[WIP] McDonnall XP-67 Moonbat

[Shootyplanes 149]

i had no idea you were getting your hands this dirty with the game, pickle. good to see

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

12 hours ago, Shootyplanes said:

i had no idea you were getting your hands this dirty with the game, pickle. good to see

u no wat we flying together soon? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[Shootyplanes 149]

dont worry, ill spend the shekels to get this plane when it hits

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

9 minutes ago, Shootyplanes said:

dont worry, ill spend the shekels to get this plane when it hits

btw sent you a personal message

[mrparty1 950]

Ok. I finished making the glass for the canopy, but I think I need to work on the material a little bit. Also, here's a derpy render that I made of it.

 

Next up is to flatten the intake sides and build a cockpit for it!

[Gilthoniel 30]

This thing looks crazy and interesting, but pleasepleaseplease consider other armament options than 6x37mm. These things spark, have low firerate and muzzle velocity, which will really make the plane troublesome to use against anything other than bombers. While this may be what was planned to be mounted, i can only imagine how quickly this idea would be dropped if it was ever allowed to develop further - weight would kill performance, pilots would complain about recoil and difficulty in aiming at anything other than giant flying barns, and really 6 an/m3 20mms would be good enough for bomber interception.
But since bays for weapons were designed to hold 6 big cannons, there is some.. flexibility in what goes in them.
2x37mm +4x.50cal?
2x37mm+4x20mm?
2x20mm+4x.50cal?
6x.50cal?
6x20mm?
Also there's question of an/m2 vs an/m3...
But IF you're going to stick six 37mms into this thing, is it at least somehow possible to make the guns not fire in salvo/all at once mode, but rather in pairs (inner, middle, outer, repeat) - solving the issue of firerate?


I'm all for this plane to be in the game, whatever you chose. TA154 was a great success of revenue-share program, and a great addition to the game. This appears to be on the same level - unique, different, possibly fun to play plane (if at proper BR). Definitely saving my shekels for when it's ready!

Side note: Any plans to include cockpit for this thing? If yes, will it be based on some sources (if there are any), or rather guesswork/based on something else?

Good luck!
 

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

1 hour ago, Gilthoniel said:

This thing looks crazy and interesting, but pleasepleaseplease consider other armament options than 6x37mm. These things spark, have low firerate and muzzle velocity, which will really make the plane troublesome to use against anything other than bombers. While this may be what was planned to be mounted, i can only imagine how quickly this idea would be dropped if it was ever allowed to develop further - weight would kill performance, pilots would complain about recoil and difficulty in aiming at anything other than giant flying barns, and really 6 an/m3 20mms would be good enough for bomber interception.
But since bays for weapons were designed to hold 6 big cannons, there is some.. flexibility in what goes in them.
2x37mm +4x.50cal?
2x37mm+4x20mm?
2x20mm+4x.50cal?
6x.50cal?
6x20mm?
Also there's question of an/m2 vs an/m3...
But IF you're going to stick six 37mms into this thing, is it at least somehow possible to make the guns not fire in salvo/all at once mode, but rather in pairs (inner, middle, outer, repeat) - solving the issue of firerate?


I'm all for this plane to be in the game, whatever you chose. TA154 was a great success of revenue-share program, and a great addition to the game. This appears to be on the same level - unique, different, possibly fun to play plane (if at proper BR). Definitely saving my shekels for when it's ready!

Side note: Any plans to include cockpit for this thing? If yes, will it be based on some sources (if there are any), or rather guesswork/based on something else?

Good luck!
 

First, 6 37 mm cannons is easier than 1 37, and 4 12.7 mm (or 2 12.7 mm and 2 7.26 mm). This is because of the better muzzle velocity of the smaller caliber shells. The tracers and hit message provide you with feedback to aim those guns and the 37 rarely hits. The 37 is easier to aim when isolated. Try this on the French P-63. It has the most ammo to test this out. Try firing at targets with all guns and then try to fire only the 37. It is easier to aim the 37 alone. 

 

There were planned armaments like 6 12.7 mm machine guns and 4 20 mm cannons. 

 

37 mm cannons are likely to desynchronize. 

 

We will do the cockpit according to photos. Some of it is done.

[Gilthoniel 30]

18 hours ago, PickleJarOfDeath said:

First, 6 37 mm cannons is easier than 1 37, and 4 12.7 mm (or 2 12.7 mm and 2 7.26 mm). This is because of the better muzzle velocity of the smaller caliber shells. The tracers and hit message provide you with feedback to aim those guns and the 37 rarely hits. The 37 is easier to aim when isolated. Try this on the French P-63. It has the most ammo to test this out. Try firing at targets with all guns and then try to fire only the 37. It is easier to aim the 37 alone. 

 

There were planned armaments like 6 12.7 mm machine guns and 4 20 mm cannons. 

 

37 mm cannons are likely to desynchronize. 

 

We will do the cockpit according to photos. Some of it is done.

There are many planes in the game with varied muzzle velocity armaments (german mk108 for example), and it's not an issue since you can bind small caliber and large caliber guns to separate keys (left mouse click+spacebar usually), and use your guns for targets they are best against, or at distances where muzzle velocity doesn't matter (point blank shots). Tracers and hit message are just one thing, learning how to aim/lead targets and seeing them explode is another. There are many p39s and p63 models in the game, and using 37mm separately from other guns is just... part of the game when using them.
Whatever you're going to stick in this flying beauty, I will be happy, just wanted to point out that varied armament is usually better, as it provides flexibility and let's you engage different types of targets effectively.

Cockpit will be based on photos? YASSS! Can't wait to take if for a spin in EC!

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

It's just a noise thing. I'm suggesting that by having 1 singular ballistic pattern of behavior to manage means it is easier to focus on that single one rather than the false feedback of other guns.

1 hour ago, Gilthoniel said:

Cockpit will be based on photos? YASSS! Can't wait to take if for a spin in EC!

Had poor stall characteristics so the test pilot refused to put it into a spin )))))

[Gilthoniel 30]

Oh, I mean that "spin" when you shoot off the tail of another plane, and he spins, and spins, and spins, and spins, and spins, and touchdown (BOOM!)

[AntiMod 12]

Any updates? I'd love to see what else has been done, if anything has been done.

 

Good luck with whatever you're up to! Can't wait to (hopefully) see this in War Thunder one day!

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

16 hours ago, Denken_Schnecke said:

Any updates? I'd love to see what else has been done, if anything has been done.

 

Good luck with whatever you're up to! Can't wait to (hopefully) see this in War Thunder one day!

We are still waiting on the national archives for documents. I have not received a response. I had to submit a second request because there were some issues with the first one.

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,589]

Keeping it as 6 x 37mm should be the only logical conclusion since that's what it was setup for, regardless of what else may have been planned.

 

Seems like they'd be the same M4 37mm cannon that the P-39 had, which is fine, I think it's a good gun, having 6 of them would be insane.

 

I would also really hope that the 1,600hp Continentals are what would end up in it.

 

Edited April 19, 2018 by xF4LC0NxPUNCHx

[NovA29R 1,592]

Do you find place where they are must be mounted?

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,589]

 

I'd say where those 6 dark covers are

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

On 4/21/2018 at 7:22 AM, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

 

I'd say where those 6 dark covers are

Correct. There are also models that you can find that show that as well but they are actually cut out as if there was a gun present. A good number of drawings have these points marked too. I do not believe they are official documents given how many inconsistencies there are. There is also the original small scale aerodynamic test model:

[MaterialWharf3 453]

On 4/12/2018 at 5:36 PM, PickleJarOfDeath said:

We are still waiting on the national archives for documents. I have not received a response. I had to submit a second request because there were some issues with the first one.

As in the DC National Archives? I don't know if there is a walk in policy, but I could help obtain stuff on the plane cause I go to school near the archives, as long as you are talking about the archives in downtown DC.

Edited April 25, 2018 by MaterialWharf3

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

On 4/25/2018 at 2:03 PM, MaterialWharf3 said:

As in the DC National Archives? I don't know if there is a walk in policy, but I could help obtain stuff on the plane cause I go to school near the archives, as long as you are talking about the archives in downtown DC.

That would be appreciated. The issue is that I want possession of physical copies. 

[mrparty1 950]

 

While I wait for some documents from the national archives, I've decided to learn how to animate, so I tried animating the control surfaces.

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,589]

Looks good!

 

I keep toying with the thought of learning how to use 3DSMAX or Blender. Hell, I already have Blender installed. It's just so different from the design CAD software I've been using for years. I'd really like to model a plane for the game.

[SuperCookie78 89]

HOLY SH*T! that looks amazing! i want that in the game now! 

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

7 hours ago, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

Looks good!

 

I keep toying with the thought of learning how to use 3DSMAX or Blender. Hell, I already have Blender installed. It's just so different from the design CAD software I've been using for years. I'd really like to model a plane for the game.

You think you could actually do something with industrial cad software? I know a lot of modern equipment used it in their design process and the software can do those contours so... Try giving it a go with those! I'd love to see what people can do with that kind of software. I've only seen very geometric work. It's also likely far more accurate... You could start by creating at least simpler elements such as the framework which is actually visible in the game in some situations. Then you would move on to the rest in some more art-oriented 3D modeling software and build around it. I need to look at the user model guide again to see how you are supposed to configure the components though... There are some details I have misrepresented or omitted.

[Pokenaut7 80]

ALL I HAVE TO SAY!!!!! +1

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,589]

15 hours ago, PickleJarOfDeath said:

You think you could actually do something with industrial cad software? I know a lot of modern equipment used it in their design process and the software can do those contours so... Try giving it a go with those! I'd love to see what people can do with that kind of software. I've only seen very geometric work. It's also likely far more accurate... You could start by creating at least simpler elements such as the framework which is actually visible in the game in some situations. Then you would move on to the rest in some more art-oriented 3D modeling software and build around it. I need to look at the user model guide again to see how you are supposed to configure the components though... There are some details I have misrepresented or omitted.

 

So, in design-oriented 3D CAD (Solidworks, ProE, Solidedge, CATIA, etc.) pretty much everything is dimension driven. The advantage of this is that you can be extremely accurate and can change any single dimension at any point in time. The disadvantage is that you pretty much have to define everything which does not lend itself to "artistic" modeling as well. That being said, it is possible to do "free-form" modeling in most of those CAD packages, but they don't excel at it.

 

The other problem is file output to something used in a game engine. I have no idea how well a STEP file, for instance, that has been exported from "design" CAD would import into something like 3DS Max or Blender, and how well that can be used. My understanding of how models are used in games is exceedingly limited.

 

I think I could absolutely model an aircraft in a design package, but it would be a very involving process, particularly when it comes down to all of the little details. 

 

I've actually made a very simple model of an airplane in the past based off of a 2D hand drawing. Just this simple model took quite a few hours.

 

 

Spoiler

 

[ivica70 910]

38 minutes ago, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

 

So, in design-oriented 3D CAD (Solidworks, ProE, Solidedge, CATIA, etc.) pretty much everything is dimension driven. The advantage of this is that you can be extremely accurate and can change any single dimension at any point in time. The disadvantage is that you pretty much have to define everything which does not lend itself to "artistic" modeling as well. That being said, it is possible to do "free-form" modeling in most of those CAD packages, but they don't excel at it.

 

The other problem is file output to something used in a game engine. I have no idea how well a STEP file, for instance, that has been exported from "design" CAD would import into something like 3DS Max or Blender, and how well that can be used. My understanding of how models are used in games is exceedingly limited.

 

I think I could absolutely model an aircraft in a design package, but it would be a very involving process, particularly when it comes down to all of the little details. 

 

I've actually made a very simple model of an airplane in the past based off of a 2D hand drawing. Just this simple model took quite a few hours.

 

 

  Hide contents

 

 

Because the plane has a smooth organic form. In Blender for example it would also take some time to create it. Depend always on the level of detail