aw33com

I don't think there are Radar bugs at all. I think this radar as well as this entire aircraft is simply not working. This whole thing needs a rewrite. There are so many foolish radar bugs that are not listed here that it's crazy. Trust me I have tons of respect for people who develop these, and I know the amount of work, but come on, fly the aircraft in a busy environment like GS server with 5 friendlies around you and 3 enemies, and you will see it's unflyable. And I can freaken fly an fighter. Things change every patch. Behavior, settings, names, etc. It's crazy. Just sit down, scrap the whole radar thing and make a simple consistent radar framework and stick to it. Horizontal scan can't lock at 5nm, but it paints 20nm, even though it should paint 10nm. Once you cycle through the modes it goes from 10nm to 20nm for no reason. Every time it finally locks on a 530 I am in range for a Magic as well. Those are not bugs. This is simply lack of any kind of care. No company should be able to sell anything new until old items are fixed.

Thank you for the picture. You have no idea how close up pictures help in modeling. You will call me crazy I started to reconstruct the parts: Maybe this will never work, but I don't want the parts to be painted. I want them to be real.

Thanks for kind words. I am looking for a good close up side picture of the ASO-2V Decoy Dispenser. The one that is most forward by the anti collision light. If anyone has it by a chance. Can't find a single good pic online to see the exact details.

Small Update. I am flying my model in DCS, but I hit tons of modeling problems. Setbacks, tons of research, and looking for solutions. Big mistake I made was not to use the ED Model Viewer, or the DCS itself right from the start. Now I know what it actually looks like in the SIM and what I need to work on. I have one major modeling problem and kind of have no solution for it. But there are also good news. Tons of details, which btw got me in trouble, does look good in DCS. Other modules do not model flanges and small details (they paint them). I did that and I noticed it shows up nicely in DCS and gives a real feel to it. I will leave you with few pictures today and I will do a write up on the problems I'm facing and some approaches I'm taking. I swear If I talked to someone for 10 minutes who has done a module for DCS, I would be done with mine. I am basically fighting the modeling tool and improvising, because I simply don't know better. I'll get there, but it feels like I'm doing this with an ax, and it takes so long. Here I'm using SU-25T cockpit:

Is there an advantage to using MAX 2017? I started the project few weeks ago where MAX 2016 was the latest support version.

Mobius, I honestly want to make this the most realistic module ever with a good flight model. That is my first goal, as that is what I enjoy the most in DCS. If I ever accomplish that, like it, people like it, and ED ever likes it, I will release it just like other modules. It would have to be really really good. So I'm can't say as of now until I finish it. I'm not even thinking about it yet. If I ever fail I will give it away to whoever wants it. I'm doing the instrumentation and pitot heads now. Not sure if this is not too much detail though. I think once I finish modeling this I will start all over and do it the right away as I will probably be smarter at the end of the process.

KLON-54 type laser range finder.

Got tons of interesting pics from alieneye. Some cockpit pics with flood lights on I have never seen before. Thanks.

Struggling with organic modeling the RWR section. Converting from M3 to M4 took me all day to get to this point. This is first time where I had to do some organic stuff. I had a feeling it won't be easy to eye ball those angels. Hopefully will finish this tomorrow. I need for find a woman or visit Growling Sidewinder to put my worries to rest for now.

Cool. Btw, those are good pics, do you have more?

OK, I did the tail, RWR, ECM, Tailcone, and Transponder, but I can't figure out what that probe is at the end. Anyone know?

Shape coming out the way I wanted it. Not gonna lie, it is going slow for now as I'm learning the tool. Some simple stuff takes me hours to figure out, but I noticed I'm getting faster at it. It seems in 3ds Max the more simplistic I am the better it comes out. Not sure if that's how it works, but that's how I'm keeping it for now.

...and here is the beauty, this one is my own creation:

Update: After 7 days of restoring plans for Su-17 and figuring out 3ds Max, I roughly loaded the sections into the tool. I will write more about the plans tomorrow. Just sharing few pictures and a cool thing I invented. It turns out there is no real way to insert blueprints into 3ds Max and make them scale up to real world measurements. Every tutorial or advice suggest to load them by pixel sizes and scale up the blueprints to some kind of box/rectangle with a given length. That is the most idiotic thing I have every seen in software maybe since the 90's. The second I saw people put in pixels into x and y I knew there's got to be a better way. I invented the way using pure ruler and mathematics. I will do a video on that one as I'm sure it will help a lot of people. Anyway attached are few rough photos, this is not final, but enough for today. My rant on plans will probably be bigger as that gave me really hard time:)

