Northrop / McDonnell Douglas F-23 for DCS World by BDF

BDF

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
14 March 2009
Messages
335
Reaction score
616
View: https://youtu.be/-XiDAas3S2Q?si=rPf-v4oQ_vDS8uTk


Teaser trailer for the work I have been doing for the F-23A "mod" for DCS World. All images are from in game with no post capture processing (but YouTube does degrade the quality a bit.). Still a work in progress and hoping to release it this year.

Note: a mod is a free to use modification that allows addition of extra aircraft and other assets.
 
With drawings readily available I wonder why cannon is on opposite side and its cover is shaped different?
I also would get rid off panel lines like these that just absent on prototype - they may be cool looking but absolutely weird in terms of rationale design
 

Attachments

  • F-23AT~1-.jpg
    F-23AT~1-.jpg
    433.2 KB · Views: 253
Because the cannon is clearly marked and shown as on the right side? Also there is no indication of what the gun door would look like. As far as the panels are concerned, there are some panels shown and these are reproduced on the model. The rest have been made up but tried to base them on what the known panels look like, the the equipment behind them and using the F-22 as a reference. I am happy with how they turned out.
 

Attachments

  • cannon_right_side.png
    cannon_right_side.png
    225.4 KB · Views: 216
Looking good BDF. I like the bay opening animation, cannot wait until release.
Thanks. Other details are in there too such as the retractable anti-collision lights, operating APU doors and the engine nozzle flaps have a start/shut down animation that drives them to a extreme open position on shut down just as the F-22's do.
 
Because the cannon is clearly marked and shown as on the right side? Also there is no indication of what the gun door would look like.
didn't notice dotted line and comment, sorry
 

Attachments

  • 1718374417648.png
    1718374417648.png
    23 KB · Views: 168
didn't notice dotted line and comment, sorry
no worries. That panel you showed is for avionics bay access. It's hard to see clearly but attached shows it's outline. Plus if you look at the door compared to the muzzle it wouldn't work. The reason we made the muzzle door so long is because the projectiles would not clear the forward of the muzzle bay and would hit the aircraft if the door was the size of the the F-22's muzzle door for instance.
 

Attachments

  • avionics_rack.png
    avionics_rack.png
    353 KB · Views: 143
  • gun door.png
    gun door.png
    117.2 KB · Views: 197
Yes, shame on me. Checked with Spadoni's sketches.
 
A few more in game images. I should note that the cockpit image is distorted because of it being viewed in 2D. In 3D (VR) it is properly proportioned.
 

Attachments

  • morning_takeoff_2.png
    morning_takeoff_2.png
    1.8 MB · Views: 188
  • morning_takeoff.png
    morning_takeoff.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 176
  • F23_cockpit.png
    F23_cockpit.png
    3 MB · Views: 227
I'm mostly a MSFS and Star Citizen kind of guy. But now I'll have to get DCS, just so I can fly this. Well done!
:cool:
It’ll be a while. Eagle Dynamics made some changes that have dramatically affected how mods work. Now we have to create a EFM which requires C++ experience and we are getting spun up on the API.
 
can it be converted over to MSFS?????? Please
I’ve thought about it but the commitment to keeping it up to date is daunting. I don’t want to release crap (of which there is a lot on MSFS). I’m not ruling it out but right now it’s not likely.
 
View: https://youtu.be/YiRk9jpsLkE?si=scyQtsNFfzJDaJri


Growling Sidewinder showing off the mod on his channel. Please note that it is still very much a work in progress. It currently uses a F-15C FM and the animations and cockpit displays are very much a work in progress. The movement of the V-tails was excessive in this video but they will be addressed in due course.
 
Watching casually YouTube and spotted a familiar rounded intakes and jumped of my couch! :eek:

Thank you for your work BDF :D
If there is a way to support your work, I will be sure to use it to do so.


Seeing the F-23A fly has been a dream come true.

Looking forward to Growling Sidewinder vids to showcase more or it.

I just wish he stoped commenting. "the F-23 was allegedly more stealth while the F-22 was more maneuverable" ... as if the 1st point is in question and the 2nd one was more important.

Can't wait to see what supersonic performance will the final flight model have. :cool:
 
Watching casually YouTube and spotted a familiar rounded intakes and jumped of my couch! :eek:

Thank you for your work BDF :D
If there is a way to support your work, I will be sure to use it to do so.


Seeing the F-23A fly has been a dream come true.

