Le Fantasque class

[the_frog]

Hello,

considering the nice artwork presented by Wise, this is just a very humble contribution:

http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/d5ad/quu33ngjzvh4dhg6g.jpg


DL: http://www.mediafire.com/download/teo3fv3es7nlaim/NDD_Malin.zip

The idea was to have some proper company for Gerome73's Strasbourg.

the Frog

[radiator]

It's not a very humble contribution, it's a great contribution!
Each new ship for SH3 - a great holiday for all of us!
Many thanks!!!

[MLF]

I agree with Radiator -thank you for this:Kaleun_Thumbs_Up:.

Regards,

MLF

[fsaconi]

It is a very nice ship, incredible in the details.

Great work. :yeah:

Greetings,

fsaconi

[french frog]

humillité your honor you, but you deserved congratulations for all your work

[makman94]

thank you for one more great addition, The_frog :yeah:
i am big fan of your ships :up:

[Jeff-Groves]

Beautiful.
:yeah:

[Borgneface]

The_Frog, this is a very nice artwork.....We are never desapointed when you offer us a ship for SH3 :yeah:

Thank you for that

Good hunting

[Hunter]

Nice to see that new units still comming :yeah:

[Fahnenbohn]

I've tried your new destroyer in the game. Well, this is a beautiful piece of art ! The level of detail is incredible. All is reproduced accurately. Something surprised me a lot : as I didn't see deep charges' launchers on the deck, I approached the ship without discretion, she detected and attacked me.

http://nsm08.casimages.com/img/2015/02/09//15020909594518069012948384.png (http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=15020909594518069012948384.png)

I think only two things could be improved at the hull : it should be slightly curved in the lengthwise direction : the bow and stern slightly raised. And the windows could be modeled in 3 dimensions.

Many congratulations, you are very talented and perfectionist !! I appreciate people like you. Thanks a lot for sharing your incredible work !!! :yeah:

http://nsm08.casimages.com/img/2015/02/09//15020910002218069012948385.png (http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=15020910002218069012948385.png)

[the_frog]

@everybody: Thanks for the kind words :salute:

@Fahnenbohn:

The hull is slightly bended; the forecastle raises by about 30 cm to the bow; the main deck raises towards aft by about 10 cm. That's very little but I followed the faired lines plan (plan des formes) of Le Fantasque & L'Audacieux as drawn 1930/31 (the historical department of the French navy once provided great scans of original plans and I am happy I downloaded a few). Possibly, you refer to Le Terrible, which had a slightly modified hull and a different shaft layout.

I skipped 3D portholes; the model is already at >100 000 triangles.


@Hunter:

About the time I started with the Le Fantasque BoJohansson started working on Le Vauquelin. I wonder if he completed the model (no furhter information available since the Sukhou forum is down).


@Jeff-Groves:

There another ship on the slipway, with the tentative pennant number J 566 :arrgh!:

[Jeff-Groves]

The original files are still at the link I sent you?

[pedalboat]

Nice work. They look great!

In Roster --- France there is a = missing in unit 2:


[UnitClass]
ClassName=DDMalin
UnitType=4
AppearanceDate=19350210
DisappearanceDate=19421127
DisplayName=FR DD Le Fantasque Class

[Unit 1]
Name=Le Fantasque
DOC=19350310
DOD=19421108

[Unit 2]
Name=Le Malin
DOC19360608
DOD=19421108

[the_frog]

@Jeff-Groves:

Thanks for the reminder; link retrieved, file downloaded.


@pedalboat:

Thanks!!! Error (luckily one without effect) corrected, revised version uploaded.

[Fahnenbohn]

Hello the_frog !

Did you try my parameters for your destroyer ? See thread "The ships' behaviour at sea". I think this may interest you.

And one question : why do you have to specify that ? :

[Unit 1]
Name=Le Fantasque
DOC=19350310
DOD=19421108

[Unit 2]
Name=Le Malin
DOC19360608
DOD=19421108

Is it not useless ?

[the_frog]

Fahnenbohn, it's linked to SH3's not implemented individual unit counting. So, yes, editing the individual untis in the *.cfg file is pretty useless. But, hey, it's kind of attaching the model to history :know:

[LGN1]

Great work, the_frog!

Do you have any plans to update the US destroyers in SH3?

Regards, LGN1

[the_frog]

LGN1,

the probably most ugly model in SH3/4 is NDD_Fletcher. The hull is just horrible. I started doing a new model but then lost interest. One day, I might re-visit that project.

