F-16 test

[Clave]

This is a test to see what is wrong...

 

[Wayne Little]

Well...not being an F-16 expert.....dunno whats wrong? Looks pretty damn good to me!

 

[Clave]

Ah good...

I spotted a couple of things after lunch:

I played around with the cockpit to make it blend better, res-scaled the pylons and added the lower pylon.

Also trying out some 'stock' stores fitment - I have a drop tank as well, but I'll save that for later...

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

Looks great to me to.

 

[Clave]

Thanks - I'm nearly done - I was just doing the Block 5/10 version (this one is Block 15) and saw it mentioned that the 'horizontal stabilisers are larger on the Block 15'

So I was checking out the line drawings and scratching my head over various things that seemed the same size, when it dawned on me that the horizontal stabiliser controls the vertical stability - in other words it's the damn tailplane... *sigh*

Anyhoo, it's late, so I will be looking at Block 5 and 10 Israeli a/c tomorrow (after the race of course) and then some US, Italian, Venezuelan, Indonesian, etc. Block 15s too...

 

[Wayne Little]

look forward to 'em in Israeli markings.....

 

[Clave]

Final tweaks done on the Block 15, 2 Sqn BAF one, and a couple of Block 5 Israelis from 117 Sqn:

 

[Clave]

They do have a lot of labels:

 

[Matt308]

Clave, I'm your biggest fan. Looks awesome, buddy.

My constructive comments:

1) Cockpit canopy is too small. Needs more height.

2) Intake is too small, this too needs more height.

3) RWR and engine nozzle have too much gap between them. I would suggest less convergence from tailbase to the engine nozzle (make it more straight). If you are depicting a closed (restricted) nozzle, then work on less convergence from tailbase to beginning of engine nozzle.

4) The outter wing pylons are wired for AIM-9s, but I think their centerline matches the wingtip mounted AIM-9s.

5) I recall a UHF/VHF antenna at the base of the tail strake.

6) Your lower nose line has a bit too much droop.

7) Your droptanks need to have less pitch (a few degrees lower than fuselage centerline)

8) There is a UHF/VHF antenna under the nose just aft of the nose radome.

9) Your lightning/precipitation static radome lines looks a little too pronounced.

10) The precip static probes on your aft vertical fin look a little large.

11) Your RWR depiction may be Isreali. I've never seen a round RWR on US aircraft. Others can correct me, but I have always seen it as a faired rectangle as viewed from a port/starboard depiction.

12) The IRSTs just aft of the radome don't look quite long enough.

Keep 'em comin'!! Looks awesome!

 

[Wayne Little]

'107' is the top scoring IAF F-16 with 6.5 victories....you got a shot of the victory markings?

 

[Clave]

Clave, I'm your biggest fan. Looks awesome, buddy. Thank you!

My constructive comments:

1) Cockpit canopy is too small. Needs more height. Agreed - fixed.

2) Intake is too small, this too needs more height. Agreed - The edge needed to be sharp as well - fixed

3) RWR and engine nozzle have too much gap between them. I would suggest less convergence from tailbase to the engine nozzle (make it more straight). If you are depicting a closed (restricted) nozzle, then work on less convergence from tailbase to beginning of engine nozzle. Can't agree with this - a photo placed on the drawing matched the line exactly...

4) The outter wing pylons are wired for AIM-9s, but I think their centerline matches the wingtip mounted AIM-9s. Good point and I realise what is wrong now - the outer pylons are missing - there should be an inner large pylon, a centre large pylon, and a small outer pylon just for Sidewinders - I will fix that next...I have put a bomb on the 'middle' pylon for now, just for reference...

5) I recall a UHF/VHF antenna at the base of the tail strake. I have not seen that anywhere, have you any pics?

6) Your lower nose line has a bit too much droop. I'm not convinced either way on this, but I'm not ruling it out either...

7) Your droptanks need to have less pitch (a few degrees lower than fuselage centerline) Agreed and fixed - may need more 'tilt' ?

There is a UHF/VHF antenna under the nose just aft of the nose radome. Agreed - on some a/c - I think there are a variety - the Israeli aircraft I'm using for my 'test bed' also has aerials under the intake - also variable in size position and quantity...

9) Your lightning/precipitation static radome lines looks a little too pronounced. Agreed - please check if they are OK now...

10) The precip static probes on your aft vertical fin look a little large. Agreed - fixed

11) Your RWR depiction may be Isreali. I've never seen a round RWR on US aircraft. Others can correct me, but I have always seen it as a faired rectangle as viewed from a port/starboard depiction. Just a shading issue - I think it's better now...?

12) The IRSTs just aft of the radome don't look quite long enough. Not sure what/where these are - if they are on the tailplane, then I have made them longer...

Keep 'em comin'!! Looks awesome! Thanks again - great comments! 8)

The three pylons (2 large, 1 small) this will be added soon:

 

[Clave]

Oh, and I will be doing more, including adding victory marks, different countries and squadrons, after me and Wayne agree on the basic structure

Also changed since last time: Rear half of canopy - made darker.

 

[Matt308]

Thanks for not slamming me on my comments. I do really find your art wonderful. Here are some pics

 

[Matt308]

Clave, I'm your biggest fan. Looks awesome, buddy. Thank you!

My constructive comments:

1) Cockpit canopy is too small. Needs more height. Agreed - fixed.

2) Intake is too small, this too needs more height. Agreed - The edge needed to be sharp as well - fixed

3) RWR and engine nozzle have too much gap between them. I would suggest less convergence from tailbase to the engine nozzle (make it more straight). If you are depicting a closed (restricted) nozzle, then work on less convergence from tailbase to beginning of engine nozzle. Can't agree with this - a photo placed on the drawing matched the line exactly...

See my pic above. It's a nit I must admit, but caught my eye.

4) The outter wing pylons are wired for AIM-9s, but I think their centerline matches the wingtip mounted AIM-9s. Good point and I realise what is wrong now - the outer pylons are missing - there should be an inner large pylon, a centre large pylon, and a small outer pylon just for Sidewinders - I will fix that next...I have put a bomb on the 'middle' pylon for now, just for reference...

5) I recall a UHF/VHF antenna at the base of the tail strake. I have not seen that anywhere, have you any pics?

It's actually in the pic you posted. I admit that not all models have this blade antenna.

6) Your lower nose line has a bit too much droop. I'm not convinced either way on this, but I'm not ruling it out either...

See my pic that I posted for you. Looks just slightly off, or perhaps the intake is still a bit small?

7) Your droptanks need to have less pitch (a few degrees lower than fuselage centerline) Agreed and fixed - may need more 'tilt' ?

Yes a bit more I might suggest.

There is a UHF/VHF antenna under the nose just aft of the nose radome. Agreed - on some a/c - I think there are a variety - the Israeli aircraft I'm using for my 'test bed' also has aerials under the intake - also variable in size position and quantity...

Agreed, check out my second pic above just forward of the "nose droop" redline.

9) Your lightning/precipitation static radome lines looks a little too pronounced. Agreed - please check if they are OK now...

10) The precip static probes on your aft vertical fin look a little large. Agreed - fixed

11) Your RWR depiction may be Isreali. I've never seen a round RWR on US aircraft. Others can correct me, but I have always seen it as a faired rectangle as viewed from a port/starboard depiction. Just a shading issue - I think it's better now...?

12) The IRSTs just aft of the radome don't look quite long enough. Not sure what/where these are - if they are on the tailplane, then I have made them longer...

See my second pic above..

Keep 'em comin'!! Looks awesome! Thanks again - great comments! 8)

Your welcome!!

 

[Clave]

I would never slam people for constructive comments - I think this is a complex area with many possible answers...

First off the RWR/tail area - There are 2 or 3 different possibilities here - The Dutch, Belgian, and some US ones have the extended fairing with parachute, but the distance from the tail on a direct side view is tricky - I matched the attached photo pretty closely for the 'short' version. The 'long' version I will look at again on my Belgian re-draw...

The blade (VHF?) aerial - I see your pic, and will definitely add that where appropriate (It is shown on Block 52 line drawing - there may be others with it fitted too...)

The IRSTs I have extended after looking at the pictures.

Still not certain about the nose - on some photos I would agree, but on others, not... going to think about this for a while...

Outer pylon/rail added.

Tank tilted some more.

I'm going to put up unarmed and armed versions for a final (ish) check over.

Also added photo for comparison of tail (short) and nose.

 

[Matt308]

Nice!!!

 

[Clave]

Thanks Matt - I am getting there...

I'm still working out whether the 'tail-gap' thing is inconsistency or real difference.

You are definitely right about it in some cases though - I have taken some shots of the line drawings, and there are possible differences across the Blocks. (Ignoring the parachute fitted version)

Crappy picture, but you can see what I mean here:

Oh, and I just noticed the RWR is larger on Block 52, I will have to change that if I get that far....

 

[Clave]

First three Block 5 aircraft with 'narrow gap' tails

110 Sqn and 117 Sqn x 2 - Including the 6.5 kill '107'....

 

[Clave]

This is a Block 15 a/c of 9 Squadron PAF:

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]