• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Screenshots

3b122273f383b1d575e58623d7ef6e17.jpg
 
Javis said:
Firstly, i think you are certainly to be congratulated with being the first on our virtual planet who dares to speak more or less in sort of a negative or atleast sceptical sense about the IFE/Heatblur Super MasterPiece that is their native MSFS Grumman F-14A/B Tomcat model. More accolades to you. Sir ! :)

Secondly, it is possibly without a shadow of doubt that if you happen to stand next to the real F-14A Tomcat VF-111 Sundowners NL200/161621/1989 "Miss Molly", you will notice exactly the same lumpy and dented appearance of the forward fuselage and nose cone. So when it comes to the F-14 model at hand that's just accurate photorealism at work. And not only that, it is THE VERY BEST photoreal aircraft texturing we can feast our eyes on sofar in MSFS.

Strap yourself in, Paul, and you'll have to admit this gotta be absolutely the next best thing to the real cockpit. I just read somewhere about a flightsimmer who stepped into the VC of the PMDG DC-6 after a flight with the Tomcat and couldn't believe how 'dated' it looked... That says something, doesn't it. :)

Edit: @ collensr: sorry, i didn't realize it was you who thought that about the PMDG DC-6.... ;-)
Click to expand...

+1

I've had the privilege to stand next to an F-14A in 1999 and those birds looked very worn indeed. I would say that is normal for a +25 yo plane that flies off aircraft carriers.

@ Bomber_12th and ZsoltB: brilliant shots guys!!!

Cheers,

Priller
 
Javis said:
Firstly, i think you are certainly to be congratulated with being the first on our virtual planet who dares to speak more or less in sort of a negative or atleast sceptical sense about the IFE/Heatblur Super MasterPiece that is their native MSFS Grumman F-14A/B Tomcat model. More accolades to you. Sir ! :)

Secondly, it is possibly without a shadow of doubt that if you happen to stand next to the real F-14A Tomcat VF-111 Sundowners NL200/161621/1989 "Miss Molly", you will notice exactly the same lumpy and dented appearance of the forward fuselage and nose cone. So when it comes to the F-14 model at hand that's just accurate photorealism at work. And not only that, it is THE VERY BEST photoreal aircraft texturing we can feast our eyes on sofar in MSFS.

Strap yourself in, Paul, and you'll have to admit this gotta be absolutely the next best thing to the real cockpit. I just read somewhere about a flightsimmer who stepped into the VC of the PMDG DC-6 after a flight with the Tomcat and couldn't believe how 'dated' it looked... That says something, doesn't it. :)

Edit: @ collensr: sorry, i didn't realize it was you who thought that about the PMDG DC-6.... ;-)
Click to expand...

Hi Jan,

My most recent Tomcat encounter was with this one in Kalamazoo, Michigan this last October (I was visiting my daughter, who lives over there ). It's obviously not a great picture to provide a comparison, but dents and bumps didn't grab my attention as I wandered round it.

MDqGfM9.jpg


The only other Tomcat I've seen in the flesh, was one off the USS Nimitz at Mildenhall air display in the UK back in the 1980s. Could well have been a very new aircraft at that time.

The bumps, dents and lumps in the forward fuselage just seem too noticeable on this model, particularly for an in-service aircraft. Look at the lower side edge of the canopy frame in some of the pictures - it quite wobbly in places.

Don't get me wrong - it's a fabulous model, and were I not engrossed with Just Flight's Vulcan at the moment, I'd be very tempted. Of course, at the end of the day, it's down to the individual simmer and how each of us perceive it. :O)
 
That is a very nice picture Paul, thanks for sharing.

Of course, that is a museum/exhibition environment, not at all comparable to an operational environment. Just look at the F-8, it looks pristine!

Cheers,

Priller
 
ryanbatc said:
I knew you'd post some glorious pics! How is it?
Click to expand...

Thank you, Ryan. I still have a lot to learn about it, but I've been in awe of everything I've seen, heard and experienced with it in the sim so-far. A lot of great features, stunning visuals, and what seem to me to be high quality sounds and very accurate flight dynamics (those who know way more about the F-14 than me, seem to agree). I've always been intimidated by these military jets with long operating checklists but, after having one go with the detailed starting checklist, I've gotten it down pretty well pat now just by memory. I also saw a Youtube short that demonstrates doing the quick start procedure in less than 60-seconds, which helped as well. I haven't gotten into the avionics/autopilot yet, and have just been enjoying putting the aircraft through its paces. I've always really wanted the DCS Heatblur F-14, but I couldn't justify the purchase based on how little time I've spent in DCS.
 
Priller said:
That is a very nice picture Paul, thanks for sharing.

Of course, that is a museum/exhibition environment, not at all comparable to an operational environment. Just look at the F-8, it looks pristine!

Cheers,

Priller
Click to expand...

True, the paint work is buffed up nicely - but I am talking about physical lumps and bumps. Compare the two pictures below. The first is a cropped part of Bomber-12ths screenshot earlier in this thread, the second an in-service F-14 about to trap. Note the bottom edge of the canopy frame, arrowed in green, and how ragged it is compared to the real one. Also arrowed in green is the panel covering the refuelling probe - compared to the real one, the MSFS one looks very battered. These are two examples - you can also compare the dents ( or lack of them ) on the two nose cones.

oHC8lLH.jpg


sGvRPVw.jpg
 
Gosh golly, it's almost like a $59.99 PC game can't recreate reality to 100% precision.

You'll always be able to find some differences between a sim and reality. It's the nature of simulation. But people on sim forums act like it's a contest sometime. :)

I grew up on this (which remains the most *fun* F-14 simulation ever.) I can handle 95% accurate bump maps.

f-14.png
 
Paul K said:
True, the paint work is buffed up nicely - but I am talking about physical lumps and bumps. Compare the two pictures below. The first is a cropped part of Bomber-12ths screenshot earlier in this thread, the second an in-service F-14 about to trap. Note the bottom edge of the canopy frame, arrowed in green, and how ragged it is compared to the real one. Also arrowed in green is the panel covering the refuelling probe - compared to the real one, the MSFS one looks very battered. These are two examples - you can also compare the dents ( or lack of them ) on the two nose cones.

oHC8lLH.jpg


sGvRPVw.jpg
Click to expand...

Yes i see what you mean, Paul, but no matter the superb detailing/texturing and fidelity of a model and no matter if it's a physical model or a digital one, it will never ever look 100% true to the real thing simply because it is a model. That's its purpose if you will, to NOT exactly look like the real thing. :)

Then there's the fact that your example is a screenshot, NOT the real deal (yes, i think i can say that in this particular case..;-) and also that this sort of thing we're discussing here (afraid i'm gonna have to call it 'rivetcounting', sorry Paul.. ;-) heavily depends on which of the default Tomcat texture sets is used, the weather and lighting in a particular shot when it was uhhh... shot, the angle of the camera and zoom, and last but not least the graphics card that was used to shoot the shot so to say. I bet a sceenshot may turn up sooner or later where the bottom edge of the canopy frame of the Tomcat in question does look nice and straight like as in the photo of the real Cat.

Yes, all the lumps, bumps and dents that may have been accumulated during the life time of a real Carrier Cat (not only Tomcats of course ) may well be seen on a model too, depending on which texture technique was used. And yes, IFE/Heatblur went full blown and fully dressed when it comes to texturing and certainly not only that !

Ok, some may say it might be a little too much but i can certainly say i don't belong to that camp ! I have always been a sucker for photoreal texturing and as i said earlier i think what we see here with the IFE/Heatblur F-14 is THE BEST photoreal texturing sofar in MSFS. All IMHO of course.(remember collensr who thinks that the PMDG DC-6 looks outdated now. That used to be the pinnacle of MSFS modeling.. ;-)

Don't go by a screenshot, Paul, no matter how wonderful it looks, you'll be sold once you have that bad ass Cat putting its dirty claws into your own personal tarmac. That's a promise. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top