P-40B Tomahawk | Wookiee's Hanger (Big Radials)

[k5083 1]

Hi.  Potential customer quite interested in this plane here. 

I have to agree with Coneman.  From the pics and vid reviews that have been published about this plane, the skins are a bit of a hot mess.  Several clear, easily avoidable errors are evident just in the graphic Chock posted.  I think I see funkiness in the 3d model as well, but I admit that not having the plane, it's harder to tell, as many of the pics and videos use a wide FOV that make it hard to tell what the real shapes are.

Yes, they are just skins, but from a marketing perspective, remember that the skins are one of the few things that a consumer can assess directly before buying.  If they aren't well researched, it raises legitimate questions about whether other things about the plane that can't be assessed before purchase are also not well researched.  Think of the skins as an advertisement for your overall level of attention to detail.  For me, personally, it has deterred the purchase while I collect more info from trusted reviewers etc, to determine whether there is a solid plane under those skins, and count on modders to fix the textures.  Just saying.

In some ways this plane has it tough because it inevitably invites comparison with the superb A2A WOP3 P-40, so for those of us who haven't given up P3D or FSX yet, it has a high bar to reach, but that can't be helped.

August

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

1 hour ago, sergemodular said:

 

I turned off crash detection so I could fly with the canopy open.  I'm hoping for an update they disable open canopy in flight leads to instant crash for those of us that like to run with crash detection on but its a minor point. 

 

You can open and close the Piaggio P149 Canopy (with a corresponding change in engine sound) in flight, so it is definitely can be done.

[Chock 17,769]

2 hours ago, k5083 said:

Several clear, easily avoidable errors are evident just in the graphic Chock posted.

They are? Not from what I can see, and it was me who put the thing together. 

2 hours ago, k5083 said:

while I collect more info from trusted reviewers

Gee, thanks for the vote of confidence. Guess there's no point in me having been a professional writer for decades and an FS reviewer for years - for example, it was me who did the Avsim review all those years ago for that A2A FSX P40 when it first came out, so it was me who gave it the multiple star rating on that review - or bothering to do this sort of technical research for days on end in preparation for those reviews any more then, huh? 😉

 

Edited April 25, 2021 by Chock

[Chock 17,769]

Thought you might like this pic, which is another graphic I created for my youtube review but didn't end up using. It was going to be the poster for the video. For the curious, that's the Big Radials P40 in MSFS near Pearl Harbor, montaged in Photoshop with the Just Flight/Aeroplane Heaven Mitsubishi A6M also ported into MSFS near Pearl Harbor. I painted on the fire and smoke trail in Photoshop.

Artistic licence aside, ten points to the first person who can tell me what is wrong with the image from a technical standpoint:

Edited April 25, 2021 by Chock

[Coneman 71]

8 hours ago, leprechaunlive said:

you sound just like Jankees actually 😄 few points here:

- Im not sure you realise how terribly long and hard the development of a full plane is. We are only two people working on the plane. One of them, has a day job already. we both have families, so doing anything takes us twice longer if not more. 

-i dont know where you get your time references from, but they are wrong (at least from our experience

- And finally your saying all this without owning the product, so how about you you first get it, try it, and see for yourself? 

-On that last point, how about you drop me a DM, i'll sort you out with a free copy, how is that? so you can make up your own mind. It might confirm what you thought, or it might not, who knows, and you might even send me an email afterward telling me what exactly should be improved (rather than "liveries are bad").

I'm really not interested in a freebie, but I appreciate the offer. My only motivation is to point out some ways to improve the product. As has been mentioned, you don't really need the airplane to see the issues with the camo and markings and some important things that are missing. And I fully realize how long this stuff takes to put together. But if this is a side job, why the push to get it out before it's polished? I think you could pick up even more business with a little extra time to make it right. I'll send you a PM with a few suggestions if you like.

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

1 hour ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

You can open and close the Piaggio P149 Canopy (with a corresponding change in engine sound) in flight, so it is definitely can be done.

