VFX Contenders - User Artwork

B

borntokillagain

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
19 July 2006
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Hey everyone,

Talos (from whatifmodelers), a few others and I are working on a series VFX profile drawings for each of the contenders involved. Attached are WIPs for the NAR and MDC designs for your viewing pleasure.

We would appreciate if anyone here could post some higher res versions the designs, particularly the GD Model 44 and NAR-323 as reference material for this project. Currently we are trying figure out details such like IFR probe placement, gun ports, vents and the like for each design.

Be sure to drop by at whatifmodelers.com to view some of the wonderful profile drawings our fellow members have posted there. ;)
 

Attachments

  • NAR 323 preview.jpg
    NAR 323 preview.jpg
    42.9 KB · Views: 1,476
  • McDD 225A-5 preview.jpg
    McDD 225A-5 preview.jpg
    35.4 KB · Views: 1,560
Really beautiful work!

I presume you have Tony Buttler's American Secret Projects to hand? I don't have any additional materials on either of these designs over what is in there. Perhaps Tommy might have something.
 
Being on What If as well, I am extremely impatient to see the results of this beautiful project. Congratulations!
 
Very nice - thanks for posting and looking forward to the others!

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 
Thanks for the comments :D All line drawings are done by our talented member Talos while the 225A profile is colored up by Coops.

I don't personally have a copy of the American Secret Projects book on hand and probably should get one.

Talos asked that i post the Grumman 303D as well so here it is.
 

Attachments

  • VFX x4.jpg
    VFX x4.jpg
    68.5 KB · Views: 1,346
borntokillagain said:
Talos (from whatifmodelers), a few others and I are working on a series VFX profile drawings for each of the contenders involved. Attached are WIPs for the NAR and MDC designs for your viewing pleasure.
Click to expand...

Very neat. What would be cool is if you did a comparison poster of side views and top views of all the contenders together.
 
Glad you guys are enjoying the work on the VFX so far. I'm trying to keep it on the down-low until we're finished and present it over at What-If, but I suppose it'll be okay to talk about it over here. :p

Anywho, yeah, I'm doing the lineart for all five birds, as well as coloring and shading the Grumman entry. A separate painter is doing each of the other four planes. I've modified the designs some from the original basic info I've found, such as the new canopies for the 225A, 303D, and 323, panel lining, and future upgrades (F110 and F100 engines, for instance).



blackstar, I don't intend to draw top views of them, since my primary focus is on profiles, but borntokillagain did throw together a quick picture of the basic three-views of all five planes.

And now...back to the grindstone, I have planes to draw.
 

Attachments

  • VFX Overview version 2.jpg
    VFX Overview version 2.jpg
    291.3 KB · Views: 1,749
Cool stuff. I do think that top views are important because the unique thing about these concepts was the swing wing, and you don't really see that from the side.
 
blackstar said:
Cool stuff. I do think that top views are important because the unique thing about these concepts was the swing wing, and you don't really see that from the side.
Click to expand...

True...it's just not my preference when I do color profiles like you'd see in a Squadron-Signal or Osprey book.
 
blackstar said:
Cool stuff. I do think that top views are important because the unique thing about these concepts was the swing wing, and you don't really see that from the side.
Click to expand...

...In total agreement here. You need all three views of a 3-view, regardless of "personal preference" in order to grasp the total shape of the vehicle in question.
 
OM said:
blackstar said:
Cool stuff. I do think that top views are important because the unique thing about these concepts was the swing wing, and you don't really see that from the side.
Click to expand...

...In total agreement here. You need all three views of a 3-view, regardless of "personal preference" in order to grasp the total shape of the vehicle in question.
Click to expand...

I know, I know. ;D That's going beyond the scope of this initial project though. Right now it's just color profiles, like what you would see in the center color pages of Squadron-Signal's "McDonnell-Douglas F-14A Gargoyle in Action", etc. Eventually I would like to do full views of the birds, but that wasn't going to realistically happen at this time, since I have to draw, design, update, and detail five separate aircraft from scant resources. I'd rather get something out soon then take until 2012. ;)
 
No the U.S Navy did not refer to its Tomcat's as Gargoyle
If I am correct, it would be a name used in the tradition of McDonnell naming its carrier-based fighter after a Gothic-type theme!
For example the McDonnell FH-1 Phantom, F2H Banshee, F3H Demon, F-101 Voodoo and the F-4 Phantom II
So the name Gargoyle may have been used by McDonnell Douglas as the name for its Model 225A, if it had won the VFX competition!