Looking forward to Growling Sidewinder vids to showcase more or it.

I just wish he stoped commenting. "the F-23 was allegedly more stealth while the F-22 was more maneuverable" ... as if the 1st point is in question and the 2nd one was more important.

Can't wait to see what supersonic performance will the final flight model have. :cool:

Hey thanks. I worked about 18 months with the artist to ensure both the cockpit and external models were as accurate as I could possible make them. For the aero-model we have some limitations as we are currently using what is called the Simplified Flight Model which is a coefficient based single point flight model. Basically considers the aircraft as a single reference point and derives all flight forces based on that single point. It is not a real time physics based model and derives forces based on coefficents in lookup tables. It can give you ballpark results but not nearly as accurate as the other FMs available in DCS such as in the 3rd party developed modules.

One of the guys on our team is a aerospace engineer whom likes to do integrated performance analysis on various fighter designs for fun. He gets pretty good correlation with public data on jets that have that data available (F-16 for instance). He's showing M 1.82 @ 36Kft supercruise and M2.25. That being said, however, it'll do M 1.7 @ 50kft. In game it does a bit more because it super difficult to tune the SFM to match his models. The big issue is we have to make estimation for a fair amount of important data, such was empty weight and internal fuel. Those general arrangement plans have some nice data tables on the wing and V-tail which helps but we are at best making estimations and cross checking with known Raptor data points for a sanity check. So it is entirely possible we are overestimating performance but we could be underestimating too, it's just too little information to really tell. But our efforts are geniune in the sense that we are trying to get it right and not pull numbers out of our ass.

Regarding GS, that was his own narration, we just gave him a early copy of it to feature. I think he's more of a enthusiast than a total geek like we are so he's not going to get everything correct. I'm just glad people are enjoying the content and I can't wait until it gets released (hopefully soon).
 
I sincerely hope you are approached by some former Northrop Engineers who can give you tips on the data you are missing or are off the mark.
 
I sincerely hope you are approached by some former Northrop Engineers who can give you tips on the data you are missing or are off the mark.
I've spoken to a couple. They've all have been impressed with what we've been able to do which is very gratifying. None of them can really talk about anything however. I knew that going in as my late father also worked for NG so I know the game. Unless they know it's been declassified or released publicly if it is only proprietary information then they won't talk about it.

Now maybe there is a avenue through NG themselves as I know they do keep a archives of all their projects but I'm guessing it would take a lot of work and money to have that information tracked down and declassified, assuming the AF is even willing to go along with it. Maybe one day we will get more information.
 
One of the guys on our team is a aerospace engineer whom likes to do integrated performance analysis on various fighter designs for fun. He gets pretty good correlation with public data on jets that have that data available (F-16 for instance). He's showing M 1.82 @ 36Kft supercruise and M2.25. That being said, however, it'll do M 1.7 @ 50kft.).

Thank you for taking the time to reply so extensively.

I think we will all be interested if you can share more about how this F-23 model analysis turned out especially if a similar one was done for the F-22. I am really curious to see their wife drag coefficients compared given the extensive area ruling on the F-23 and the removal of the trust reversers.

Top supercruise speed for the YF119 powered YF-22 (M 1.43) and YF-23 (M 1,6) are known as is the top super cruise of the F119 powered F-22A (M 1.82). Given your decision to us the F119 for your F-23 model, you have some real good data to work with to estimate top speed.

The big issue is we have to make estimation for a fair amount of important data, such was empty weight and internal fuel. .

Would you be able to share these 2 estimations?

Again, it will be great to see them side by side with those of the F-22 (from DCS) as we have some good public weight data to work with.
The F-23 should come out lighter for a given amount of fuel carried and given its lower drag, this should translate to better sustained turning ability.
 
Would you be able to share these 2 estimations?

Again, it will be great to see them side by side with those of the F-22 (from DCS) as we have some good public weight data to work with.
The F-23 should come out lighter for a given amount of fuel carried and given its lower drag, this should translate to better sustained turning ability.

So we went with a slightly lighter empty weight than the Raptor. This is based solely on a comment in the book Advanced Tactical Fighter to the F-22 Raptor: Origins of the 21st Century Air Dominance Fighter. The authors, whom were part of the ATF program, stated that the Northrop submission was lighter than the F-22. It is admittedly quite a thin reference and I am still not sure myself that that is accurate given the disparity in the basic cardinal dimensions but it is all we really have.

For internal fuel, I did some comparisons between the scale plans of the YF-23 and the GA plans of the F-23A DP231 in Blender. I am not super skilled and Blender is not engineering quality CAD but I found a 28% difference in fuel volume between the two. In Metz's book he indicates that the YF-23 has "a little bit more than a F-15C with a center line tank". I.e. about 18,000lbs. That would indicate that the F-23A would carry 23Klbs. However we went far more conservative for the internal fuel.

Our empty weight is set to: 43,098lbs/19,546kg
Internal Fuel: 19,556lbs/8,870kg

Regarding the F-22 mod, no attempt was made on that mod team's part to really create a descent flight model. They made some tweaks to give it more AoA but that was about it. It couldn't supercruise for instance. I know they just dropped a Enhanced Flight Model which allows for the use of Thrust Vectoring but I haven't tried it to see if it can supercruise.
 
Superb work! Looking forward to DL and flying your mod.
 
Regarding the F-22 mod, no attempt was made on that mod team's part to really create a descent flight model. They made some tweaks to give it more AoA but that was about it. It couldn't supercruise for instance. I know they just dropped a Enhanced Flight Model which allows for the use of Thrust Vectoring but I haven't tried it to see if it can supercruise.
I'm trying to make an F-22 EFM model just for the sake of learning to develop EFM models. I don't have access to the 3d model so I've been using ModelViewer to get some coordinates and try and model some of the parameters using AVL. Hoping by the time we know what any of the Blue 6th gen fighters look like, I'll have figured it out so I can program one just for myself to fly around in.

Just curious - did you write your own EFM and 3d model everything on your own? For this or any other mod you plan on working on down the road, I'd love to help out and learn how to develop a mod like this if that interests you. I'm decent at 3d modeling and I'm a software dev in my day job. I've been learning C++ on the side to write EFMs. I just don't know anything about aerodynamics but I can program it given equations.
 
I'm trying to make an F-22 EFM model just for the sake of learning to develop EFM models. I don't have access to the 3d model so I've been using ModelViewer to get some coordinates and try and model some of the parameters using AVL. Hoping by the time we know what any of the Blue 6th gen fighters look like, I'll have figured it out so I can program one just for myself to fly around in.

Just curious - did you write your own EFM and 3d model everything on your own? For this or any other mod you plan on working on down the road, I'd love to help out and learn how to develop a mod like this if that interests you. I'm decent at 3d modeling and I'm a software dev in my day job. I've been learning C++ on the side to write EFMs. I just don't know anything about aerodynamics but I can program it given equations.
We are going to collaborate with the guy who made the Raptor EFM. He's going to help us get going then we'll take it from there. EFM is high on the list for next phase.
 
Looks quite good overall. This may be the effect of the lighting, but I think perhaps the chine should be a bit more pronounced back near the chine/wing intersection station? Of course it’s hard to tell without taking a cross section of the model and comparing to the DWG.

The tail hook bay door also seems maybe a tad short, although I’m not sure if there is some kind of telescoping mechanism for make it work.
 
I am really impressed by the Mod.
This video detailing the full installation, startup, quick tour and controls does a great job to entice you to download the game and give it a try


In another video they did an acceleration comparison and the F-22 was able to accelerate much faster which I found odd, given the F-23A was sleeker aerodynamically and I would argue likely lighter in weight.

The original ATF requirement was for 8 AAMs but I believe got downgraded during developent to 6 of current types and 8 of new versions with clipped wings.

Given both designs planned to fit 3 AIM-120 Charlie in the space of 2 Bravo, I am wondering if the F-23A might have been able to fit 3 AIM-9X in the space of 2 AIM-L.
 
Last edited:
I am really impressed by the Mod.
This video detailing the full installation, startup, quick tour and controls does a great job to entice you to download the game and give it a try


In another video they did an acceleration comparison and the F-22 was able to accelerate much faster which I found odd, given the F-23A was sleeker aerodynamically and I would argue likely lighter in weight.

The original ATF requirement was for 8 AAMs but I believe got downgraded during developent to 6 of current types and 8 of new versions with clipped wings.

Given both designs planned to fit 3 AIM-120 Charlie in the space of 2 Bravo, I am wondering if the F-23A might have been able to fit 3 AIM-9X in the space of 2 AIM-L.
So no disrespect to the other mod makers but I don't think there was any attempt at creating a realistic aero model. One of the guys on our team is a actual aerospace engineer and created some parametric performance models for us to use. There are severe limitations with the current SFM but as we start in on the EFM that should allow us to get much closer to his models. The Raptor mod doesn't super cruise for instance whereas our quick happily does. Even then, we have limitations too, as obviously the F-23 was never built so we had to make assumptions and estimates based on the limited amount of data available and some of the anecdotes and tidbits that have discussed here, Metz's book etc.
 
Last edited:
Looks quite good overall. This may be the effect of the lighting, but I think perhaps the chine should be a bit more pronounced back near the chine/wing intersection station? Of course it’s hard to tell without taking a cross section of the model and comparing to the DWG.

The tail hook bay door also seems maybe a tad short, although I’m not sure if there is some kind of telescoping mechanism for make it work.
So it's there. I was very meticulous with shaping and the artist had a nice tool that we were able to compare the shape with all the cross sections. That area as I recall did require a bit of interpolation but I believe is quite close:

1756819313722.png



As far as the tail hook bay, in actuality it is the one major feature I forgot to add. What you are seeing is a access panel that is visible on the GAP. There is a piece of equipment there and as you can see on the GAP below there are two access panels there for the top and bottom. We faithfully modeled both correctly with the difference in length.

1756819483430.png
 
I watched some videos on yt and you made a phenomenal job on the 3d model. For the fm I think northrop had lots of data in their simulator. The F-23 may have never been flown but in ng sim iterations did. Towards the end of the dem/val new iterations were sometimes daily. Maybe through a foia?
 
So no disrespect to the other mod makers but I don't think there was any attempt at creating a realistic aero model. One of the guys on our team is a actual aerospace engineer and created some parametric performance models for us to use. There are severe limitations with the current SFM but as we start in on the EFM that should allow us to get much closer to his models. The Raptor mod doesn't super cruise for instance whereas our quick happily does. Even then, we have limitations too, as obviously the F-23 was never built so we had to make assumptions and estimates based on the limited amount of data available and some of the anecdotes and tidbits that have discussed here, Metz's book etc.
Unfortunately I only took the time to read the extensive help file you've included in your mod release after I posted this.

I was expecting installation instruction but I got one of the most extensive F-23 performance article I've read to date.
Thank you. You should post a link to it here.

The part where the F-23 basically thrives at high altitude and super cruise felt a genuine attempt to portray its designers operational intent. Now I can't wait for you 3rd release with hopefully even more charts.

I guess that is when we will get to see the famous hoverboat effect where the aircraft just does not want to land when it gets close to the runway because of the wide body and ground effect.
 
@BDS
Have have you considered adding 3 AIM-9X in the front bay. I believe there is space.

F-23A-Weapons-Stores.jpg
 
@BDS
Have have you considered adding 3 AIM-9X in the front bay. I believe there is space.

View attachment 783481
No because realistically there is no space for the missiles and the launchers. Now I strongly suspect that the launcher technology for the forward bays are more similar to the original AMRAAM trapeze approach The Raptor was going to use, but event he LAU-142's are wide at their attachment points and the hinge points being 171mm wide. So I really am not certain there is enough clearance for the missiles and the launchers. We used LAU-141s which I'm fairly sure they would not have used but they are clearly too wide at the base:

1756923490356.png


1756923518564.png

You may have been able so shoe horn another missile in there but that assumes there was the structural attachment points in the bay itself. I doubt there was every any consideration for more than two in the forward bay.
 
You may have been able so shoe horn another missile in there but that assumes there was the structural attachment points in the bay itself. I doubt there was every any consideration for more than two in the forward bay.
Looking at the Saw Tooth edge of the in the middle of the bay now, yes, no way that missile would fit in the center.

There maybe another way.

I am referencing the drawings I have from Aerospace Project Review eV3N2 page 115 and scaling the AIM-9X
There is definitely room to stack 2 AIM-9X on top of one another.

F-23A-Front-Bay-4-9X.jpg

For this to work the doors will opening mechanism needs to open more than 90 degrees

Perhaps this could be a later upgrade and I am specifically thinking about the F-15SE Conformal Weapons Pod side door launch mechanism


I do have a new idea about the main weapons bay that I can try to flesh out like that
 
Ok but like.... why? one major design philosophy of ATF having supercruise is the ability to disengage by putting distance between you and the enmy and reposition for best stealth characteristics and reengage on its own terms. And the most favorable term is not to enter a dogfight where outcome is much more volatile no matter how much better your aircraft can maneuver. I dont see the need to increase weight and complexity with 4 AIM-9X
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom