[NO BUG]Issue with Upper Fuselage panels

[mkiii]

The panels on the upper fuselage should be flush with the skin. They currently have a pronounced bump/normal map applied.

 

 

Other than skin reinforcing plates that are not modelled or in the current texture, this area should be pretty smooth. The real jets can have a lot of staining around the joints which might make them appear to be raised , but they are not afaik.

 

 

[cofcorpse]

As far as I understand, these panels do not have to be flush with the surface. They can protrude a little. I attached pictures as an example. So I assume it's not a bug. Though, it would be great to hear opinion of real life crewchiefs.

[=Panther=]

They do protrude, and not one will be like the other. It is the fuselage fuel panels, and the gasket material along with sealant application isn't always the same.

[mkiii]

Manafacturing must have become shoddy since the 80s then.

[Fjordmonkey]

Manafacturing must have become shoddy since the 80s then.

 

No, people just have a very strange perception that fighterjets (and aircraft in general) are shiny and smooth at all times, which is NOT the case when you get up close and personal to one.

[=Panther=]

No, people just have a very strange perception that fighterjets (and aircraft in general) are shiny and smooth at all times, which is NOT the case when you get up close and personal to one.

 

This 100% Been working the Viper since 2001 and not one jet has had a flush panel.

[Fjordmonkey]

This 100% Been working the Viper since 2001 and not one jet has had a flush panel.

 

Exactly the same I saw working on the Viper duing my mandatory service here. It's also why I giggle when I see non-weathered skins and paints on models.

[mkiii]

No, people just have a very strange perception that fighterjets (and aircraft in general) are shiny and smooth at all times, which is NOT the case when you get up close and personal to one.

Condescending much:music_whistling:?

 

I may old & stupid now, but I worked on aircraft for 17 years in the Air Force & as a contractor (Non mandatory service), and some of those were F-16s A & B models, from 1984 to 1987, and believe me when I say that I have no "strange perception of these things being shiny and smooth at all times".

 

You guys may have worked on them in the 21st century - but things do get modified from when new - even panel fit & finish. Granted, they may have NEVER been billiard table smooth even in the 70s, but there are degrees of LUMP, and I believe that this is excessive. If you tell me that the C model was never this way, then, I have no reason to disbelieve you, especially looking at the state of current models with the scab plates all over the place, one way to add strength might be to beef up those panels. Oh, and what year is our DCS model meant to be from - 1991 or nearer to the present? Just curious.

 

 

F-16A (I believe) taken from storage to be converted into a pilotless target drone, constituting what I would call pretty flush maybe 2 mm at worst - if not "smooth & shiny, and boy do I not envy him having to remove all those panels."

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/115998/maintainers-resurrect-f-16s-that-will-become-targets/:-

 

 

Pretty Flush inbetween all the reinforcements:-

Edited April 19, 2020 by mkiii

[Deano87]

Oh, and what year is our DCS model meant to be from - 1991 or nearer to the present? Just curious.

 

To quote Wags, Its a F-16C Block 50 operated by the United States Air Force and Air National Guard circa 2007.

 

Here is a USAF Block-50 taken in 2016

 

Personally I agree with mkiii, I think they look a lot more flush IRL than the bump/normal mapping on the current DCS F-16 would make it look like. Now that isn't me saying that the real jets are perfectly flush, I bow to Panther's first hand knowledge, but the bump mapping in the sim as it currently is makes the jet look like they stick out about an inch, which I think is a bit OTT.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Deano87

[mkiii]

Thanks for the info chap. I guessed that it must be something a bit more recent than the 90s. As I said before, I understand that the later models may well be very different to the old (well they were new at the time) 16s I handled back in the 80s Unless I imagined it all... There was a lot of beer in Germany that had to be drunk back then after all.

 

 

PS can ANYONE tell me why every post I make on this forum adds double spaces after a new line & adds a huge space at the end like this? vvvvvvvvvv

[F16FLCS-SME]

As an FLCS maintainer, I was forced to close each panel and access door/cover and check for smoothness by running my finger all over the fasteners and panel edge.

Most of the primary FLCS harnesses are routed through the fuel tanks so I had to watch crew chiefs opening/closing those panels a lot.

It is also mandatory by each panel open/close Job Guide.

If I found a certain panel not flush with the skin, I would allert the crew chief to fix it, as it will and have caused wierd FLCS malfunctions like slips, mis-trim, drag, fluctuations, rattling noise and many more. What is shown in the OP picture is quite excessive.

[mkiii]

Glad top hear that my brain is not completely addled then. The guys with more recent experience are clearly used to a pretty different aircraft to the one I remember, and as depicted in the photo of the older models I posted up top.