P.S. McDonnell did develop the LBD-1 Gargoyle guided missile

Regards
Pioneer
 
Last edited:
I guess the name of the McDonnell Douglas F-14 could also have used Douglas military aircraft naming conventions with Sky in the name, like Douglas A2D Skyshark for example. Or maybe it could have been named for a bird of prey.
 
Even after the merger McDonnell and Douglas were effectively separate agencies. You didn't buy fighters like the F-15, F-18, etc from McDonnell Douglas you brought them from the McDonnell Aircraft Company or "McAir" as it was known. So these aircraft kept their McDonnell naming tradition in the US Navy which was named for ghosts and the like. The F/A-18 is an exception because it is actually a Northrop aircraft which named its fighters for stingers therefore the Hornet. If the US Navy was to have brought something from the Long Beach, Douglas Aircraft Division of McDonnell Douglas then it could have been named the "sky-X".
 
Pioneer said:
No the U.S Navy did not refer to its Tomcat's as Gargoyle
If I am correct, it would be a name used in the tradition of McDonnell naming its carrier-based fighter after a Gothic-type theme!
For example the McDonnell FH-1 Phantom, F2H Banshee, F3H Demon, F-101 Voodoo and the F-4 Phantom II
So the name Gargoyle may have been used by McDonnell Douglas as the name for its Model 225A, if it had won the VFX competition!

P.S. McDonnell did develop the LBD-1 Gargoyle guided missile

Regards
M.A.D
Click to expand...

Yes, that was exactly our intention. It was either that or Banshee II. ;D (Figuring FH-1 Phantom ->F2H-1 Banshee ->F3H-1 Demon ->F4H-1 Phantom II ->F-x Banshee II) Gargoyle seemed appropriate, what with the six wings and such that this thing has.

Minus Grumman, which will keep 'Tomcat', we will have each plane having a unique name, naturally, though all will be 'F-14A something'
 
Vought - got to be something in the Sea Wolf - Pirate - Corsair - Crusader - Cutlass theme. e.g. Buccaneer, Privateer, Sea Raider, Freebooter, or Pirate II maybe?

Rockwell (North American) - something referencing the Fury I guess?

General Dynamics (Convair) - Vengeance II ? (After the Vultee Vengeance)
 
overscan said:
Vought - got to be something in the Sea Wolf - Pirate - Corsair - Crusader - Cutlass theme. e.g. Buccaneer, Privateer, Sea Raider, Freebooter, or Pirate II maybe?

Rockwell (North American) - something referencing the Fury I guess?

General Dynamics (Convair) - Vengeance II ? (After the Vultee Vengeance)
Click to expand...

Thanks, Overscan. What we had figured so far was this:

Grumman F-14A Tomcat (obviously)
McDonnell-Douglas F-14A Gargoyle
Vought F-14A Paladin (playing off the Crusader theme, with a possible 'Saladin' name for the IIRAF sale)
General Dynamics F-14A Vanguard (Vultee Vanguard, also "Vanguard of the fleet" sort of thing)

Rockwell's I can't remember what we were debating on off-hand.

I finally got some work done on the V-507, so here's a comparison of the current stage of the lineart of all five birds (this is the first time I've had all five together)
 

Attachments

  • vfx.jpg
    vfx.jpg
    28.6 KB · Views: 1,267
Talos said:
And now...back to the grindstone, I have planes to draw.
Click to expand...

A minor [really picky, sorry] point of order...

What timeframe is the combined drawing intended to depict? The reason is that the company names and logos were in a state of in the late 1960s. For instance:

North American Aviation merged with Rockwell Standard to form North American Rockwell in late 1967.

North American Rockwell merged with Rockwell Manufacturing to form Rockwell International in 1973.

So, the NR-323 should have the non-italicized "North American Rockwell" title. The italicized "Rockwell" title dates from the late 90's after the name of "Rockwell International" was discarded. The NAR/RI logo looks a little odd, the circle should be ever-so-slightly ovalized and the "hockey sticks" should be wider.

Grumman changed their logo from the "ball" to the "hatchet" in late July 1969 along with the name change from the Grumman Aircraft Engineering Company to Grumman Corporation.

(VFX contract award was in January 1969.)

HTH, and keep up the good work!
Craig
 
That combined one with all the three-views was just an internal one for the artists to remember what they were going to be working on while we were discussing it, it wasn't intended to be released. We'll be doing various profiles detailing the planes from the 1970s through retirement in the early 2000s, including foreign sales. Don't worry, though, we know about the company changes. ;D
 
Thought i posted this update by Talos to gather opinions on NAR323 loadout combination and their placement around the airframe. Right now only the semi-comformal stations for Sparrows are known. Don't ask us how the 20mm is suppose to be fired with the starboard lower Sparrow carried ;D

Ideas please ?
 

