Are those panel lines geometry or textured? Because if they're modeled, this is no-longer a low-poly mesh.
Regarding weathering; First, you need to UV unwrap your mesh so you have something to work with. Then just think of areas that would get lots of wear in real life:
Around the cockpit, add some scuffed paint from pilots hurriedly scrambling into their cockpits. Add some hydraulic fluid leaks around powered doors. Think of which areas would be exposed to the harshest airflow, and dirty them up. Look up photos of real aircraft and try to match them.
this is not one i was planning to sell and it was never meant to be low poly, they are modelled lines. really unsure about how to unwrap UVs(not sure if it's even possible in sketchup), but thanks for the suggestions of where to put the dirt. where is the harshest airflow likely to be on my design? what are your thoughts on cockpit canopy designs and opening mechanisms? i wanted to keep the cockpit fairly low profile, but it needs to remain transparent until as far down as possible to improve field of view. i want to have it slide back but the shape of the area around it makes that quite tricky. dirt will be added as i get to that stage, full panelling comes first. thanks.
Nice to see you adding some detail. I'd highly recommend schooling yourself on unwrapping UVs. Making all of the panel lines geometry is very ineffecient.
Canopies are generally just hinged with a hydraulic ram to raise and lower them. As far as weathering; any leading edge is going to be prone to wear (front of wings, inlet guide vanes, et cetera). Also, rivets...dirt, hydraulic fluid, oil and fuel bring a lot of attention to them. Seeing streaks of crud around rivets is very common.
If you want to excel in Sketchup you should take a look at sorceress21's work. She can work some magic with that program.
Nice to see you adding some detail. I'd highly recommend schooling yourself on unwrapping UVs. Making all of the panel lines geometry is very ineffecient.
Canopies are generally just hinged with a hydraulic ram to raise and lower them. As far as weathering; any leading edge is going to be prone to wear (front of wings, inlet guide vanes, et cetera). Also, rivets...dirt, hydraulic fluid, oil and fuel bring a lot of attention to them. Seeing streaks of crud around rivets is very common.
If you want to excel in Sketchup you should take a look at sorceress21's work. She can work some magic with that program.
thanks, am looking for sorceress21's work now. seems like she is a member on here.
If you want to keep the super-low-profile canopy, you could try something like the F-103. In that (proposed) interceptor, the canopy was just bits of glass set into the fuselage skin. The entire cockpit dropped out of the bottom of the nose on struts for entry/egress.
Regarding airflow, position the model so you're looking nose-on. Pretty much everything you see is taking the brunt of the air. If there's airbrakes, you can fuss those up to. Other than that, just do whatever looks nicest.
If you want to keep the super-low-profile canopy, you could try something like the F-103. In that (proposed) interceptor, the canopy was just bits of glass set into the fuselage skin. The entire cockpit dropped out of the bottom of the nose on struts for entry/egress.
Regarding airflow, position the model so you're looking nose-on. Pretty much everything you see is taking the brunt of the air. If there's airbrakes, you can fuss those up to. Other than that, just do whatever looks nicest.
checking out the F-103 design now. added some radiator details near the back, they are underneath hinged covers and when they get hot the covers open allowing the radiators to emit heat into space. with a red glow coming from beneath some baffle like structures it should be awesome when imported to blender. pictures to come soon.
radiators shown here Attachment not found.
and these shots show the overall shape of the region i have been panelling, some elements have been moved out of the way as they are not altered yet from the old model. Attachment not found. Attachment not found.
i added some ailerons/elevators on the rear edges of the wings, though they are quite unusual in design. i also added panelling details forward of each aileron. though something about them does not look quite right to me. engines will be fully reworked but not yet, still unsure of cockpit canopy arrangement though i may give up searching for new ideas and just have it slide straight back(this of course has the problem of removing some of the lower stuff from the pilots field of view). gun turret also needs redesigning and i have some ideas for it, thinking of different styles for the hyperspace drive. i know it needs to be in the large nose cone area and have two tubes angled slightly inwards but i am unsure of how to add greebles to the drive without destroying the smooth aerodynamic shape of the nose. the open bays visible on the side of the nose are for thrusters that i have yet to build. the bulges in the wing roots will contain extra thruster bays.
