Congratulations to all entrants for participating and for providing some very interesting works.
And now it's my time to make a lots of enemies here with a litany of vicious criticism.
(even more enemies than already, that is
)
Shigure - Statler BH2 Vulture
I've already commented on that plane in the Antaraverse thread. It's a nice drawing (only the standard nose and tail turrets could be made bit more rounded), but - given it's a tail-dragger - it looks nose-heavy due to relatively aft locations of wings, which in turn look bit thin. My most serious concern, though, was that - with a location of bomb bays as denoted by bombload examples - at least one (or
the one) wing spar would go right through the bomb bay (most likely forward one), or the bays would need to be extremely shallow (occupying just the portion of the fuselage below the wing).
Armoured Man - Okamoto ES-60 Tusru
In artistic terms, it's an excellent drawing. In engineering terms - not so much, I'm afraid, as it shows complete disregard to the issue of the center of gravity. Of course, for a hobbystic AU drawing, exact calculation of it would be completely pointless, but some approximations can be made "as a rule of thumb". Generally, the CoG for a straight-winged airplane (now I'm considering it's location ONLY along the aircraft's length, and leave the height aside) can be found close to the middle of the wing's chord, often bit to the forward (it gets more complicated with swept wings and even more with variable-geometry ones, but it's not the case here). For that reason, bomber aircraft tend to have their bomb bays near (under) the CoG (or forward and aft of it - generally symmetrically to it - be it long and shallow like in Lancaster or Halifax, short but deep in B-17 or He 111, or two bays, forward and aft of the wing spar in B-29), so that presence or lack of bombload would not affect the overall stability. In this design, the bomb bay is entirely
forward of the CoG, and once the bombs are dropped, the massive weight of engines, fuel tanks and generally most of the airframe, would suddenly be (
NOT) offset only by cockpit: or actually, once the bombs go, the nose go up like F-15 trying to zoom to stratosphere. On a minor issues - wing leading edge looks bit thin at the root (suggesting horribly thin wing), the exhaust pipe seem to be blowing
forward, and I have a feeling - but that's just an impression - that the engines would have a massive cooling and reliability issue (suggested by such problems on B-36 and He 177 respectively).
Aiseus - Nargana Bureau's Heavy Bomber Number 3
Aiseus takes part in numerous challenges with rather simple (artistically) and unpretentious designs, that tend (with exception of Heavy Tank and Big Iron challenge entries) to take places rather near the bottom of the result lists, yet he persists with his effort, and that's something that brings my sympathy (and I'm sorry to hear that your "AU is slowly dying"
). Unfortunately, this design is also unpretentious - but, it has to be stressed - artistically/stylistically generally correct - to the point of being not very practical. Perhaps most striking feature is the bottle-like shape of the fuselage, that seems to serve no practical reason but to make structural calculations more difficult to designers. It also seems, that fuselage height (even leaving aside the cockpit) is getting bigger and bigger towards the nose for some strange reason (but it seems, that if it has a nose wheel, then the CoG is right!
), while the inner engines seem to be mounted much more forward of the wing's leading edge than the outer ones (as suggested by the wing's leading edge).
Hexelarity - Humei H5S1 Flying Serpent
Design is perfectly sound and the drawing is very good. But it's not to Hexelarity's merit. It's simply a (credited, of course) modification of Imperialist's rendition of Nakajima G10N Fugaku (
http://shipbucket.com/vehicles/3642 ) with longer nose, some minor changes to details like cockpit, added panel lines and the like. There's nothing wrong with posting entries that are the "real world never-weres": two years ago The_Sprinklez posted a well-received rendition of GD AMSA 2096 (B-1 preliminary) in the Cold War Strategic Bomber challenge. Difference was that the drawing
was entirely his own, completely new work, and here's the Hexelarity's own input is really of just secondary magnitude.
