P51 Mustang

[Kaskad]

Current Polycount - 1801 tris
Max Polycount - I like where it's at :E
Texture Size - 1024
Description of background information on piece - Never did a plane, wanted to
Where are you looking to receive criticism - Everything
_________________________________________________

[Magnel]

Keep in mind, the P51 mustangs had a air scoop at the bottom. exaust pipes on the sides of the motor and 3 turrets on each side of the wing(if you wanted to get specific), (if I remember right, I use to love ww2 aircraft)

Looks pretty good now, are you going to texture it as well?

[Kaskad]

Originally Posted by Magnel

Looks pretty good now, are you going to texture it as well?

Yessir

Originally Posted by Magnel

Keep in mind, the P51 mustangs had a air scoop at the bottom. exaust pipes on the sides of the motor and 3 turrets on each side of the wing(if you wanted to get specific), (if I remember right, I use to love ww2 aircraft)

This does have the bottom air scoop, but maybe it's too small. The exhaust pipes I think can be normal mapped well. As for the turrets, my ref only shows them as being in the nose behind the rotor. Maybe it's an incomplete ref?

[Bobbeh]

What Magnel said about the air scoop and what not + the wings are a little off. While the wings are fat towards the fuselage on the fwd facing side, they taper out towards the outside, whereas yours seem to stay the same 'thickness' all the way out. The wings on the p51 also get fatter towards the middle of the wing if your looking at it from a side view. And then taper down considerably on the aft facing side of the wing like a teardrop.

(i don't know much about old school aircraft, but i did do 3d graphics for airline training company for about a year)

P.S. ^^ Pilots don't know how to use computers -_- ^^

EDIT: I may have exaggerated how your model looked in my brain slightly, yours do taper slightly, but they taper moreso irl.

More EDIT: forgot to say it looks good though, I want to see it textured!

[Xoliul]

Do you use blueprints? Strikes me as having some proportional and accuracy issues, of the top of my head.
edit: looked around a bit, you're going for one of the less common early Mustangs without the bubble canopy. Better determine really well what the exact type is you're going for, so you can get it all right.

[Kaskad]

These are the blueprints I worked from, they were labeled as being of a P51 Mustang



If not, gentlemen, then it seems I will have modeled the wrong plane.

B)

[Bobbeh]

i see, i see. Well those are indeed for a p51. I wouldn't say its 100% accurate, or a blueprint for that matter. the air scoop is actually nearly double the size of that, unless this is some modified version. also notice the teardrop shape of the stabilizer trim and the wings ;]

either way gg so far.

[Kaskad]

Did some wing work there too, besides the obvious radio addition. This isn't the best angle to judge the wings from, but the tips and base now match up to my reference image, and I've tried to make the taper pretty smooth.

[nistrum]

yeh wing tips can be a right nightmare. very organised mesh tho good going.

[Xoliul]

True, good mesh, aircraft can be harder than you think.
Those blueprints indeed look like they're not too high-quality, going by that text it's probably the A-36 Apache ground attack version. Should look up exact ref for that version then. These blueprints, though smaller, will probably be more accurate: http://www.military.cz/usa/air/war/bomber/a36/a36d.gif
The shape of the rear winglets for example is different than yours, and going by more photo's, yours is not accurate yet. Also, the shape of the rear part of the canopy is bothering me, it's rounded and never had a bar across it: http://www.richard-seaman.com/Wallpa.../A36Apache.jpg
Also you can see on that photo you forgot the front air intake, the long one on top of the nose.
And your prop needs to lose a blade (they only have 3) + make the blades wider, higher and less sharp, also rotate them about 60 degrees on their base.