Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[greybeard]

For years I dream of having a real P-40K; I remember every time I update Pacific campaigns, in 1943 I miss the "K", and I have to replace it with the P-40E! I tried to use the existing Beowolff's, but I'm dissatisfied with it and soon eliminated.

Lately, flying with P-39, I became aware of how its tail is similar to that of P-40K, and here is my proposal: would be possible a "cut and paste"? I specify that I know nothing about 3D modeling in IL-2, so forgive me if I'm telling nonsenses ...

The model I am referring to is the P-40K-1 / K-5, characterized by a round fin, was also the fastest of the P-40's (IIRC).

here there are some references:
http://www.p40warhawk.com/Models/Technical/P40-1.GIF
http://www.p40warhawk.com/Models/Technical/P40%20%20plans%201.GIF

I tried to do it graphically, the "cut and paste", and I see that there is a good match:


even better if you could use as a basis the P-40E new in version 4.13:


the horizontal tail, however, should remain those of the P-40, because they are too different.

OK! I I told you! Think about it and then let me know something, please.

Thanks for your attention. Hello!
GB

P.S.: some more info about the plane.

The P-40 was the "Good Enough" fighter which fought for all the WWII, from Pearl Harbour to Italy. Quite neglected by 1C, recently received some attention by TD for the "E" variant, fixing many oversights, like exaust stacks and weapons loadout. Curiously, are still missing the most produced variants:

P-40N.....5219
P-40F.....3631

as well as the P-40K (1300 built). It could feature a DF loop antenna on top of its rear fuselage:




The P-40K, together with the "L", was the fastest variant at 20,000 ft, reaching 370 mph.



Find here link to download freeil2modding new P-40K

[Koty]

https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,25646.0.html

[bomberkiller]

...but I'm dissatisfied with it and soon eliminated.

Hello greybeard,

I don't understand. What is not right with the "Kittybomber"?

Klick the pic - the pilot is Jimi Hendrix. 



Best regards, Gerhard 

[greybeard]

plus minor issues that i can't recall right now.

BTW, skin looks inappropriate: the rectangular cooling gill just in front of the exhaust stacks was introduced with the P-40M. Say hello to Jimi Hendrix!

Cheers,
GB

[Koty]

...
...
...

Ever heard of polygons?

By the way, these versions are also WIP by DT ATM.

[greybeard]

Ever heard of polygons?

Yes, but I think they also apply to P-39's fin...

By the way, these versions are also WIP by DT ATM.

Good to hear!

[bomberkiller]

Hello greybeard,

I understood it.

Thanks for your answer.

Best regards, Gerhard

[Mick]

...
...
...

Ever heard of polygons?

By the way, these versions are also WIP by DT ATM.

... yep, we've all heard, more than enough, about the 3000 polys per .msh limit, that was decided way back in the ancient times, more than 15 years ago, at a time when it was a sound decision because the best graphics cards had 128 Mb max ...! 

... ever heard about 4 GB graphics cards ...? 

... mine is 892 MB "only", and no prob whatsoever ... 

... ever installed and flown one of the 3D beauties Barnesy regularly releases at FM ...? 

... are you saying that DT's future P40K won't have the tail curves Greybeard showed in his pic, simply because of that silly totally outdated poly "rule" ...? 

[greybeard]

... are you saying that DT's future P40K won't have the tail curves Greybeard showed in his pic, simply because of that silly totally outdated poly "rule" ...? 

Dear Mick,

I think you're escaping the fundamental point of my proposal, which is the use of the vertical fin (meshes Tail, Kneel and Rudder) of the good old P-39D, which certainly falls within the limit that you quote. No need to add polygons, just replace.

As for upgrading to modern technology, personally I am opposed. The game was put on sale in 2006 and must continue to satisfy the original requirements; I myself use a PC bought in 2006. In addition, the use of more advanced technology, not only can not be exploited by the original graphic engine, but can make things worse. I have had for some months a much more modern PC, where the game worked worse, for example because of external anisotropic filtering that brought out all the defects of the maps.

I believe that we must learn to make good use of what we have, is not a sacrifice but a discovery, perfectly in line with the world in which we live.

Sorry for the long reply. Cheers,
GB

[Epervier]

As for upgrading to modern technology, personally I am opposed. ...

I believe that we must learn to make good use of what we have, is not a sacrifice but a discovery, perfectly in line with the world in which we live.

I agree with you ! 
Do not forget: the Better is the enemy of the Good (le Mieux est l'ennemi du Bien !) !

[Mick]

... I wasn't talking about upgrading to more modern technology, my graphics card is a GTX260, with "only" 892 Mb, and my processor is an Intel 8400 core2 duo (overclocked @ 3.45 Ghz) and I don' use any texture compression ... 

I was talking about the 3000 polys/mesh "rule" ... 

DT allegedly signed a contract with 1C Games that, among other things, forbids them to go beyond a 3000 polys/mesh limit, modders that don't belong to DT didn't sign any such max poly limit ... 

Personally I by far prefer Jero's and Barnesy's 3 D improvements to stock wheels, cowlings, spinners, gun barrels, cockpits etc ... 

Those who don't have a PC that allows them to use more polys are not obliged to download and use Jero's or Barnesy's or anybody else's 3D improvements ...

Everybody is free to fly with only DT's "official" patches, too ...

[SAS~GJE52]

IIRC..... the poly limit is a function of the game engine, your graphics card has no effect on that. However, even within that limit some of the early models were very low poly, so there is still a huge amount of room for improvement.

G;