[Scout614]

Hey Frog. Whats the best way to get your ships to populate my world since i seemed to mess up your British destroyers last time i tried to put them in?

[Jimbuna]

A very nice addition matey :cool:

[the_frog]

Hello Scout614,

if your campaign files contain entries calling for generic vessels, then there's a certain change that the vessels show up. However, generic entries are rare; most entries call for specific units. So, just installing new ship does not mean you will ever see one of them.

To increase the propability of sighting one needs to edit the campaign files (random as well as scripted layer), using the mission editor (or, with more experience, a text editor). WB did many edits for GWX but I haven't seen him here for a while.

I could provide campaign files but that's tricky because there are so many versions on the market and almost everybody runs a unique version of the game. So, I don't do it.

Cheers

[pedalboat]

Well, just for a show I added this ship by deleting the default one in mission Convoy Attack (NavalAcademy folder) and at least it works for me withot problem so far.

[Group 1.Unit 7]
Name=FR DD Le Fantasque
Class=DDMalin
Type=4
Origin=France
Side=1
Commander=0
CargoExt=-1
CargoInt=-1
CfgDate=19380101
DeleteOnLastWaypoint=true
GameEntryDate=19380101
GameEntryTime=0
GameExitDate=19451231
GameExitTime=0
EvolveFromEntryDate=false
Long=1723610.000000
Lat=6592940.000000
Height=0.000000
Heading=70.193764
Speed=5.000000
CrewRating=1
DelayMin=0
ReportPosMin=-1
ReportPosProbability=100
RandStartRadius=0.000000

[the_frog]

pedalboat,

editing one mission file in order to have a look at the model is fine. Editing the campaign file is something completely different ...

[pedalboat]

Yes, you're right, the_frog. Fiddling around with the campaign file is beyond my skills. That's why I did it the easy way.

[Scout614]

Hello Scout614,

if your campaign files contain entries calling for generic vessels, then there's a certain change that the vessels show up. However, generic entries are rare; most entries call for specific units. So, just installing new ship does not mean you will ever see one of them.

To increase the propability of sighting one needs to edit the campaign files (random as well as scripted layer), using the mission editor (or, with more experience, a text editor). WB did many edits for GWX but I haven't seen him here for a while.

I could provide campaign files but that's tricky because there are so many versions on the market and almost everybody runs a unique version of the game. So, I don't do it.

Cheers
That stinks i tried in the past with your RN DDs to change there unit names to match the stock ships in game but that messed up alot so im not gonna do that again.

[the_frog]

Scout614,

you are describing something different. Stock SH3 has only following RN destroyers (unit class 4): V&W, C&D, J, Tribal

I provided full replacments of J and Tribal; you could replace the C&D by one of the A to I destroyers. You just need to delete the entire NDD_C&D folder in the sea folder; then copy one of the desired A to I folders to the sea folder. And finally (and most important), you need to edit the *.cfg file in the new folder. The ClassName given therein must be changed to DDC&D. That's it.

You could also think of replacing NDE_River, which is the late-war escort version of whatsoever A to I destroyer (the Canadians lumped all A to I destroyers they received into one single group, named River class). In that case, you also need to change the UnitType to 3.

[Scout614]

Ok that makes alot more sense now. I think sh3 also has a Hunt class but I'm not near my computer to check. of course im also using GWX3 so that might be why i have more DDs then what you are saying

[the_frog]

... right, the Hunts are also unit class 4 in SH3, I forgot about that. SH3 has all three Hunt classes and I did replacements. You don't need to do anything else than installing them ...

[Scout614]

... right, the Hunts are also unit class 4 in SH3, I forgot about that. SH3 has all three Hunt classes and I did replacements. You don't need to do anything else than installing them ...
thanks I'll test them out once I finish this patrol

[LGN1]

...
You could also think of replacing NDE_River, which is the late-war escort version of whatsoever A to I destroyer (the Canadians lumped all A to I destroyers they received into one single group, named River class). In that case, you also need to change the UnitType to 3.

Hi the_frog,

do you have a recommendation which one from A to I to use in order to replace the NDE_River (I have used the D class to replace the NDD_C&D)?

Related to this, does it make sense to replace a stock US DD by one of the three DDs from the US destroyer pack (Bagley, Benham, or Porter)? I'm not very familiar with destroyers...

Regards, LGN1

[Scout614]

Hi the_frog,

do you have a recommendation which one from A to I to use in order to replace the NDE_River (I have used the D class to replace the NDD_C&D)?