Spacefighter, stop, just stop. Look at a real airplane for god's sake to see how the panels are arranged. You are just sticking a bunch of random looking rounded rectangles and other shapes in random places. Take a look at this: block25.jpg
Each one of those hatches is made to access something inside for maintenance and makes sense. Notice that the wings are mostly just one or two panels as are the flaperons and slaterons.
Spacefighter, stop, just stop. Look at a real airplane for god's sake to see how the panels are arranged. You are just sticking a bunch of random looking rounded rectangles and other shapes in random places...
Each one of those hatches is made to access something inside for maintenance and makes sense. Notice that the wings are mostly just one or two panels as are the flaperons and slaterons.
While I agree with you, to a point, I think we should be impressed that he's making the effort to improve his models.
Spacefighter, do a search for "F-16 cutaway" (or any other aircraft) and you'll be able to more clearly visualize why a lot of aircraft have panels where they do.
thanks for the images Knight26 and i am trying to make the panels more like that of normal aircraft. i'm looking for cutaways now but please remember that because of the technology used on these craft some things on current aircraft just DO NOT translate across. aircraft for example need refuelling, these use bussard ramjets(i made that decision early on because i really like that method of propulsion). aircraft fly in an atmosphere at all times, these are atmosphere capable but PRIMARILY designed for space. i was contemplating using charged plates and plasma to act as ailerons, such technology has been theorised already. i'm not finished yet and at present i am quite open to ideas that do not destroy the original shape. that said i think the panels i have put on the fuselage are quite good and fairly similar to those on real planes. the wing stuff requires changes which i am working on now.
p.s.what do you think of my radiators?
....but please remember that because of the technology used on these craft some things on current aircraft just DO NOT translate across.
That's kind of a cop-out. It's sci-fi, sure, but unless you're going to throw all engineering conventions out the window most things will cross over structurally. Maybe you don't have an aerial refueling port. That's the only thing I've seen you list that is different. Panel lines will normally follow the structural framing underneath. You may not see rivets due to some radar absorbant material coating (like the F-22), but you'll still see panel lines.
sorry but i only just got round to reading this. worked on the cockpit canopy all day, nightmarishly small details and all too many opportunities to make geometry errors. finally completed the sliding mechanism so that is one less problem, now to continue with panelling. i am taking a careful look at a long list of aircraft schematics to see where panel lines are usually found, when i get back to working on panelling i should be able to make it more realistic.
thanks for the links and suggestions.
if my radiators as they are are too small there is not much i can do to make them larger however what is shown there is one radiator, the fighter has atleast ten of them. i may also consider folding radiators right next to the laser guns to quickly remove excess heat from them.
i'll give you a tip about SketchUp modelling, at first block out your model (in seperate components,) after that, dont try to intergrate the details into your standard shape, but make the details appart and place them on your ship, because what you have now are only some lines on a surface, there is no mechanical detail: http://www.scenicreflections.com/files/Jet_Engine__Wallpaper_rqd.jpg
have yet to really continue work on the fighter, been quite busy. might not get chance for much modelling for a few weeks depending on circumstances. have added some new panels o the fuselage but have not reworked others yet. still need to alter wing panels and control surfaces(?). but intend to rework some internal details before i return to external ones.
to anyone who has concept images of:
1. fusion reactors
2. rcs thrusters
3. shielding units(shield generators)
4. engine nozzles and afterburners
i would greatly appreciate sharing any of them, thanks. i've been looking around on google images but struggling to find any images that are particularly helpful here.
in reply to Rick27 thanks for the tips, though blocking out is not really a strategy i use. i prefer working on it nose to tail(or in some other arbitrary direction) filling in from dead simple to full detail as i progress. nice image in the link i may borrow some of it's features for parts of my engine design, though alone it does not contain all the ideas i need for the engines.
in reply to colbmista, you may wish to know just how much waste heat a starship must get rid of. if we are really optimistic and say the laser guns are 60% efficient that's still a lot of energy left over as heat. then we have, life support, shields, power reactors and engines each of which generates waste heat in various amounts. as you may have already read in this thread or my others, my ships are quite unrealistically powerful so even if the engines are 95% efficient that's more than several petawatts to get rid of( a more exact figure will be available when i decide on a realistic mass for the fighter and hence an accurate power estimate). in space there is no conduction or convection so we need radiators to remove it or the crew will boil within a fraction of a second. that and the radiators look cool and fit well in those ten places.
