New Aircraft

I think the website said that you can drive it in CAB or DCC mode, but there are no moveable controls. And to hear the enginesound that a real Spitfire would make, search YouTube for 'Spitfire Merlin sound' or something similar, and that'll give you a rough idea. Once you hear it, you'll never forget it!:D
 
I see there is a Bristol Beufighter. It does not seem to be on the DLS, yet.
My brother has hand made a 1/4 scale (as in HUGE) radio controled Beufighter that has won many awards. Just wait until he sees one flying around on my Trainz layout.:D
 
A footnote --- the A-10 is an air force base plane, not army, as I stated eariler!

sorry about that!

Ishie
 
A footnote --- the A-10 is an air force base plane, not army, as I stated eariler!

sorry about that!

Ishie
Did some reading up on that yesterday on Wikipedia. It is an Air Force plane that works with Army ground forces and in those actual times are in "temporary/combat" control by the Army. Apparently until Iraq and Afghanistan, the A-10 and similar Aircraft where not that well respected as a Combat Ground Attack Aircraft however its ability to survive enemy ground attack has proven itself very valuable. The preferred Aircraft was the Helicopter for ground attacks and Anti-Tank attacks however it did not provide the protection needed for the Pilot and thus the Aircraft.

Interesting to read some of these things from time to time.

Craig
:):):)
 
Hi Guys, thanks for the interest and nice comments, appreciated.

Craig does some nice screenshots. :)

None of the aircraft are quite finished yet, I have to refine the script that lifts the tail on some. Perhaps I should get back to that project?

The B24 still requires an interior, and the Mustang needs the landing gear and interior. The others are complete, but I need to look for errors and decide if specular lighting should be added on some.

My Bell helicopter does have a full cab with levers that operate, this can take a long time to model. Since then I have decided to use invisible cabs, instead of taking the time to do individual operating cabs for ships and aircraft, no levers. After all there would only be two required levers in a plane, the throttle and brake....and a brake on a ship?:hehe:

When you first enter cab view you see a screen of the scene in front of the plane. Using the [ and ] keys cycles through a number of other cab views, which are external attachment points to the main mesh. This is the only way to see loaded passengers as products. The benefits are that the same invisible cab can be used for all models. Hope you are not disappointed in this process, I try to balance a reasonable quality with moderate construction time.

Yes they will operate in DCC (cab mode) as there are no operating levers in the simple cockpit, you use the keyboard to operate - see the Auran manual. I need to adjust the engine script for the higher speeds to be achieved in cab mode.

warthog_dcc450.jpg


I have tried to use correct sound files to construct the engine sound, I do like the Merlins and have tried to adopt that sound, but the sound you would hear in the cockpit is never the same as a Spitfire flying by, a dopler effect in Trainz would be interesting.

A disappointment is the automatic operation of the panrograph under AI as Craig mentioned, in built code cannot be overridden. The track trigger Craig mentioned is nice, under dc operation to lift the wheels at the end of the runway as the aircraft lifts off, and it lowers them on landing. Now if he can get the creator to release it, that would be nice too.

I have also put the rear limback point some distance behind the aircrafts, so you can fly them behind each other (coupled) but having a separation distance.

I need to mention Craig is using TRS2004 I believe, and requires to use the invisible track type he specifies. I convinced Auran to change the code for TRS2006 to allow invisible track to show in Surveyor and the minimap, but be invisible in Driver. My invisible tracks (four colours) are suited to TRS2006 and less obtrusive in Surveyor. The models are classified as for TRS2004, but I check them in TS2009 for errors.

I had in mind to do a P38 lightning later if I get interested, had not thought of passenger aircraft, there are probably too many variants, and other have done a few already.

Ian
 
Last edited:
Did some reading up on that yesterday on Wikipedia. It is an Air Force plane that works with Army ground forces and in those actual times are in "temporary/combat" control by the Army. Apparently until Iraq and Afghanistan, the A-10 and similar Aircraft where not that well respected as a Combat Ground Attack Aircraft however its ability to survive enemy ground attack has proven itself very valuable. The preferred Aircraft was the Helicopter for ground attacks and Anti-Tank attacks however it did not provide the protection needed for the Pilot and thus the Aircraft.

Interesting to read some of these things from time to time.

Craig
:):):)

Hi Craig,

that's right my dear friend .... try MSFX or X-plane and you can flies these babies or online flying games, etc ...

thanks Graig for your post -- great reading!!
Ish
 
Hi Guys, thanks for the interest and nice comments, appreciated.

Craig does some nice screenshots. :)

None of the aircraft are quite finished yet, I have to refine the script that lifts the tail on some. Perhaps I should get back to that project?

The B24 still requires an interior, and the Mustang needs the landing gear and interior. The others are complete, but I need to look for errors and decide if specular lighting should be added on some.

My Bell helicopter does have a full cab with levers that operate, this can take a long time to model. Since then I have decided to use invisible cabs, instead of taking the time to do individual operating cabs for ships and aircraft, no levers. After all there would only be two required levers in a plane, the throttle and brake....and a brake on a ship?:hehe:

When you first enter cab view you see a screen of the scene in front of the plane. Using the [ and ] keys cycles through a number of other cab views, which are external attachment points to the main mesh. This is the only way to see loaded passengers as products. The benefits are that the same invisible cab can be used for all models. Hope you are not disappointed in this process, I try to balance a reasonable quality with moderate construction time.

Yes they will operate in DCC (cab mode) as there are no operating levers in the simple cockpit, you use the keyboard to operate - see the Auran manual. I need to adjust the engine script for the higher speeds to be achieved in cab mode.

warthog_dcc450.jpg


I have tried to use correct sound files to construct the engine sound, I do like the Merlins and have tried to adopt that sound, but the sound you would hear in the cockpit is never the same as a Spitfire flying by, a dopler effect in Trainz would be interesting.

A disappointment is the automatic operation of the panrograph under AI as Craig mentioned, in built code cannot be overridden. The track trigger Craig mentioned is nice, under dc operation to lift the wheels at the end of the runway as the aircraft lifts off, and it lowers them on landing. Now if he can get the creator to release it, that would be nice too.

I have also put the rear limback point some distance behind the aircrafts, so you can fly them behind each other (coupled) but having a separation distance.

I need to mention Craig is using TRS2004 I believe, and requires to use the invisible track type he specifies. I convinced Auran to change the code for TRS2006 to allow invisible track to show in Surveyor and the minimap, but be invisible in Driver. My invisible tracks (four colours) are suited to TRS2006 and less obtrusive in Surveyor. The models are classified as for TRS2004, but I check them in TS2009 for errors.

I had in mind to do a P38 lightning later if I get interested, had not thought of passenger aircraft, there are probably too many variants, and other have done a few already.

Ian

Hello Ian, sir

Thank you for that in-depth explanation about your latest masterpieces!!:)

As for commercial airplanes -- I've reskin two dozen, which still sits in my files, so, if you do come across in making these, sir, please let me know (dropping an e-mail or pm) ... I would, certainly, enjoyed seeing them first them.

I am a huge plane fanatic ... I have Microsoft flight simulators, etc and x-plane -- etc ... in their forums, you can download schemes, etc which, most are license as freeware -- (just to give you a another aveune if you need that type of livery skins)

Thank for making these, especially the A-10 ... great machine if you fly it in MSFX ... the real way -!:wave:

Ish
 
Are you going to make B-17's? I think there the 'superfortress' the ones that (sadly) bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Jamie
 
The B-17 was the Flying Fortress. Some were used in the Pacific war but I don't think any bombed Japan. B-24s were used widely in the Pacific but again not to bomb Japan.
For the Air Force (Army Air Corps) that was done by B-29s, except for one B-25 raid.
At least that is what I recall.
 
B-24's

The B-17 was the Flying Fortress. Some were used in the Pacific war but I don't think any bombed Japan. B-24s were used widely in the Pacific but again not to bomb Japan.
For the Air Force (Army Air Corps) that was done by B-29s, except for one B-25 raid.
At least that is what I recall.


Weren't the B-24's used on the Doolittle Raid? Launched from a carrier... an amazing feat.
B-17's were the Fortress, named because of the amount of protective armament carried. The larger B-29's were the Super Fortresses I believe. Dropping the Bomb needed a special turn they practiced to get away from the bomb's blast.

Angela
 
The B-17 Flying Fortress was the predecessor of the B-29 Superfortress and first flew in the late 1930s. It was mainly used in the European war, operating from England with the 8th USAAC in daylight operations. The RAF also used them but mainly in a maritime role as they could not carry as big a bomb load as the Avro Lancaster. I suspect the B-24 was preferred for the Pacific area because of it's greater range.

No, Angelah, it was the smaller B-25 Mitchell twin engined bomber in the Doolittle raid and even they had great difficulty in taking off from the carrier.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top