It can be done for sure. we just thought we would use the Asobo's canopy simvar...well, lesson learned, never do it the Asobo's way 😄 This will get fixed, no worries 🙂

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

2 hours ago, k5083 said:

Hi.  Potential customer quite interested in this plane here. 

I have to agree with Coneman.  From the pics and vid reviews that have been published about this plane, the skins are a bit of a hot mess.  Several clear, easily avoidable errors are evident just in the graphic Chock posted.  I think I see funkiness in the 3d model as well, but I admit that not having the plane, it's harder to tell, as many of the pics and videos use a wide FOV that make it hard to tell what the real shapes are.

Yes, they are just skins, but from a marketing perspective, remember that the skins are one of the few things that a consumer can assess directly before buying.  If they aren't well researched, it raises legitimate questions about whether other things about the plane that can't be assessed before purchase are also not well researched.  Think of the skins as an advertisement for your overall level of attention to detail.  For me, personally, it has deterred the purchase while I collect more info from trusted reviewers etc, to determine whether there is a solid plane under those skins, and count on modders to fix the textures.  Just saying.

In some ways this plane has it tough because it inevitably invites comparison with the superb A2A WOP3 P-40, so for those of us who haven't given up P3D or FSX yet, it has a high bar to reach, but that can't be helped.

August

hmmm, who should i trust here? New member with 4 post, or Chocks?  Decisions, Decisions.  😄

[Chock 17,769]

22 minutes ago, leprechaunlive said:

hmmm, who should i trust here? New member with 4 post, or Chocks?  Decisions, Decisions.  😄

Depends on what is being stated really. The number of posts someone has isn't something you should go off to be fair. And nobody should ever feel that they are not able to voice their opinion and join any discussion. After all, at some point we all had just one post on Avsim, and a valid point - if it is one - is a valid point regardless of the number of posts anyone has made.

I do strongly disagree with people saying the paint jobs are not accurate though. It is risky to compare profile pics from modeling books and other such references and assuredly declare something is not correct if it doesn't have the roundels and letters in exactly the same place as they appear on such pictures, since we have enough photographs and documentary evidence to know that, especially in wartime, the rules were not always followed in regards to placement of such things.

It is even risky to go off the colours themselves on such images, not least because you'd have to be sure of monitor calibration and the calibration of the scanner the thing was originally created on as well as compression of colours in certain file formats. It's a different matter with swatch books, of which I have several incidentally, but even these are not always a great choice when painting stuff; as most scale modelers know, you have to go for 'scale colour' and other such concepts to end up with something which looks good, rather than slavishly following the pictures in a book. Even a really decent book.

If the paint jobs had been wildly inaccurate, I certainly would have pointed that out, and even then not have been too concerned, since a paint kit and a bit of time can remedy this anyway, but the fact is they are not really inaccurate anyway, so it's a moot point in both respects.

Personally, I would take it as a massive compliment if the worst anyone could say about a model of a fighter plane I had made, was that they thought some of the colours or markings were a bit off, although I am surprised you haven't had a bunch of people complaining that it doesn't even have a small radial, let alone a big one. 😉

Edited April 25, 2021 by Chock

[crimplene 634]

23 minutes ago, Coneman said:

I'm really not interested in a freebie, but I appreciate the offer. My only motivation is to point out some ways to improve the product. As has been mentioned, you don't really need the airplane to see the issues with the camo and markings and some important things that are missing. And I fully realize how long this stuff takes to put together. But if this is a side job, why the push to get it out before it's polished? I think you could pick up even more business with a little extra time to make it right. I'll send you a PM with a few suggestions if you like.

Why don't you simply provide some examples of what is wrong? You keep being evasive.

@k5083 Same for you. "clear, easily avoidable errors"? Name some!

[Chock 17,769]

13 minutes ago, crimplene said:

Why don't you simply provide some examples of what is wrong? You keep being evasive.

@k5083 Same for you. "clear, easily avoidable errors"? Name some!

This is a good point, although I look forward to someone turning up with a well-calibrated contemporary colour picture of a P40B. We might find some pics where the font isn't quite correct for the lettering and serial numbers, or possibly the insignia being not exactly in the same place as it was on the real thing. But you also have to consider that many wartime pics were censored too, so you can't always trust them either.

Then again, I'm willing to bet that the shark mouths on the real AVG P40s in the CBI were painted a lot rougher than you see on preserved P40s at airshows, so sometimes a bit of artistic licence is no bad thing. It's not as if you could nip up the road for a load of masking tape when you were on some makeshift airfield in Burma stood on a 55 gallon oil drum trying to paint a beautiful livery with a three inch wide brush and whatever paint there was to hand, whilst also keeping an eye out for Japanese bombers.

Edited April 25, 2021 by Chock

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

39 minutes ago, Coneman said:

I'm really not interested in a freebie, but I appreciate the offer. My only motivation is to point out some ways to improve the product. As has been mentioned, you don't really need the airplane to see the issues with the camo and markings and some important things that are missing. And I fully realize how long this stuff takes to put together. But if this is a side job, why the push to get it out before it's polished? I think you could pick up even more business with a little extra time to make it right. I'll send you a PM with a few suggestions if you like.

Yea but then you would STILL be talking about something you dont own!

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

7 minutes ago, Chock said:

This is a good point, although I look forward to someone turning up with a well-calibrated contemporary colour picture of a P40B. We might find some pics where the font isn't quite correct for the lettering and serial numbers, or possibly the insignia being not exactly in the same place as it was on the real thing.

Then again, I'm willing to bet that the shark mouths on the real AVG P40s in the CBI were painted a lot rougher than you see on preserved P40s at airshows, so sometimes a bit of artistic licence is no bad thing. It's not as if you could nip up the road for a load of masking tape when you were on some makeshift airfield in Burma.

Exactly, and then again, we NEVER set out to have the best liveries in the history of human kind! We settled for "good", wich means inevetably, some people are going to find them lacking, but, we cant please everyone unfortunately. 

Edited April 25, 2021 by leprechaunlive

[Chock 17,769]

Just now, leprechaunlive said:

Exactly, and then again, we NEVER set out to have the best liveries in the history of human kind! We settled for "good", wich means inevetably, some people are going to find them lacking, but, we cant please everyone unfortunately. 

I think it's worth pointing out too that in spite of the very impressive nature of the FSX A2A P40, the liveries on that weren't exactly its strong point either. That's true of quite a few A2A aeroplanes. Compare if you will the paint jobs on the Aeroplane Heaven B-17F/G to the ones on the A2A B-17G and you'll be in no doubt as to which has the better paint jobs. Spoiler alert: It isn't the A2A one. And this is coming from someone who thinks A2A is the best flight sim developer of the lot.

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

1 minute ago, Chock said:

I think it's worth pointing out too that in spite of the very impressive nature of the FSX A2A P40, the liveries on that weren't exactly its strong point either. That's true of quite a few A2A aeroplanes. Compare if you will the paint jobs on the Aeroplane Heaven B-17F/G to the ones on the A2A B-17G and you'll be in no doubt as to which has the better paint jobs. Spoiler alert: It isn't the A2A one. And this is coming from someone who thinks A2A is the best flight sim developer of the lot.

I would tend to think the same about A2A.

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

The other issue with historical liveries is there is no way you guarantee they are historical without photos of the actual aircraft as even though there were rules about what the colors and markings should be they tended to be followed very loosely if at all.  

Even then the exact precise colors can be a matter of debate as the manufactured paints supplied tended to be different from the specifications and vary from batch to batch and color photos from the day are far from color correct and even if you find left over paint from the period it may have changed color over time.

Just look at the thousands of threads on modelling forums arguing passionately about what constitutes a correct Dunkelgelb .