Related to this, does it make sense to replace a stock US DD by one of the three DDs from the US destroyer pack (Bagley, Benham, or Porter)? I'm not very familiar with destroyers...

Regards, LGN1

Speaking of the River Class. I would use his river class haha but I'm seeing it as FFRiver so would I make it unit type 2. Also those are interwar US destroyers so they wouldn't match up too well with the US DDs maybe a US DDE though

[the_frog]

LGN1,
no, better do not replace the original (stock) SH3 US destroyers. In case you feel for replacing stock NDE_River, I suggest using either A or B class DDs.

Scout614,
in case you have a FFRiver, you do not refer to stock SH3. In stock SH3, there's no FFRiver. Some big mods renamed the NDE_River to NDD_A&B.

[Scout614]

LGN1,
no, better do not replace the original (stock) SH3 US destroyers. In case you feel for replacing stock NDE_River, I suggest using either A or B class DDs.

Scout614,
in case you have a FFRiver, you do not refer to stock SH3. In stock SH3, there's no FFRiver. Some big mods renamed the NDE_River to NDD_A&B.

Copy that

[JapLance]

This has to be one of the most detailed models for SH3 :yeah:.

Just adapted it to my SH4 installation. I really love it.

[the_frog]

Hello JapLance,

I am not surprised you adapted the model to SH4 :woot:

Pictures?

Since the idea was to do (almost) everything from scratch, I finally did my own version of the French AA weapons. Hope you like them.

[JapLance]

I don't run SH4 too much lately, other than checking ships in the museum. But for these magnificent ships I did a quick test mission.

Here is a "Division de contre-torpilleurs" in the Mediterranean under Vichy flag:

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z92/JapLance/SH4%20WDAD%20Med/DD%20LIndomptable_zpsldry8040.jpg

And this is a view in the Museum of the Le Terrible in 1944.

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z92/JapLance/SH4%20WDAD%20Med/SH4Img2015-02-04_214136_709_zps285b70d6.jpg

Soon, a pic of one of your new Scott-class in Spanish neutrality livery :D.

[the_frog]

:hmmm: SH4 graphics can be rather smashing ...

I didn't do the Spanish neutrality liveries, with the huge flags painted on the hull sides. Argentine, RN, or RAN vessels sporting Spanish colours on the hull would have been a rather awkward view. The texture system of SH3 has its merits but also some serious drawbacks :-?

Well, I could have created an equipment file, holding the hull flags, plus extra nodes for those flags in the *.dat., plus additional equipment layouts ... I didn't ...

[Fahnenbohn]

Hello the_frog !

I'm searching for british destroyers which are better looking as in SH3 stock game. Did you model one or two of them ?

There is a destroyer I would like to see well modeled : it is the german 1936A-class destroyer, or Narvik-class destroyer. I find her very graceful, and it would be so great that you could model her with as accuracy as you did for Le Fantasque class !!!!

http://nsm08.casimages.com/img/2015/03/08//15030811121418069013048580.jpg (http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=15030811121418069013048580.jpg)

Best regards

F.

[Scout614]

Hello the_frog !

I'm searching for british destroyers which are better looking as in SH3 stock game. Did you model one or two of them ?

There is a destroyer I would like to see well modeled : it is the german 1936A-class destroyer, or Narvik-class destroyer. I find her very graceful, and it would be so great that you could model her with as accuracy as you did for Le Fantasque class !!!!

http://nsm08.casimages.com/img/2015/03/08//15030811121418069013048580.jpg (http://www.casimages.com/img.php?i=15030811121418069013048580.jpg)

Best regards

F.
He's made all sorts of British destroyers just look on his profile under all threads started by thefrog.

[the_frog]

Hello Fahnenbohn,

I am no more using my old signature, which, as Scout614 pointed out, links to a blog. There you find most things I did the last years:

https://unionunabhaengigerwerften.wordpress.com/

... and remember, always install the newest version of the library files last.

There is a pretty good model of the Typ 1936A destoyers in the Soviet Waterways SH4 mod. Nobody converted it to SH3 so far.

Cheers -- the Frog

[Fahnenbohn]

Thank you for your link, the_frog !
I have not SH4. Is it hard to convert a model from SH4 to SH3 ? That would be so great if you could do that for me ! ... :yeah:

[TOY]

Wow, a piece 'o' art! What a beautiful model, downloaded NOW!!!

:up:

[the_frog]

Fahnenbohn,

usually, converting models from SH4 to SH3 no big thing. However, some of the 3D models that come with the SW mod do cause trouble. That's why I gave up converting SW models.

[JapLance]

In Operation Monsoon for SH4 there is a Narvik destroyer:

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z92/JapLance/SH4%20WDAD%20Med/DD%20Type%201936_zpsrxqqn4dr.jpg

Since I'm not really familiar with German destroyers, I'm not completely sure if it's the one Fahnenbohn is looking for, but it looks quite similar to the one in his pic.

[the_frog]

JapLance, that seems to be the model that is also in Soviet Waterways for SH4. I just realised, it actually depicts the Typ 1936A (mob) subclass.

[JapLance]

Ok, sorry then. I just checked and it is the same ship that seems to give you problems.

At least I got some benefit from this, as I realised that the Operation Monsoon Narvik has the funnels swapped for some unknown reason :hmmm:. The large one should be forward, as in all German destroyers I've seen.

[the_frog]

The model in the Soviet Waterways mod has the funnels at the correct positions :)
I didn't try converting the Typ 1936A model, so I don't know if there are problems. After trying a few other models I gave up converting models from that mod in general. Probably, the Typ 1936A model is fine ... However, since the Operation Monsoon model is the same, one could try that model instead.

[yamatoforever]

A beautiful french ship. Thanks!
Gefällt mir sehr. Ein Franzose. :up:

[the_frog]

Seems you have not been here for a while:03:
Welcome back.

Still modding train simulations or are you returning now to the sea?

[gap]

A beautiful french ship. Thanks!
Gefällt mir sehr. Ein Franzose. :up:

Seems you have not been here for a while:03:


Better late than never... btw I should second yamatoforever's congratulations: amazing model, Der Frosch :03::up:

[the_frog]

.... amazing model, Der Frosch :03::up:

I did models better and worse than that one :D

[gap]

I did models better and worse than that one :D

Your modesty does you credit :)

[the_frog]

Your modesty does you credit :)

I am a realistic person ... if you feel for, check the first models I tried, for example Bellona and Arethusa. They are typical kit bashing models, basically done by "deforming" existing pieces. The results were mixed. From a distance, they do not look too bad but don't come closer ... :doh:

I considered several times to re-built them but skipped the idea. They shall remain until someone feels sick enough of their looks and replaces them :D

[gap]

I am a realistic person ... if you feel for, check the first models I tried, for example Bellona and Arethusa. They are typical kit bashing models, basically done by "deforming" existing pieces. The results were mixed. From a distance, they do not look too bad but don't come closer ... :doh:

Well, of course experience matters, but creating a good model is always a matter of compromise between detail level, vertex count and the time you spend on a single object while many others are badly needed in game (and you start feeling sick of alway turning around the same bits) :03:

I considered several times to re-built them but skipped the idea. They shall remain until someone feels sick enough of their looks and replaces them :D

I don't think this is going to happen anytime soon :D

[Kendras]

... and you start feeling sick of alway turning around the same bits)

I hope this is not the case for you with the Wildcat/Hellcat models ! :03:

[gap]

I hope this is not the case for you with the Wildcat/Hellcat models ! :03:

Not exactly :haha:

As far as 3D work is concerned, the Wildcat model that I have been working on was basically ready for use since its dowload. I only had to put its part in their correct place and split some parts that I wanted to be separate from the rest.
What is taking time is painting all the possible color variants of the aircraft. US paint schemes are done; I realized there is a problem with RAF camo patterns though. Who created the model made the UV projection of the two wings specular and overlapped, and this is not good for asymmetrical paint schemes. I could rearrange the UV maps, but doing this would entail reworking all the textures I have already painted... I need to device something else to bypass the problem :hmmm:

[the_frog]

I don't think this is going to happen anytime soon :D


... but for better comparison of model quality the stock SH3/4/5 Dido might become replaced (if I can revive my interest ...:)):

https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/9705/numkcat59icarpj6g.jpg

... a draft model, prepared late 2015, before I focused on Southampton.

[gap]

... but for better comparison of model quality the stock SH3/4/5 Dido might become replaced (if I can revive my interest ...:)):

How can we contribute to reviving it? :O:

[the_frog]

How can we contribute to reviving it? :O:

Jimbuna's steady posting of pictures showing ugly stock SH3 models has always been a great motivation for doing better models :D
I probably shall give credit to his contribution :hmmm:

I would like to complete another project before. The major obstactle is that the guns are not available:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-51_mk7.php

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_3-50_mk10-22.php

Gap, if you feel for you may consider to re-create them :O:

[Kendras]

Jimbuna's steady posting of pictures showing ugly stock SH3 models has always been a great motivation for doing better models :D
I probably shall give credit to his contribution :hmmm:

:har:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-51_mk7.php

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_3-50_mk10-22.php

Gap, if you feel for you may consider to re-create them :O:

And what about 4,7inch guns with and without shield (for Nelson battleship I converted from SH5) ? :D

[gap]

Jimbuna's steady posting of pictures showing ugly stock SH3 models has always been a great motivation for doing better models :D
I probably shall give credit to his contribution :hmmm:

:rotfl2:

I would like to complete another project before. The major obstactle is that the guns are not available:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-51_mk7.php

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_3-50_mk10-22.php

Gap, if you feel for you may consider to re-create them :O:


And what about 4,7inch guns with and without shield (for Nelson battleship I converted from SH5) ? :D

if someone can provide me with good quality pictures of the guns seen from different angles or, at best, with construction schemes, why not? :03:

[Kendras]

if someone can provide me with good quality pictures of the guns seen from different angles or, at best, with construction schemes, why not? :03:

Let's finish all our projects first. :shucks:

[the_frog]

Gap, how many projects you "run" by now?
Here you go :D

http://www.mediafire.com/file/99b3n19x1g41005/3inch-50_Mk_10-22.7z

http://www.mediafire.com/file/nk7bubkserczahb/5inch-51.7z


Mind the polygon count, we need AI items not player models :03:

A largely correct model of a 3inch-50 submarine wet mount is in SH4 but has in total >30 000 polygons :)

[gap]

Gap, how many projects you "run" by now?
Here you go :D

You mean how many projects carried me away? :03:
I don't know exactly, but obviously more than I can handle :doh::O:


http://www.mediafire.com/file/99b3n19x1g41005/3inch-50_Mk_10-22.7z

http://www.mediafire.com/file/nk7bubkserczahb/5inch-51.7z

I couldn't ask for more
:rotfl2:


Mind the polygon count, we need AI items not player models :03:

Roger that :salute:
How many polygons more or less would you like each gun to be?


A largely correct model of a 3inch-50 submarine wet mount is in SH4 but has in total >30 000 polygons :)

I will have a look into it. Maype I can downsample it. If not, it will be a good template to start from :up:

[the_frog]

How many polygons more or less would you like each gun to be?

Check the 6 inch model I once sent :03:

Most of the guns I did had 4 to 5 000 triangles. This seems to be good comprise between the level of detail and what SH3 can handle.

[gap]

Check the 6 inch model I once sent :03:

Most of the guns I did had 4 to 5 000 triangles. This seems to be good comprise between the level of detail and what SH3 can handle.

Those amazing guns... I almost forgot about them! :doh:

Time to download your files, hoping that the link is still working, and to return the favor :salute:

[the_frog]

I remember seeing a model of the USS Texas having the two guns. It could be this model but I do not use Sketchup anaymore and so I cannot check.

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/545ff652d009382f7bb109af440648c0/USS-Texas-BB-35? (https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/545ff652d009382f7bb109af440648c0/USS-Texas-BB-35?hl=de)

[gap]

Hi The_Frog :salute:

In the past few days I have been reading information on the guns that you need for equipping your upcoming model and, seeing how many US ships had those guns fitted aboard (some of them even featured in stock SHIII, IV and 5), I must say that it is a scandal that no one has modelled them yet.
So, being the curious (and lazy) guy that I am, I have decided to have a look into the sketchup model that you pointed me to, and I hve also managed extraxting some meshes from it. Here they are, after some basic reworks by me:

http://i.imgur.com/XEL6iHs.png

Far from being a perfect copy of the real guns, I think those models look pretty decent though. Indeed, besides the usual reworks imposed by missing polygons, normals facing the wrong direction, etc, they will require a good polygon reduction (they are way beyond the poly count limit you gave me).
What do you think? Should I go for it?

Something I have noticed, is that the the look of the 3"/50 gun varied quite a lot during its long service. The model above probably reperesents an interwar mark (Mk 20 maybe?), when New-York-class battleships were re-fitted with those guns. Do you think it is okay for your upcoming model, or we should go for a later mark?

[the_frog]

Hello gap,

the 3 inch-50 was one of the most numerous pieces of equipment in the USN inventory and used especially on anti-submarine warfare vessels such as the DEs. So, yes, it's kind of funny that Ubisolft did no model of it :roll:

Those models are good enough for SH3 purposes but it is pretty clear they are based on cyclinders with far more than the 12 edges that give nicely smooth models in SH3.:hmmm:

Missing polygons, faces facing opposite directions and the stupid number of faces, these are the annoying features of meshes converted Sketch Up meshes. I think fine tuning such models needs more time than re-building them from scratch. But if you feel for starting the preocess I won't stop you :O:

I still have little time to dedicate to 3D stuff but I lost interest in the Treasury class cutters (those need the two guns) and went back to the Dido. Some progress ...

https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/bf06/049kusn4iqhlbi06g.jpg

Top and bow-heavy they were.

Most fittings are ready and "just" need to placed ...
In addition, items left to do: funnels, masts, davits, shafts ... and those bloody ships had boats different from those of Southampton/Fiji ... well, at least the 27-ft whaler is same. :yep:

[gap]

the 3 inch-50 was one of the most numerous pieces of equipment in the USN inventory and used especially on anti-submarine warfare vessels such as the DEs. So, yes, it's kind of funny that Ubisolft did no model of it :roll:

Exactly my point: when I discovered that the two New York class battleships
had both guns in their late and mid-late war configuration, I thought I could rip them from SH5, but I was horrified to discover that Ubisoft guys fitted those ships with a fantasy armament :o


Those models are good enough for SH3 purposes but it is pretty clear they are based on cyclinders with far more than the 12 edges that give nicely smooth models in SH3.:hmmm:

Twice the needed number of edges to be more precise: 24 :yep:


Missing polygons, faces facing opposite directions and the stupid number of faces, these are the annoying features of meshes converted Sketch Up meshes. I think fine tuning such models needs more time than re-building them from scratch. But if you feel for starting the preocess I won't stop you :O:

Well, I see them more as a 3D blueprint than as a model ready to be fed in s3D. I think more than 3/4 of the time I spend for modelling complex objects, is used for figuring out shapes and proportions from photographs and flat drawing (and for looking for them), than for actually modelling. Sometimes I get stuck, and I can only proceed to the next step when I find a photograph from the 'right' angle, or when I have a mental illumination lol. So, for me, a good 3D template is always a good thing :)


I still have little time to dedicate to 3D stuff but I lost interest in the Treasury class cutters (those need the two guns) and went back to the Dido. Some progress ...

Have you seen the SH5 model of it? How does it compare to the real Didos? :03:

[the_frog]

Exactly my point: when I discovered that the two New York class battleships had both guns in their late and mid-late war configuration, I thought I could rip them from SH5, but I was horrified to discover that Ubisoft guys fitted those ships with a fantasy armament :o

Well, well, Ubi did several fancy fantasy items. One is the 4.5-inch guns in SH5, which is partly modelled after the US 4 inch-50. Or the director towers of the SH4/5 Dido :03:


Twice the needed number of edges to be more precise: 24 :yep:

Great ...


Well, I see them more as a 3D blueprint than as a model ready to be fed in s3D. I think more than 3/4 of the time I spend for modelling complex objects, is used for figuring out shapes and proportions from photographs and flat drawing (and for looking for them), than for actually modelling. Sometimes I get stuck, and I can only proceed to the next step when I find a photograph from the 'right' angle, or when I have a mental illumination lol. So, for me, a good 3D template is always a good thing :)

I understand. As templates they may work fine if to scale.


Have you seen the SH5 model of it? How does it compare to the real Didos? :03:

The SH3 model was bad but was re-used in SH4, with some polygon-heavy nonsense added. This worsened model, with little changes, then made it into SH5 ...
So, it is about as close to reality as the equipment of the New York class :D

[gap]

Well, well, Ubi did several fancy fantasy items. One is the 4.5-inch guns in SH5, which is partly modelled after the US 4 inch-50. Or the director towers of the SH4/5 Dido :03:

...

The SH3 model was bad but was re-used in SH4, with some polygon-heavy nonsense added. This worsened model, with little changes, then made it into SH5 ...
So, it is about as close to reality as the equipment of the New York class :D

:o :Kaleun_Sick:

[yamatoforever]

Seems you have not been here for a while:03:
Welcome back.

Still modding train simulations or are you returning now to the sea?

Both! And the great new ships are then installed in my DFW videos. :up:

(Schön wieder dabei zu sein und von dir zu hören)