(Btw. using someone else's work in itself also isn't "wrong" - in First Generation Jet Fighter challenge Muscatatuck used Nighthunter's P-39 as a base, but the very point of his entry was a deep conversion of P-39 into a jet aircraft)
(Oh, and one more thing: credits should be in chronological order, so Your name should be last, not first)
Schlemm138 - Schlemmer Flugzeugwerke Sc99
The design itself is based on Junkers EF 132 (therefore sound by definition) with engines moved from the wing roots (Vickers Valiant-style) to the underwing pylons (B-52-style), which is also entirely practicable idea. No serious criticisms in regards to that. It's bit worse on the "artistic" front, so to speak. Detailing looks rather bare, I'm afraid, and more effort could be put into it. The spotted camouflage with square-ish spots look just ugly and the spots on the vertical stabilizer in the top-view are quite absurd. Even bigger reservations I have about the front view: the cockpit frames look rather random and don't really match the side view, the main wheels look too octagonal, the vertical stabilizers on twin tail version look IMHO too thick and last but not least - the shape of the engine nacelle is horribly unaerodynamical - it should resemble 8 lying on it's side, like in the B-52, instead of flat 0)
(Btw. the Tarzon bomb could be found here (at the bottom of the left column):
http://shipbucket.com/vehicles/6867 - without need to modify the Tallboy from scratch
)
Dalamace - Rapp R.173
Being essentialy a Bloch MB.162 with just minor cosmetics, it's completely workable design by default, and the artistry is good as well (unsurprisingly, since Dalamace is with us for some time already and provided a number of really nice works). I have more reservations about Cruel Snake Mk. I version, where these massive engines just look "not quite right" so forward and low, but it's more an impression than some solid problem.
Zenith - Heston 416 Blackadder
A quite good entry for a completely new Member. Drawing-wise, I'd say that wing could be improved (panel lines seem to be running bit at random and it seems to have rather odd airfoil) and I'd make the line separating wing from the engine black. As for the design itself - it looks that the bomb bay is
very shallow (sufficient to fit one layer of 500 kg bombs, but have a feeling that not wide enough for a single layer of 250 kg bombs or deep enough for two layers of these). And if the plane has a nose wheel, then the location of wing related to the aircraft's length is spot on, but if it's a tail-dragger (and judging from the possible cover of the tailwheel under the horizontal stabilizer, it is), then it would be extremely nose-heavy and on the ground it would have cockpit pointing towards the sky at a rather impractical angle. But in general, for the first entry it's a good start. Keep it up!
Weebson - Fokker T.VI Flying Citadel
Apparent child of Halifax and B-17, with wings from He 111.
As a drawing, it's good. As a design - I'm afraid it suffers from the Center of
Gravity Problem I explained earlier with Armoured Man's work - only here the bay is too much aft, instead of forward. On the minor issues - the waist guns are IMHO bit too low and these gun ports just forward and below of the cockpit are rather awkwardly placed - when firing forward, the gunner would have to practically walk into pilot's legs.
BB1987 - Okajima G6O
To me - ex aequo with Charguizard's work - the best entry of the challenge. If there's anything wrong with it, then I can't see it. Design itself seems to be loosely inspired by Nakajima G6N Renzan, but larger and the drawing as such is excellent. In particular I love the front view.
Psychicumbreon - RP-3 Merirosvo
Another Halifax relative, and an extremely close one - only major difference being the bomb bay slightly enlarged towards the bottom-aft, and with corresponding change in the shape of the fuselage there. Unfortunately, not much to talk about in terms of originality nor artistry (I'm afraid it's basically a downgrade of Sheepster original drawing).
Btw. it would be nice if You would use a standard template.
Wolftheriot - König Kö 123
Drawing-wise it's bit austere with details. The shape and airfoil of the wing is bit odd, the trim tabs on the vertical stabilizer is of awkward shape (horribly thin but extremely high), and it looks like the inner engine's nacelle blends at the rear into the wing root. In the transport version, the ramps are horribly thin - no more than just some 13,5 centimeters in fact.
But the biggest problem - and a HUGE one, is that this plane, as it is, probably wouldn't even manage to taxi from the hangar to the runway. Reason for this is the main undercarriage, retracted into the fuselage, and with a very short legs at that. In practical terms, I think that it's track would be no more than some +/- 4 meters - not much, considering the wingspan of 69 meters and comparing it with Spitfire, whose undercarriage had a track of 2 meters at a wingspan of just 11,23 meters and was notorious for it's poor ground handling due to that. And spitfire didn't had 6 engines in the completely unsupported wings. On top of that, the clearance between propeller tips and the ground is just
50 centimeters. In other words - first major bump on the ground, stronger gust of crosswind, too sharp turn or possibly even a flat tire and the outermost propellers slam into the ground - with predictable consequences.
