was seen landing at Kadena
Here’s a nice reference of Korean & japanese based aircraft
http://forum.scramble.nl/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=79337 -
please also detail canopy part, build a new, smoother radar disc, upgrade landing gear, and animate AAR door and control surfaces. thanks.
Here’s my thought about the Sentry: It is not an aircraft you would generally see in theatre as you are flying unless you are flying HAVCAP. Even then, you would not normally fly close enough to see into the windows. Consequently, is it worth adding a 1,000 tirangles or so to add windows and a flight deck and detailed landing gear?
If the consensus is that it’s worthwhile doing so, I can probably trade off extra triangles for mapping LOD2 and LOD3 to the new skin and changing the LOD1 to LOD2 distance from 5,000 to 500 or so.
What’s everyone’s thoughts?
-
I don’t think it’s worth it. You point out exactly why and I agree.
Plus it’s not like you don’t have anything more worthwhile to do. It looks great as is.
RAM22
-
Here’s my thought about the Sentry: It is not an aircraft you would generally see in theatre as you are flying unless you are flying HAVCAP. Even then, you would not normally fly close enough to see into the windows. Consequently, is it worth adding a 1,000 tirangles or so to add windows and a flight deck and detailed landing gear?
If the consensus is that it’s worthwhile doing so, I can probably trade off extra triangles for mapping LOD2 and LOD3 to the new skin and changing the LOD1 to LOD2 distance from 5,000 to 500 or so.
What’s everyone’s thoughts?
I’ve never even seen a AWACS in campaign mode but I have had times when I’ve needed to refuel. If anything I think the focus should be on the Tanker.
-
I’ve never even seen a AWACS
I have as I did a couple HAVCAP before but I don’t do those anymore. On the other hand, I have seen a ton of RED Mainstays, they look great flaming, floating to the ground. LOL
RAM22
-
It is not listed as a model which is in need of a serious facelift, and / or of being high priority currently: https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?7220-Modelling-Organisation
-
I have a little off topic request before I testing. Because of bubble of of the main unmodeled issue is detecting the AWACS on RWR from big distance. What is your expectation if I dramatically increase the bubble distance for E-3? Because elimination of bubble slider my guess there is an upper limit for deaggreation regardless how big value is given to E-3. If there is no limit how serios issues can be caused by increasing the deaggregation dist. value besides the FPS drop? (100-120 nm for AWACS?)
-
I have to agree with Pumpy. I think a decent skin job and minor tweaking would suffice for this model.
Speaking of which… I’d like to thank Fred “Baldeagle” Balding for letting us modify his model. Pumpy is making a few minor improvements so we can have a proper E-3C (and perhaps an E-3D AEW1 as well):
I’ll be making new skins for the KC-135 in the coming days; if Pumpy wants to improve that one as well I think we shall be more than grateful.
-
Upgrading models is a p-u-r-e hobby.
3d modeller like you can do anything you like but - no promise BMS want have it in DB.I’ve checked the E-3 lod…imho the radar disc is the first priority to upgrade, too boxy. the cockpit area can be upgraded easily, thanks to original FS modeller. rudder can be animated. tailflat and elevator needs a new build. the gear can be animated. and the mainwing is the most complex to upgrade…maybe just animate flaps.
-
rudder can be animated. tailflat and elevator needs a new build. the gear can be animated. and the mainwing is the most complex to upgrade…maybe just animate flaps.
Hi ccc,
The model already has most surfaces on DOF’s. Slats and flaps are not, but the ailerons are. Are flaps and gear animations really necessary for a plane that is in the air already when you enter the sim? Anyway, to add all the stuff the model designation must change from “simple” to “complex”.
Does anyone on BMS team know if changing simple to complex causes any hits to fps?
-
Are flaps and gear animations really necessary for a plane that is in the air already when you enter the sim?
Agree!
Just adding the bulges/fairings for additional sensors, fixing the leading edges’ texture overlapping and maybe polishing the rotodome a bit is more than enough for this particular model, IMHO. The skin alone already does a pretty good job enhancing the current model as it is.