Fighter plane


(ookka) #1

Hi guys,

after a long time without any personal work and posts here, I started a new plane. early design was very [edit]un-realistic[/edit], but I came back to something more “realistic”. Still a lot of things to do.

Thanks

[edit] Current progress [/edit]



(ArneCRosenfeldt) #2

Lower tail problematic on a runway. Fuel tanks disturb flow at inlets. Looong nose limits field of view. Overall looks vintage.


(ookka) #3

@ArneCRosenfeldt : thanks for your comment. The lower tail should be ok according to some tests I made, but with a long and flat landing maneuver :slight_smile: I don’t want to get it too small because it is a part of the final overall design. But I will try to work on it to keep it credible. For the fuel tanks, I have dispatched the playload in a different manner. Fuel tanks are under the wings now.
For the long nose, due to the jet engine size, all electronics (old fashion radar etc.) are in the nose. For the overall “vintage” look that is perfect : I want to make it 70’s/80’s :slight_smile: I edited my first post and removed the “futuristic” word.

Thanks again for your comment.


(ookka) #4

Hi,

some work today. Wings are larger than the original one, fuel tanks are different, nose is shorter, etc. A lot of parts are herre to get the shape, as draft shapes (jet exhaust for example).

Still a HUGE work to do before it starts to look good :confused: (canopy and cockpit to be done, details, tail etc…)

Thanks for viewing and comment







(ookka) #5

Hi all,

some various progress on details (tails, wings etc.) and a full rework of the canopy, still WIP, to get a 70/80’s old-fashioned look. I added also a short range AA missile. I aslo tested a strange shader, but it gives a good preview imo.

Next steps of modeling : interior, final details and crew.
Thanks for reading and comment.







(Speed7) #6

Looking really good, will keep checking in on this one.

Shaun


(ookka) #7

Thanks Shaun, very appreciated. I will do my best to keep you interested :slight_smile:


(ookka) #8

Hi all,

I have put a lot of effort on modelling (crew, ejection seat, full rework of all pieces and joints, etc.) and texturing (UV mapping) but I realize it does not show off a lot on the following renders :slight_smile:

Anyway, here it is the progress :






Thanks for viewing and comment


(NID Graphics) #9

Looks great, not sure how the aerodynamics would work.


(ookka) #10

Hi,

Thanks a lot. Not sure too of the benefits for aerodynamics but the job should be done :slight_smile:

Here is the progress. I have detailed and finalized the canopy. It is not very visible now :confused: but I have modelled each part of this one… I hope it will be useful in future renders. I have detailed also some cockpit part, but nothing a lot visible from the outside too. I will keep focused on finalizing modelling now (jet exhaust, playload like missiles, etc.). I will come back to cockpit and canopy after the start of texturing job for the plane, in order to avoid to spent a huge time in UV unwrapping for cockpit details virtually invisible in renders.

Thanks for C&C







(minoribus) #11

Awesome model, ookka. If I understood it right it isn’t based on a real plane but it should resemble the style of the 80ies. The front window of the canopy seems to be rather flat. That is quite visible in #8. Maybe it should be more convex. And the field of view for the second pilot is very limited. due to the wide window frame in front of him. The alpha jet had a similar canopy design to your post in #4. The rear window frame was divided into two parts.


(ookka) #12

Hi,

@Minoribus : thanks a lot. you are right it should resemble to this style of 70/80ies. I tried to correct a little bit the flat aspect of the canopy you mentioned. The second pilot is a RIO - Radar Intercept Operator and spends most of the flight time looking to his screens in the cockpit. You can see such low surface field of view in combat plane of this era. So it is a choice. Let me know if it is really disturbing ?

UV mapping started :


Thanks


(ookka) #13

Hi,

just finished to unwrap and arrange uv maps for the whole thing. Just tired of these endless details to unwrap… I think I will see seams in my dreams this night :).

Finally I have 4096*4096px textures for :

  • body/fuselage and canopy
  • wings
  • tails
  • jet exhaust
  • playload (missiles and additional fuel tanks)
  • playload fixations under the wings

Let’s go texturing now…





(GrimZA) #14

Critique:
Engine nozzle is quite small

The aerodynamics will make the plane want to constantly nose dive to the ground.

Other then that, great modelling.

Also i can’t see the landing gear or the inner parts of the nozzle. The nozzle will usually consist of 3 or 2 areas, inner nozzle/wall, the actuators (these control the flexing of the inner nozzle/wall and outer petals/wall) and the outer petals/walls (which allows air to aerodynamically pass over the nozzle)


(Michele Marcelli) #15

Nice ookka, the model appears to be beautiful, as well as the unwrap!! The image/unwrap for texture (power 4096) is one texture for the whole model?

Good job man and keep up!! +1

P.S: 300ppp It’s a reference only to the printers for typography ecc. For the 3D you do not need it…


(ookka) #16

Hi,

Thanks for your comment. I am not a huge specialist of aerodynamics despite a long time as aviation fan :slight_smile: I trust you :wink: I will not model the landing gear for this one. For the engine nozzle, I reworked it but it is not very visible on last render. For the size, I will see if I can do something and compare with for example F-105. Thanks again for your reply.

@Medal71: thanks too, appreciated. I have a texture for body, one other for wings, one for tail, one for missile, etc. You are right about the ppi, it could be only useful for printing the render maybe…I removed it


(ookka) #17

Hi,

I reworked a lot since last post. New fuselage body with a bigger engine and a 80’s look. I had to rework all part attached to the body, the tail etc. I made the uv unwrapping again… Here is the start of the textures, with simple lines for panelling. It is not really a funny job, it is very tedious but it will be the base of the bump maps.

Still a long way to go !





(ookka) #18

Hi,

few hours on rivets ! I just try to get position and overall feeling for the future diffuse/spec/bump maps. A tedious work, but as the lines were, a mandatory base for texturing the bird. 8k map for body, 8k for wings, 8k for tail. Sorry for the low res renders…

thanks for C&C !




(pauljs75_) #19

That looks pretty plausible for a made-up aircraft. I see some elements of MiG, some of Mirage, and some of F-18. But looks cool overall. In earlier shots I was wondering how that tail would clear for landing, but it looks like it might be revised in the most recent version. I think placement and mechanism used for landing gear will be one of the trickier things to figure out.

As for painting rivets, there is a trick to do those quickly in Blender itself. Yet it’s still hard to get it consistent because of how brush scaling works. Unfortunately for some unknown reason texture paint in Blender doesn’t have that one brush sizing option that sculpting in Blender has, which would be way useful. (The option that locks brush size relative vs. surface rather than view.) Regardless - to paint rivets you use the brush spacing setting and dial the amount way up, and fiddle with brush curve (not to be confused with curve-based stroke - although that’s useful too) for how the rivet outline looks. It works well with space, line, and curve brush strokes. The only real hard part is keeping the view distance right for the size, which is why that missing brush size mode is a bit of a letdown.

Alternately it’s possible to just paint the seam lines in Blender first, and then use Illustrator or Inkscape for the rivet circles. Not as convenient as staying in one program, but if textures on the template are scaled consistently then this will be more consistent too.


(ookka) #20

Hi,

Thanks. I did not take references on these airplanes, but after twenty years of aircraft loving, I am sure it has been “in my mind” even if I don’t want to refer to any particular plane :slight_smile: It is a good question too (and your comment did not help me :D) to know the country of origin for the final paintings/camo… Can you please tell me what is the more “plausible” one according to you (France, Russia, US ?, UK ?). Just to get another opinion than mine.

You are absolutely right. I will have to remove or change missile supports under the jet intakes I think. I have placed and tested rear landing gears in the middle to back part of jet intakes, on the lower side and these supports are not really well positionned… I have still hard time with “what if” engineering to get a place for a 20mm caliber gun. As for the early series of F4 Phantom, maybe it will end with a dedicated playload. Or inside the front lower side of jet intake like for the Mirage III or Kfir, I don’t remember wich one it is at the moment.

Thanks for the explaination. To be honest, I am really really not confortable with texture painting. Even if I use Blender since early 2.4, I did not even try this feature. Photoshop allows me to work on both textures (diffise/bumps/specular) using brushes, spacing etc. I use PS for maybe 14/15 years now and even if I use only 10% of this software I think it would be really hard to completely change my workflow. But I will try texture painting on a test project, discovering new approaches and things is really cool.

Thanks again for your comment.