WesleyWestland - Hartley & Shepherd HS 95
Apparently another relative Halifax, but this time not 'by kitbash', only 'by inspiration', being entirely new drawing. Wings are perhaps a very tiny little bit low, so the bomb bay may be bit shallow, and the airfoil looks a bit like it had leading edge lower than the trailing edge (while it should be the other way round), but generally it's a sound design and a good drawing.
Rowdy36 - Brunel Broadsword
One of the better designs here and with a very nice looks. Have only few nit-picks: ailerons and flaps are outlined in black, but the rudder, elevator, undercarriage and bomb bay covers (etc. similarly "routinely moving" elements) are not, even though typically in FD-style they should be. Engines are IMHO bit too low relative to the airfoil, cockpit windscreen on the plan view just IMHO doesn't "look right" and the main undercarriage legs on the side view look bit austere. But in general, it's a great work.
Corp - Polaris Model 60 Arbalest
It's an original entry for sure. But I have some reservations - one is that the airfoil seems to be much thicker than even on B-36 (despite being indeed of similar size), while at the same time the empennage seems to be extremely thin and flat. Like with Rowdy36's work - the "moving parts" (control surfaces, gear and bomb bay covers, doors etc.) tend to be outlined in black, not jus the dark shade, and on the "windows" of all kinds, the border between the transparent and non-transparent material tends to be outilined in black too (basically, the whole our style is built around the
black contours).
RaspingLeech - Messerschmitt Me 464 (P 1095)
Author's play on the real-world never-weres, the Messerschmitt's P 1075 and P 1085, therefore design-wise it can be safely assumed to be entirely feasible for our purposes. Drawing-wise it's also a solid work, so on both accounts it's near the top of the scale.
APDAF - Sikorsky S-64 Sokol
APDAF is one of our old members, but one dedicated exclusively to personal designs area, and who had a very troubled start with them, but persisted with his efforts and over time the quality of his work (particularly "design-wise") has improved greatly. Unfortunately, this work looks like taken from the "bad old days". I recall that years ago APDAF privileged me with his trust and asked to review a design of a similar, but more compact 4-engined 1930s heavy bomber. This work looks like it was derived from that bomber, albeit in its "pre-review" version. Going from tail to nose: the fuselage cross-section is square(ish) while the tail turret seems to have a circular cross-section and switch from one to other looks rather abrupt (plus there is a brighter stripe along the top contour of the glass panels, but no darker one along the bottom) - and in general the fuselage there certainly would benefit if it was taller, not only because the gunner needs to be in prone position but mostly for structural reasons, given the overall size of the tail). Horizontal stabilizers' struts seem to reach unnecessarily too far and are too flat relative to the stabilizer - I guess that either only the top ones would suffice, or they rather shouldn't extend so far out. The vertical stabilizer looks rather strange with this shape, and I'd say that the 'ribs' probably wouldn't reach all the way to the leading edge on a stabilizer so huge. The waist gun stations - gunners would have to be very careful not to fall on the ventral gunners' head. Top turrets - I'd say they could be drawn more neatly. Airfoil - it's bottom looks almost completely flat, which is very unlikely, and by extension the engines (which are IMHO spaced too widely apart) would be (optically) rather closer to the upper contour of the wing, than the bottom (see the drawing). Tires in the front view look rather baloon-ish. The shape of the fuselage below the forward turret makes it impossible to occupy this turret unless while lying on the belly at approx. 45 degree angle (so he would struggle to do much turning to the sides in that), because for sitting there's just no room space at all. And last but not least - the side and front view of the front section of fuselage just don't really match.
JJX Indoweeb - Betelheim Gu-300 Supertruck
Another very good entry. Details are great and paint schemes (particularly nose art) and the bomb bay cutaway look magnificent. That said, I have an impression, that the wing chord might be a little bit lacking (and perhaps the wing should be just several pixels forward relative to the gap between the bomb bays through which the wing spar goes), and unfortunately (as evidenced by the cutaway) the top turret goes right into the aft bomb bay. And btw. at a service ceiling of 9500
kilometers it has really impressive performance envelope. ;P (but the design of the ball turret - top turret probably too - suggest that it doesn't have the pressurised crew compartments like B-29? Or at least there is no possibility to crawl between them - as suggested by cutaway?)
Garlicdesign - Caproni Atlantach B11C Bladhmiaire
As always, Garlicdesign's entry simply cannot disappoint! Essentialy a never-were Caproni Ca.204, which has already appeared in the Thiaria AU (although the current drawing is not just taken from there and slightly updated for style, but also has some alterations to the substance) - so design-wise there are no problems with it (that weren't inherited from original design, that is - the tail gunner would have a very uncomfortable ride, I imagine), maybe except for that entrance hatch directly underneath the top turret (depending on the turret's design, either the crew would have to squeeze underneath when embarking/disembarking, or the gunner would be in somewhat precarious position). And drawing-wise my only nit-pick is that Garlicdesign (as is his habit) has little concern for lumps of double black lines (like in the area where engines and wing flaps converge).
Albert1099 - CANT Z.1020
A quite nice drawing (that perhaps could benefit from bit more details), visibly inspired by Piaggio P.108. Most visible oddity are extremely tiny (relative to whole aircraft) main wheels, and the fuselage (on top view) looks rather wide (plus the darker line which on top view is at the base of cockpit canopy - suggesting 8-shaped fuselage, on the side view is at the top of the canopy and has different length). Also, the rudder looks bit small and panel lines on the vertical stabilizer don't seem to be parallel with it's leading edge (typically they tended to be either parallel, or were theoretically converging somewhere above - here they look other way round)
JCSTCap - Ealhs E.460
Truly beautiful series of drawings (esp. the Italian-style camouflage) of an airplane that looks inspired by Messerschmitt Me 264. Design-wise I only have a feeling that bomb bay might be bit too far forward, the gun ports behind the wing are too cramped together (in combat waist gunners would constantly kicked or stomped on the belly gunner, and they in turn would be constantly kicked in the backs by the top gunner) and that tiny wheel underneath the gunner's positions would serve no purpose, because the vertical stabilizers - and perhaps even the fuselage - would hit the ground long before the wheel would make contact with it.
Charguizard - Werkspoor WkB.3 Gans
Nothing but the best could be expected from our leading "master of FD scale of younger generation" (
- "younger" in terms of time spent on Shipbucket - I don't know how old are You
- but it's a pity You don't do more Real-Life FD stuff). Design itself seems to be closely based on the unbuilt Fokker T.VI, and drawing-wise - well, what can I say?...
TigerHunter1945 - SAAB B.5
Entry from another "rising star" of FD scale (that unfortunately also don't bother much with drawing Real-Life stuff
). Artistic side is excellent though in some places (like where the outer engine meets wing or along most of the line where vertical stabilizer meets fuselage or the outline of tail wheel cover) I'd rather use black line instead of 'dark shade' (same issue as with Rowdy36's drawing), and by custom (except when unavoidable due to size) the line separating tire from the wheel (metal) is also black, while in some places (usually around canopies/turrets etc.) some double black lines could be quite easily avoided. Also, in several places accidentialy the black contour turns red (missed during the repaint from the original false-color base drawing, I suppose?). Design wise, my only issues is that vertical stabilizer looks relatively huge and it's shape makes impression of being hastily transplanted from completely another aircraft (plus it's trailing edge on top view looks rather thick) and the smaller rudders on the end of horizontal stabilizer simply lack space to turn inward. But otherwise it's a fantastic work and I love the jet engine!
Imperialist - Dornier Do 19 Storch
A creative play on real-world Do 19. Good work by our esteemed Coleague, that just could look even better with bit more detailing here and there - and the airfoil looks rather strangely flat, but overall a work certainly deserving a place in the upper echelons of the scoring list.
So hopefully expect to see properly tidied up renditions after the voting ends