Update: My "step back" is finished. I completed Acro Sport 1 as much as I wanted it. I learned a lot. Still missing tons of info on modeling as I self thought myself 3ds Max. Now I need to research theory behind best practices for modeling. There is 1 thing that gives me hard time in 3ds Max. I think it is called Proportional Editing, or Organic modeling. It has to do with rounded surfaces. I did my work vert by vert. That obviously is not going to work. I saw something in Blender called Proportional Editing. Now I'm hoping something like that exists in 3ds Max. As that is the hardest part about modeling. You have to Eye Ball the rounded parts, and you somehow have to get the curves correct on those shapes/objects. That to me is difficult. On Su-17 existing models: There are Su-17 models out there for purchase, but I was not impressed with the level of detail on those models. I also collected few Su-17 plans and it seems lots of shapes and parts is Eye Balled. It should be good enough for DCS, but there's got to be a better way to duplicate the aircraft. So the next week I'm going to devote to researching the best way to model, learn few things I'm missing, find out best approaches, and then tackle Su-17. Here is my Acro Sport 1 model. It has many mistakes, so I'm glad I did him first. If I spent 1 more week on this guy I would get him to Christen Eagle II level type of detail. My Acro Sport plans called for much simpler shapes than in reality, but the model is close enough and updatabale if I want to one day. In case you are wondering all moving parts like tail, tail wheel, ailerons, and etc of the aircraft move around their pivots. ...and here is my Sections pic from Max: Thanks everyone for info, I will talk to him, I really like how open he is with sharing his info. I already have his documents printed out and I'm reading through his paper.

Vanir, Thanks for the info. I am interested in those 2 things from you: 1. SPPU22 pod installed backwards. 2. "Sukhoi says it definitely supports Archers" Do you have pictures maybe of SPPU22 backwards or Archers strapped anywhere on Fitters? Would love to have them. The Fitter was the ultimate RED ground pounder aircraft from 70's to 2000's (and more). Each country had their own "upgrades". There is so much wrong data out there about Fitters, because of all those versions and upgrades. If I ever do the module I will choose a specific model and stick with the original versions. I would need to see pictures of everything, otherwise in general I don't trust the online info. For example there were never 4,000 Su17s in "naval aviation" as total produced Su17s was 2,867.

Sorry about that. I was tired last night. That was of MIG23.

For the lovers of the aircraft, I found some kind of access to SU-17M4. Here are few pics:

I want to get to this level of details:

Update: I took a step back. Was not happy with my 3d modeling on the P-47 tutorial, so I started doing another plane as a learning excerise. I learned a lot, but will need a week or 2 to be able to learn how to design details. So far I learned how to make the model much smoother and how to make movable parts, and I have a better overall understanding of 3d Max. Here is where I am with the Acro Sport: Maybe in the end this will become a how to thread and I will be able to post how I did it step by step.

Learned how to texture the model and how to create glass canopies. Now the hard part to make it fly in DCS.

Few Cool Facts about SU-17: 1. At Sea Level Su-17M3 IS AS FAST as SU-27 (Flanker). 2. Su-17M was the best performer of them all. Su-17M4 was slower due to fixed cone. 3. There were 24 official variants. 4. Besides the well known reconnaissance-configured Su-17 there were purposely build SEAD Configured Su-17M3s. 5. Almost all exported Su-17M4s were differently configured. It's super hard to find pictures with consistent loadouts. Each country configured their Su-17s differently. Some modified the center wing pylon to carry 2 R-60Ms on each, and some modified the most outer pylon to do that. Most customers did not carry the 2 hard points that were at the back of the fuselage. 6. I have never found a picture where Su-17 would carry Kh-29 missile on a wing pylon. 7. The aircraft has 12 hard points, but it's super hard to find them in this configuration. 8. Poland has the most advanced Su-22s with Israel and French companies updating their avionics. Those airplanes are known as Su-17M5 in many sources, but some contradict that. Poland just announced to upgrade their fleet for 10 more years, but I'm hearing it's not happening. 9. Even though the aircraft was build to carry R-73 Archers, customers do not carry them. 10. The number of versions, and country configuration creates a lot of contradicting information online. Including NATO names themselves are confusing, not really matching Russian versions. Much better research and model selection would be required to build this module.

Update. I created my first thing in 3d: P-47 Will learn 3ds Max now and do SU-17 in 3d. Need few days to learn the tool first. Doing p-47 got me somehow familiar with it, but I need like 10 days of learning it.

I knew I could count on you :) You made my day, I'm so happy. I don't have PG so I took a break from DDCS and started doing this. Never done 3d modeling, but I already started doing a model of a simple airplane. It's coming out, but I'm obviously improvising a bit. Going to Florida in 6 days. Once I come back I'll finish the simple P-47 model. If it comes out I'll post and ask for advice on how to attack Su-22 modeling. Thanks for now.

Yeah, are you Mobius?