A4 Skyhawk

[Revan]

Any status on the port into DCS?

[Sceptre]

It's a shame New Zealand got rid of the Skyhawks... not that we needed them but they were cool anyway :)

[dumgrunt]

dont worry mate, the NZDF is really just the "fourth arm" of the ADF ;)

 

i'd give my left nut to get an electric rat. maybe partner with an existing 3rd party developer?

[pepin1234]

nice. I hope you get do it

[Chief1942]

Spent almost my entire time in USMC working on that plane. Went from the A4D-2n originally to the newer designated A-4C, A-4D, A-4E. Was an airframes mech but actually did everything from ordinance to hydraulics on that plane. Left the engine stuff to the Jet Mechs as that's the way the pilots wanted it. My last unit before dischage in 1964 was VMA-311 that was transitioning to all A-4E's on their way to deploying to VietNam.

[southernrebel]

that means you where station at El Toro. Santa Anna Calif. if you where, my dad retired from there in64. Enlisted pilot, one of the last. used to watch the A-4 evolve and Blue Angles fly there.

[Chief1942]

Southernrebel,

El Toro it was. Started there in a transitional FJ-4 "Fury" squadron which were being exchanged for the newer A-4's. Spent a couple of years in VMA-121 and my final outfit was VMA-311. Loved all the trips to Yuma for weapons delivery practice for the pilots as well as NAS Fallon, Nevada. Lots of memories of the A-4 and yes, there were very few "Mustangs"(enlisted pilots) still around in those days. Most were finishing up their careers after WW2 and Korea. Closest thing we came to using the A-4's for in those days was the Cuban Missle Crises. Wasn't until it was all over that we really learned how close we came to being vaporized. But they did get quite a workout in "Nam.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Chief1942

[Chief1942]

I'll see what I can find

 

JazAero;

 

Tried to reply to your PM but kept getting "the following users were not found" when I tried to reply. But basically:

 

Boy, this is going to be a challenge. It's been many years since I strapped pilots into the A-4's and to be honest, I don't think I ever paid any attention to the canopy hinge mechanism. I really should remember as being an Airframes Mech I had to pretty much check every rivet, nut and bolt on the planes when they were in for their periodic inspections. I will never forget the admonition on the inspection sheet as it went from a/c section area by area, "Check for cracks, corrosion, and defective rivets". Must have read that a million times. ' All I can offer is to look through some of our squadron photo and see if it even provides any type of close-up of the canopy hinges. Will get back to you with what I have.

[JazAero]

I don't know why it did that because I actually did get your PM, but anything you can find out would be appreciated, even if you have any photos I like to see them, especially if they've never been published. I have downloaded every photo that's been published of the aircraft.

 

Thank you

[Chief1942]

I do have some pics that I got from one of our pilots that he took for me as they were flying a two ship over California. Not sure what you can glean from any of the pics I have but will send you some if I can make it work on the 'puter. I spent some time on the net today looking at what might be available regarding the canopy/operating mechanism. Actually the best pics were from some scale modeling sites. These modelers really do their research and have tons of pics of the A-4 for reference as they build their models.

Edited May 28, 2014 by Chief1942

[Roller25]

Hey JazAero... Take a look through this guys material https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=cbcd63d6340707e6&sa=822839791

 

His name is Phil Thompson (goes by the name "SpazSinBad" on many forums) and is an ex Aussie scooter pilot from back in the day. He is very knowledgeable on the A4, and has tonnes of info. I began developing the A4 for FSX some time ago and he was quite happy to answer any questions.

[JazAero]

Thanks Guys. @Roller25 I did look at this stuff. but could not find what I was looking for. @chief1942 same thing I found pictures of everything imaginable except the one thing I'm looking for. I'm just going to have to go find an A4 somewhere in a hangar, tough to do where I live. :-) . I appreciate all the help you guys tried to give me.

 

Keep your ears open for an upcoming announcement, that's all I can say right now…

[aaron886]

There's some good geometry in your model, but don't discount the importance of good texture work! It would go a long way toward improving the visual realism.

[JazAero]

There's some good geometry in your model, but don't discount the importance of good texture work! It would go a long way toward improving the visual realism.

 

I have a different take on the importance of textures. I think they're overrated. allow me please qualify that. Years ago graphics cards didn't have the processing power necessary to render good geometry and proper lighting. So modelers got around that limitation with texture and with what I like to call texture tricks, which include bump maps, etc.

 

With today's modern graphics cards. There is more than enough power to render complex geometry and lighting and allow the light to play on the geometry and in essence create its own texture, just as it is done in real life. sure, you can add various subtle elements such as dirt, paint smudges, decals, etc. but I don't believe it is necessary anymore to create extra elements to "simulate" the geometry. Which always looks game-ish in my opinion. I offer the screenshot below as an example of what can be done with just geometry and lighting and some very simple decal work or what some like to call textures. this is an in game shot from X-Plane 10 which the model was originally developed for.

 

edit, don't misunderstand me. I am interested to see what a good texture artist can do with this model, and how it would hold up against the original here, would it enhance it? or would it actually cheapen its appearance?. Right now, it is by no means perfect, but I've had more than one person think that this was a photo of a real aircraft. And to me, that says a lot

 

Edited June 6, 2014 by JazAero

[X93355]

I have access to an RNZAF A-4K if you need any photos etc.

 

And yes, this will be one very cool aircraft to have with DCS.

[Oesau]

I have access to an RNZAF A-4K if you need any photos etc.

 

And yes, this will be one very cool aircraft to have with DCS.

 

Yes a Kahu version would be great but of course would be happy with a Vietnam era type!

 

http://redkiwi.weebly.com/project-kahu.html

[JazAero]

@X93355 Thank You, really only one,

 

if you can get a picture of the canopy hinging system. That's the only thing that we have no images of. I have close to 6 GB of reference material and out of all of that. Not one picture of that mechanism or hinge exists. Unfortunately, I have no Skyhawks close to me where I could go out and snap some photos.

 

And of course any in cockpit shots are always considered a plus.

 

Thank you again for your offer

Edited June 6, 2014 by JazAero

[southernrebel]

sure would like scale cockpit drawings of A-4 pit. size of panels, frw panel, seat diminstions.

all to help build a pit.

[X93355]

@X93355 Thank You, really only one,

 

if you can get a picture of the canopy hinging system. That's the only thing that we have no images of. I have close to 6 GB of reference material and out of all of that. Not one picture of that mechanism or hinge exists. Unfortunately, I have no Skyhawks close to me where I could go out and snap some photos.

 

And of course any in cockpit shots are always considered a plus.

 

Thank you again for your offer

 

Will be popping down to the hanger in the next few days, will get a heap of photos for you

[Oesau]

Will be popping down to the hanger in the next few days, will get a heap of photos for you

 

Where's the A-4 you are going to?

[X93355]

Where's the A-4 you are going to?

 

Classic flyers in Tauranga. We have a hunter, an Aermacchi MB339CB, A4 Skyhawk, P-40 kitty hawk, A-37 dragonfly, Harvard, Yak52, CT4B and the mighty T3 Airtourer :)

[aaron886]

It's not bad, the model is pretty good! The lack of texture is apparent though, making large surfaces look flat and bland. Good diffuse textures will complement your geometry, not "cheapen" it! Specular mapping would further enhance the way its surface catches light, and improve the non-uniformity that gives a real object more authenticity.

[Winfield_Gold]

It's not bad, the model is pretty good! The lack of texture is apparent though, making large surfaces look flat and bland. Good diffuse textures will complement your geometry, not "cheapen" it! Specular mapping would further enhance the way its surface catches light, and improve the non-uniformity that gives a real object more authenticity.

 

As that a limitation of X-plane? the screenshots as stated in the OP are taken directly from X-plane

 

By no means am I a texture artist, Just an observation to consider

[JazAero]

As that a limitation of X-plane? the screenshots as stated in the OP are taken directly from X-plane

 

By no means am I a texture artist, Just an observation to consider

 

I'm not sure if it's a limitation, but I do know that it is widely known that X-Plane 10 and for that matter all of the series are optimized for rendering geometry over texture. which sort of makes them unique in that respect.

 

In many instances they actually recommend substituting texture with geometry Whenever possible.

 

I have often wondered if that's not the reason why aircraft look exceptional in X-Plane, but landscapes tend to suffer.

 

But I digress this is not an X-Plane forum. I do know that DCS handles things differently. so, I will have to adjust the model accordingly.

[X93355]

Jaz,

 

Some pictures from today, not the best quality as it was raining today. If you need more let me know as I'll be back there this week. Will get in the cockpit and take better ones for you. Got some cockpit photos as well. Happy to get anything you need.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2014 by X93355
Duplicate photo