Attachments

  • NAR 323 10131.jpg
    NAR 323 10131.jpg
    26.2 KB · Views: 868
borntokillagain said:
Thought i posted this update by Talos to gather opinions on NAR323 loadout combination and their placement around the airframe. Right now only the semi-comformal stations for Sparrows are known. Don't ask us how the 20mm is suppose to be fired with the starboard lower Sparrow carried ;D

Ideas please ?
Click to expand...
Unlesss I'm severely mistaken the 20 mm was located in the lower middle of the fuselage. It's firing port would have been somewhat aft of the intakes, on the bottom of the plane, behind the forward landing gear.

In fact, if you check out reply #8 in the beginning of the thread, you can see it's location in one of the drawings.
 
MihoshiK said:
borntokillagain said:
Thought i posted this update by Talos to gather opinions on NAR323 loadout combination and their placement around the airframe. Right now only the semi-comformal stations for Sparrows are known. Don't ask us how the 20mm is suppose to be fired with the starboard lower Sparrow carried ;D

Ideas please ?
Click to expand...
Unlesss I'm severely mistaken the 20 mm was located in the lower middle of the fuselage. It's firing port would have been somewhat aft of the intakes, on the bottom of the plane, behind the forward landing gear.

In fact, if you check out reply #8 in the beginning of the thread, you can see it's location in one of the drawings.
Click to expand...

It didn't look like that when I looked at the drawings in that reply. My interpretation was that the muzzle was in a divet on the starboard side of the fuselage, right in the 'corner'. But I can see how it would be closer to the centerline, though. All in all, it's just a low-resolution resource and hard to tell definitively without additional drawings/model shots.
 
Enlarged pics. Looks like the ammo drum is on the centreline, the gun below it also on the centerline. Not sure though.
 

Attachments

  • NA323.jpg
    NA323.jpg
    124.8 KB · Views: 947
  • NA323-2.jpg
    NA323-2.jpg
    84.9 KB · Views: 968
It looks like you guys are missing the bumps on the top of the fuselage, near the wing trailing edge, that allow for clearance of MLG wheels. You can see them in the isometric see through drawing Overscan just posted. Other than that, it looks good.
 
Traditional stabilizer+rudder fin that is folding? Seems backwards from the A-5 whole turning fin as realized (with an easy fold) or twin fin proposal (with no fold needed). Interesting mechanism that one there inside the fold, visible in the side cutaway...
 
Sundog said:
It looks like you guys are missing the bumps on the top of the fuselage, near the wing trailing edge, that allow for clearance of MLG wheels. You can see them in the isometric see through drawing Overscan just posted. Other than that, it looks good.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, I just haven't added them yet!

At the moment I'm working on detailing the V-507.
 

Attachments

  • V-507.jpg
    V-507.jpg
    40 KB · Views: 782
Talos said:
Don't worry, I just haven't added them yet!

At the moment I'm working on detailing the V-507.
Click to expand...

I wasn't sure how far along you were, I just wanted to point it out JIC. ;) They're looking really good so far. :)
 
You're sharp sighted, Tophe !
In Liebert/Buyck "Le Mirage F1" it is described,how engineers from Dassault
travelled to Dallas to assist Vought in the design of the VFX contender.
 
frank said:
Not sure why this thread isn't tied in with this one, but it has a number of pics of Vought's mock-up & I saw a couple of posts mentioning Dassault's involvement.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,229.0.html


Tophe said:
The LTV V-507 looks like a French Mirage... Is there any influence or cooperation explaining?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It was, but as it's an art thread and not a research thread like the other one, it doesn't belong in that thread. I do need to get back to work on these, though. I've been busy.
 
Haven't updated this in awhile, but I got some work done on the 507 today, so things are progressing. Since I found new references for the canopy, I'll probably change the 225A's to that so it's not using an F-15B's... ;D

 
Well here's the new more-accurate canopy. It's scary how well it fits in with the F-15B one. The windscreens are the same. I stuck a support in the middle of the canopy like how the F-14 picked one up between G-303G mockup and prototype stages.

 
prolific1 said:
I'll be covering F-14 alternatives (in 5-view) when I get to the 70's installment of my book. Until then...it the 50's for me.
Click to expand...

I best hurry and get these done, then. After seeing your work finished, I doubt I'd want to continue mine. :p ;D
 
I best hurry and get these done, then. After seeing your work finished, I doubt I'd want to continue mine. Tongue Grin
Click to expand...

You should continue whatever you have planned regardless of what other people are doing. Your line work might prove to be a valuable resource to someone else. Besides...it will be a while before I move to this era. I have quite a bit of work o finish on my first book. :p
 

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom