The A2A Simulations Community

Hello, I don't wish a full B-17 F conversion, but the ability of remove the nose turret and change the shape of the nose glass windshield would be very appreciated to fly with the Memphis Belle Livery.

I'm wondering if this would be difficult to do or not..

Only way to do it is for A2A to get out the source model file and change it, but I'll tell you now it's not a minor issue. Additionally, as A2A have shown their primary goal with their models is accuracy, a B-17G without a nose turret and reshaped nose is not accurate. Yes, I'm aware that the "Sally B" was modified, but it also had the correct F-style upper turret just as "The Movie Memphis Belle" has.

You have to realize the "G" model was the result of all the modifications made to the "F" during its initial deployment.

Those changes include the addition of the Tokyo Tanks mid way through the production, the "Cheyenne" tail with remote guns (again mid-production), the cheek guns in the nose, the revised, side-by-side waist gun emplacement with larger windows, a revised Bendix upper turret, chin turret (introduced after the YB-40 tests) revised radio room and sliding roof which also changed the turtle deck in front of it, and a lot of additional armor. As a result, just taking parts off of the "G" model doesn't necessarily make it an "F". In fact, most "G" models are mostly indistinguishable from a B-17F with all modifications completed.

_________________

Chris, while I agree with absolutely everything you said, I think the OP was simply looking for a minor cosmetic change, like the way we can change our Spitfire canopy. A true purist would have a million issues with an F model conversion, as you stated, but as a simple cosmetic change to just the visual model I think it is a GREAT idea... just to add to the fun, and paint options...

But if it would slow down development on any upcoming A2A release I'd have to say NOOOOO!!!!

Joe

What I'm saying is that even a minor cosmetic change isn't minor because it requires a complete rebuild of the front end. It's not just pulling a part off and then following that up with the fact that A2A hasn't ever done anything just for cosmetic reasons. If they do an "F", they'll do a real "F", not just take the chin turret off and call it an "F" since that's not what make it an "F" (confused enough? )

Also, as they've said with the P-47 and why they won't put a bubble top on it. If you change the looks, you might as well change the flight dynamics as well. That's another big project because taking the chin turret makes the plane a lot "slicker".

_________________

I'd personally love a fully modelled B17F. I yearn for those hydraulically controlled turbos and all the complexities and niggles that go with them. Even better would be to have another hardware throttle quadrant setup to control the individual turbo wastegates. I can dream at least. A2A I hope you're listening.

_________________
Visit the Harman Motor Works blog...
http://www.harmanmotorworks.com/blog
YouTube Channel...
www.youtube.com/user/harmanmotor

Yes CAP Flyer.

You know, as the B-17 is my ALL TIME FAVORITE Aircraft, since I'm very young ( I'm 17 now ), I know pretty much about it, and also all differences between both versions you stated before.

BUT , my point was just to have the look, at least the biggest differences that are the nose turrent and windshield. Of course, there's a lot of change, even in the interior, but my goal was just to have a B-17 G who look like the F model, with the Memphis Belle livery and the soundtrack of the movie in backround...

I know A2A are perfectionnist, but I'm sure if they launch a Poll, many people will agree to have a new function in an eventual next update, to change the nose windhield and remove nose turret, like changing the Prop for the spit.

Because in that way, change a prop by a simple click is totally unrealistic no ? You have to check the Prop governor linkages etc.. but it was fun and useful.

Please A2A, what do you think about it ?

Cheers.

Yes, you do have the prop linkages, but at least with the early Spitfires (not sure about the later marks) they were all designed to accept the two blade wooden props and could be converted with minimal fuss. For obvious reasons they chose not to do so. It is not unrealistic, but rather impractical for the planes who flew in war.

_________________

I think we are flat out of luck on any and all mods to the B-17. Pity, as at the least, a move from the -G to the -F appears to be feasible. Another potential mod I asked about (unarmed variant with turrets removed and faired over) has come to naught.

If you look at A2A's Accu-Sim history, I don't believe they have ever released multiple variants.

One thing is for sure though-- I have a tough time flying ANYTHING that isn't Accu-sim these days!

Just my .02 cents.

Kent

mmmm most of our aircraft have multiple variants, P-47 with a few Razorback types, Cub with ski's, floats, Spitfire MkI-II etc etc. With Accu-sim we have things modelled to a fine degree changing something like varients from G to F isnt like just changing the 3D model. An entire rebuild under the hood would be required as to the two aircraft have so many different systems.

_________________
A2A Facebook for news live to your social media newsfeed
A2A Youtube because a video can say a thousand screenshots,..
My twitter for my own twitter and random A2A insights

Lewis,

First, I want to reiterate that I love your Accu-sim products.

Further, I agree that with the release of the Spit (Mk and II) and P-40 (P-40B, P-40C, AVG, RAF and Russian), you are now moving into a multi-model approach on releases (perhaps my use of the word "variant" was imprecise...you are right-- "variant" indicates "variations of the same model", and your B-17G, B-377 and Cub certainly do all reflect being "variations of the same model").

That said however, what I meant is that your satisfied customers would appreciate truly different models of some of the earlier releases: B-17F, P-47D bubble top, etc. There would be many more repaints that could be done, and many different operations that could be simulated, as they are models that were major players (B-17F), or actually the more numerous of the type (P-47D bubble top with 7,179 units, vs. 5,423 Razorback). I can't speak for others, but I would gladly pay additionally for these models.

Being realistic though, I realize it unfortunately isn't probably going to happen for The B-17 and P-47D at this stage of the game. As a result, I encourage A2A to boldly continue on the path they have started with the last two Accu-sim airplanes by releasing multiple models with each new product (especially the F-104, and F-4). There is no doubt that on your current course, you have (and are continuing to) redefine FSX...

Regards,

Kent

Kent, what I think you're missing in the plot though is that it's not just as simple as adding another 3D model. Even with modular Accusim, you have to not only change the 3D model to match, but also all the Accusim systems. The main reason A2A is going to be releasing a Mk.V Spitfire is because it uses the same base engine as the P-51D with the Mk.II's systems, meaning they don't have to do much in the way of adding new systems. To go from a B-17G to a B-17F requires several major changes to the systems that are the heart of Accusim, and then you get into the problem that with the B-17F, so many changes were incorporated under that one variant that just doing a B-17F won't be enough. You have to choose a specific time in the B-17F evolution as the last B-17F's off the Boeing, Vega, and Douglas lines were almost identical to the B-17G. So, what do you do? Make a B-17F that for all intents and purposes is a B-17G? No, you can already do that to some extent by just repainting the current model. Make an early-model B-17F? Maybe, but then you'll have problems with some of the late-model F's that have the G-style offset nose compartment guns. It's one of those things that's really hard to do even though it may seem simple.

Same thing with the F-104 and F-4. The difference between and F-4D and F-4G is light years in systems. Yeah, it's still an F-4, but the G model had much more complex avionics (almost 20 years newer in fact), and that was just the basic stuff, not the SEAD equipment.

_________________

Don't know what to say....except maybe "Semper Fi"?

K.

Here's my first attempt to modding the B-17G over the weekend to remove the chin turret: Screenshot.

I'm not happy with the results. Furthermore, my AccuSim B-17G won't fly anymore and I think I'll have to restart from scratch.

_________________
I like Thunderbolts! (Link to MySpace tribute page)


120th Fighter Wing, Montana Air National Guard

Yeah...I understand wanting an -F....but I'm not convinced te collateral damage in your picture is worth it!

Kent

CAP Flyer, as you stated above, late B-17 F's are almost same as early B-17 G, so why just some esthetical and maybe light sysyem change couldn't do the trick ? You countersay your statements no ?