you know space is freezing so that amount of heat radiators is kinda pointless as the cold in space will assist in the cooling of what ever craft and texhnology that is in space
you know space is freezing so that amount of heat radiators is kinda pointless as the cold in space will assist in the cooling of what ever craft and texhnology that is in space
space cannot technically be called "cold" as in the absence of particles whizzing around with kinetic energies temperature is very hard to define. as space contains only tens particles per cubic metre it can be regarded as a perfect vacuum in this context, so the ship will lose heat to it by radiating out energy by means of photons. however if this rate of heat loss is matched or equalled by the rate of heat gained then the ship will stay at constant temperature or heat up. if the engines/lasers/systems were not running then yes it would cool rather fast assuming that there were no nearby high powered light sources radiating heat onto the ship(these would supply heat to the ship faster than the ship is radiating heat away). when the systems on the craft are functioning it will be generating more heat than it can easily radiate away without the addition of radiators. the radiators are also used so that the waste heat is radiated from certain areas, so only the radiator and the heat exchanging systems will get hot rather than the entire ship.
p.s. concept images of fusion reactors/ shield generators/rcs thrusters/engines are stil very welcome
thanks.
Why not design a reactor generater in your own design use your head look at things around you turn thos shapes or items in to some sort of design for a reactor take dumbbella for example thos can be a rough shape for somesort of generater its quite simple enough also look at rh the defiant it was based off of a turtle or the ship from the oblivion movie which was based off a dragon fly take real world things and wing it
thanks for the links, the thrusters images could certainly be very useful. the reactor ones might, but ny reactors need to be quite tall and thin so some reworking is needed.
I've been reading through this thread, and as much of the good you are doing with your models ( even though I don't agree with the pricing from a professional point of view), I don't understand what your framework is? Why use lasers? They are generally just used for burning holes at extreme temperatures, why not use super-heated gases that turn into plasma? Or even electro-magnetic ballistics?
I also suggest reading the articles on the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs.
Good luck with it all, and I do look forward to seeing it evolve, but I seem to find with allot of Science Fiction, that people don't really understand what Science Fiction is.
i prefer lasers for my fighters and light craft because in my SF verse powerful enough sources are small and light enough to fit onboard such small craft. partly i'm using lasers because they are a sort of sci fi classic, but also because their only requirement(unless they are certain types of chemical laser) is energy. kinetic weapons and plasma/ions both require ammunition/fuel as well as energy. if you have noticed i am planning some work on a KKS(kinetic kill ship) designed to attack capital ships by accelerating towards them at extreme speed and then releasing a dense projectile for smashing through the armoured hulls. as for that mention of the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs i will take a look at some of those articles when i get a chance.
more work completed includes this Attachment not found.
please ignore the cockpit it's just there as a placeholder and will have more done to it soon. engines will also be replaced. Attachment not found.
the turret has not been altered yet, so it can be ignored. the large plain spaces on the hull are also not yet worked on.
still have not refitted the wings
did design a new reactor but it didn't look too good with this craft(too spindly and not enough space around the core for shielding and thermocouples) so i intend to change it again.
Attachment not found.
also designed a reactor cover(which i am quite proud of), there is one on each side of the fighter, each covering two reactors. the text reads "check radiation levels before opening" as the whole cover can hinge up so the reactors can be accesses should they need to be removed and replaced. note that these are the power generating reactors not those in the engines(which are still to come).
big conundrum for me at present is what to do about the smooth metal shell at the back of the cockpit, i know that it is better for a fighter to have a cockpit which is clear in all directions but that did not look very good when i tried it before, i just know i cannot leave it smooth but am unsure of what to put there. was thinking of adding some sensors as it is a perfect place for them but still want to put some more panel lines on it, unsure of how they should be arranged.
I know what it is! I finally realized what looks so off about your paneling. The color! Real panel lines are not THAT visible. If you change the color of the lines you have now to something just a hair darker than the base color you may have a winning combination.
The only thing that still really stands out is the trailing edge of the wings. I know you said you're still working that area so I'll leave it at that.
Good job on the reactor covers. If you apply that level of detail to the rest of the model it would make it instead of break it.
Last thought: When you layout your panels and what may be underneath please consider the maintainers who have to access those areas.
i prefer lasers for my fighters and light craft because in my SF verse powerful enough sources are small and light enough to fit onboard such small craft. partly i'm using lasers because they are a sort of sci fi classic, but also because their only requirement(unless they are certain types of chemical laser) is energy. kinetic weapons and plasma/ions both require ammunition/fuel as well as energy. if you have noticed i am planning some work on a KKS(kinetic kill ship) designed to attack capital ships by accelerating towards them at extreme speed and then releasing a dense projectile for smashing through the armoured hulls. as for that mention of the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs i will take a look at some of those articles when i get a chance.
I like lasers just because they're a Sci-Fi classic. However, if somebody needs more of an explanation, I think I'm going to borrow yours. That's good stuff.
I like lasers just because they're a Sci-Fi classic. However, if somebody needs more of an explanation, I think I'm going to borrow yours. That's good stuff.
are you suggesting panel lines coloured like this, or even closer to the hull colour? Attachment not found.
p.s. just to ask would 7000 kg be a realistic mass(assuming the fictional metal i am using, diracium, is of similar/slightly lower density to materials used in current aircraft) for a fighter of this size, bearing in mind that there is quite a lot of air inside(reactors/engines/systems/pilot facilities are accessible in the rear with just enough space to move around in) so the structure is not solid all the way through?
...bearing in mind that there is quite a lot of air inside(reactors/engines/systems/pilot facilities are accessible in the rear with just enough space to move around in) so the structure is not solid all the way through?
SF, the engines at least in most modern fighters are designed to be serviced outside the plane itself. They can be removed, serviced and repaired, and replaced rather efficiently.
Except for designated cargo spaces, a war machine should have ZERO free space. If there's space in the hull you're not using, it's wasted potential. There could be more power cells, ammo, fuel, atmo, or capable gear (bigger avionics, faster computer, intrinsic field de-fieldifiers, whatever) in that empty space.
Additionally, empty space means poor structural integrity. Unless you're assuming a hand-wavium or unobtanium level of tensile and ductile strength for your materials, no military designer worth his, her, or its salt would put void spaces in a vessel designed for high-g maneuvers (like a fighter must be otherwise it's toast).
There's no logical reason to build the fighter that way. If nothing else, if I were the designer and you presented me with a void-space required design, I'd simply make the engines big enough to fill the void space, easy to detach, and then present you with a "cost overrun" bill.
This isn't even a rule-of-cool issue like those dual-folding wings of yours. This is a functionality issue that's a real deal-breaker on the design.
the engines will be able to be removed, for replacement. my thought in having the space in the back was to allow a small amount of space for the pilot on extended missions and also so the pilot could make emergency repairs should something go wrong during flight. in space of course making emergency repairs in flight makes far more sense than when flying in earth's atmosphere, if a fighter were to suffer from some kind of problem whilst in deep space then it might be quite a while before a rescue effort can reach it. if the problem was with life support then if the pilot cannot get to those units to try and repair them he is as good as dead, in a problem with the engines whilst out of contact with base it also makes sense for the pilot to be able to access them.
i'll think about altering this but it has been a feature throughout this design from the original drawing(that was ages ago). in the meanwhile more pictures will be posted soon.
jsut because your concept drawing had it doesnt mean the finished product will through out the designing process things change a concept is jsut a concept nothing else your finished work will never look like its concept design
Posts
Canopies are generally just hinged with a hydraulic ram to raise and lower them. As far as weathering; any leading edge is going to be prone to wear (front of wings, inlet guide vanes, et cetera). Also, rivets...dirt, hydraulic fluid, oil and fuel bring a lot of attention to them. Seeing streaks of crud around rivets is very common.
If you want to excel in Sketchup you should take a look at sorceress21's work. She can work some magic with that program.
Regarding airflow, position the model so you're looking nose-on. Pretty much everything you see is taking the brunt of the air. If there's airbrakes, you can fuss those up to. Other than that, just do whatever looks nicest.
Attachment not found.
and these shots show the overall shape of the region i have been panelling, some elements have been moved out of the way as they are not altered yet from the old model.
Attachment not found.
Attachment not found.
i added some ailerons/elevators on the rear edges of the wings, though they are quite unusual in design. i also added panelling details forward of each aileron. though something about them does not look quite right to me. engines will be fully reworked but not yet, still unsure of cockpit canopy arrangement though i may give up searching for new ideas and just have it slide straight back(this of course has the problem of removing some of the lower stuff from the pilots field of view). gun turret also needs redesigning and i have some ideas for it, thinking of different styles for the hyperspace drive. i know it needs to be in the large nose cone area and have two tubes angled slightly inwards but i am unsure of how to add greebles to the drive without destroying the smooth aerodynamic shape of the nose. the open bays visible on the side of the nose are for thrusters that i have yet to build. the bulges in the wing roots will contain extra thruster bays.
block25.jpg
Each one of those hatches is made to access something inside for maintenance and makes sense. Notice that the wings are mostly just one or two panels as are the flaperons and slaterons.
Compare that with these as well:
F-22:
22417.jpg
Pak-Fa (note that alot of those are not panel lines but rivet lines):
Su-27M:
While I agree with you, to a point, I think we should be impressed that he's making the effort to improve his models.
Spacefighter, do a search for "F-16 cutaway" (or any other aircraft) and you'll be able to more clearly visualize why a lot of aircraft have panels where they do.
p.s.what do you think of my radiators?
That's kind of a cop-out. It's sci-fi, sure, but unless you're going to throw all engineering conventions out the window most things will cross over structurally. Maybe you don't have an aerial refueling port. That's the only thing I've seen you list that is different. Panel lines will normally follow the structural framing underneath. You may not see rivets due to some radar absorbant material coating (like the F-22), but you'll still see panel lines.
I wouldn't say they're "quite good", but I'll concede it's a good start, but not very similar to real aircraft.
I think as far as radiators go, those are entirely too small. They're good for vents, I suppose.
Check out this site. It features pretty good technical pictures of the F-16. That's a good starting point.
thanks for the links and suggestions.
if my radiators as they are are too small there is not much i can do to make them larger however what is shown there is one radiator, the fighter has atleast ten of them. i may also consider folding radiators right next to the laser guns to quickly remove excess heat from them.
to anyone who has concept images of:
1. fusion reactors
2. rcs thrusters
3. shielding units(shield generators)
4. engine nozzles and afterburners
i would greatly appreciate sharing any of them, thanks. i've been looking around on google images but struggling to find any images that are particularly helpful here.
in reply to Rick27 thanks for the tips, though blocking out is not really a strategy i use. i prefer working on it nose to tail(or in some other arbitrary direction) filling in from dead simple to full detail as i progress. nice image in the link i may borrow some of it's features for parts of my engine design, though alone it does not contain all the ideas i need for the engines.
in reply to colbmista, you may wish to know just how much waste heat a starship must get rid of. if we are really optimistic and say the laser guns are 60% efficient that's still a lot of energy left over as heat. then we have, life support, shields, power reactors and engines each of which generates waste heat in various amounts. as you may have already read in this thread or my others, my ships are quite unrealistically powerful so even if the engines are 95% efficient that's more than several petawatts to get rid of( a more exact figure will be available when i decide on a realistic mass for the fighter and hence an accurate power estimate). in space there is no conduction or convection so we need radiators to remove it or the crew will boil within a fraction of a second. that and the radiators look cool and fit well in those ten places.
space cannot technically be called "cold" as in the absence of particles whizzing around with kinetic energies temperature is very hard to define. as space contains only tens particles per cubic metre it can be regarded as a perfect vacuum in this context, so the ship will lose heat to it by radiating out energy by means of photons. however if this rate of heat loss is matched or equalled by the rate of heat gained then the ship will stay at constant temperature or heat up. if the engines/lasers/systems were not running then yes it would cool rather fast assuming that there were no nearby high powered light sources radiating heat onto the ship(these would supply heat to the ship faster than the ship is radiating heat away). when the systems on the craft are functioning it will be generating more heat than it can easily radiate away without the addition of radiators. the radiators are also used so that the waste heat is radiated from certain areas, so only the radiator and the heat exchanging systems will get hot rather than the entire ship.
p.s. concept images of fusion reactors/ shield generators/rcs thrusters/engines are stil very welcome
thanks.
fusion reactors:
http://templarsoftwilight.wikia.com/wiki/QuadFusion_Reactor
http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/492112/enlarge
also the arc reactor from iron man is a good example
rcs thrusters:
http://space1.com/Artifacts/Gemini_Artifacts/RCS_Thruster/rcs_thruster.html (realworld thrusters)
engines:
ive always liked how the stargate deadalus ships engines looked
sheild generators:
look at starwars designs im not gunna do all the searching for you
I also suggest reading the articles on the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs.
Good luck with it all, and I do look forward to seeing it evolve, but I seem to find with allot of Science Fiction, that people don't really understand what Science Fiction is.
more work completed includes this
Attachment not found.
please ignore the cockpit it's just there as a placeholder and will have more done to it soon. engines will also be replaced.
Attachment not found.
the turret has not been altered yet, so it can be ignored. the large plain spaces on the hull are also not yet worked on.
still have not refitted the wings
did design a new reactor but it didn't look too good with this craft(too spindly and not enough space around the core for shielding and thermocouples) so i intend to change it again.
Attachment not found.
also designed a reactor cover(which i am quite proud of), there is one on each side of the fighter, each covering two reactors. the text reads "check radiation levels before opening" as the whole cover can hinge up so the reactors can be accesses should they need to be removed and replaced. note that these are the power generating reactors not those in the engines(which are still to come).
big conundrum for me at present is what to do about the smooth metal shell at the back of the cockpit, i know that it is better for a fighter to have a cockpit which is clear in all directions but that did not look very good when i tried it before, i just know i cannot leave it smooth but am unsure of what to put there. was thinking of adding some sensors as it is a perfect place for them but still want to put some more panel lines on it, unsure of how they should be arranged.
The only thing that still really stands out is the trailing edge of the wings. I know you said you're still working that area so I'll leave it at that.
Good job on the reactor covers. If you apply that level of detail to the rest of the model it would make it instead of break it.
Last thought: When you layout your panels and what may be underneath please consider the maintainers who have to access those areas.
I like lasers just because they're a Sci-Fi classic. However, if somebody needs more of an explanation, I think I'm going to borrow yours. That's good stuff.
thanks, more work coming soon.
Attachment not found.
p.s. just to ask would 7000 kg be a realistic mass(assuming the fictional metal i am using, diracium, is of similar/slightly lower density to materials used in current aircraft) for a fighter of this size, bearing in mind that there is quite a lot of air inside(reactors/engines/systems/pilot facilities are accessible in the rear with just enough space to move around in) so the structure is not solid all the way through?
SF, the engines at least in most modern fighters are designed to be serviced outside the plane itself. They can be removed, serviced and repaired, and replaced rather efficiently.
Except for designated cargo spaces, a war machine should have ZERO free space. If there's space in the hull you're not using, it's wasted potential. There could be more power cells, ammo, fuel, atmo, or capable gear (bigger avionics, faster computer, intrinsic field de-fieldifiers, whatever) in that empty space.
Additionally, empty space means poor structural integrity. Unless you're assuming a hand-wavium or unobtanium level of tensile and ductile strength for your materials, no military designer worth his, her, or its salt would put void spaces in a vessel designed for high-g maneuvers (like a fighter must be otherwise it's toast).
There's no logical reason to build the fighter that way. If nothing else, if I were the designer and you presented me with a void-space required design, I'd simply make the engines big enough to fill the void space, easy to detach, and then present you with a "cost overrun" bill.
This isn't even a rule-of-cool issue like those dual-folding wings of yours. This is a functionality issue that's a real deal-breaker on the design.
Sanderlee.
i'll think about altering this but it has been a feature throughout this design from the original drawing(that was ages ago). in the meanwhile more pictures will be posted soon.