Can you spot all the differences between these two aircraft?

[Fuzzy_Modem]

[Borgholio]

I found Waldo!

[Venator]

The interceptor version, as far as I can tell:
- Lighter (or at least fewer) single guns on the upper wing set.
- Thicker lower wings with some sort of maneuvering vane instead of a pod at the ends.
- Lacks the large outboard missile/rocket pods.
- Supplants the underside vanes (manoevering wings or maybe bomb bay doors?) with gun barrels or sensor apparatus.
- Loses the small spines on the nose and the canard wings with missiles.
- Trades the 'fenced in' dorsal system (vectored thursters?) for a big glowing power core/shield generator/aquarium for little fishies.
- Has what look like vents for heat exchange or thust vectoring on the upper wing surfaces.
- The interceptor pilot appears to sit further forward, and has bare arms (and a bare midriff) for some reason.

Plus a variety of cosmetic differences.

[Fuzzy_Modem]

The interceptor version, as far as I can tell:
- Lighter (or at least fewer) single guns on the upper wing set.
- Thicker lower wings with some sort of maneuvering vane instead of a pod at the ends.
- Lacks the large outboard missile/rocket pods.
- Supplants the underside vanes (manoevering wings or maybe bomb bay doors?) with gun barrels or sensor apparatus.
- Loses the small spines on the nose and the canard wings with missiles.
- Trades the 'fenced in' dorsal system (vectored thursters?) for a big glowing power core/shield generator/aquarium for little fishies.
- Has what look like vents for heat exchange or thust vectoring on the upper wing surfaces.
- The interceptor pilot appears to sit further forward, and has bare arms (and a bare midriff) for some reason.

Plus a variety of cosmetic differences.

Good eye It's a blue vest and pants over a white jumpsuit, (rather than bare skin)
Photo refs:
http://crossovercomic.com/media/extras/ ... ik4igg.jpg
http://crossovercomic.com/media/extras/ ... 4_fb03.jpg

The "fenced in" area is a control panel for reactor tweaking. The round glowing bit is a suped-up shield generator.

The "underside vanes" are retractable heat sinks for the (often overtaxed) reactor of the bomber variant, behind them is the rear landing strut, visible on the Interceptor.

The bomber pilot isn't farther back, he's just taller. (Edit, at least I don't think he's farther back. Maybe he got moved when I sized him…)

Other than that, almost spot on Color and texture differences aside, there is only one other major difference.

[Enigma]

The bomber pilot looks like he has lazy eye beams.

[Jawawithagun]

You used Bump Maps on the Interceptor

[InsaneTD]

The interceptor doesn't have a rocket hanging off the side if the cockpit?

[Fuzzy_Modem]

You used Bump Maps on the Interceptor

I used bump maps for both, they are just subtler on the bomber. I should try to meet in the middle for both. Visible, but not so deep as to make the surface look not smooth.

[Venator]

Other than that, almost spot on .

I do my best .

I've those things on the underside of the bomber are for cooling, I assume it's more of a dive-bomber or strafing attack craft rather than a traditional "explodey bomb things fall out the bottom" type of bomber?

[Fuzzy_Modem]

I assume it's more of a dive-bomber or strafing attack craft rather than a traditional "explodey bomb things fall out the bottom" type of bomber?

True.

[Batman]

Well bomb bays seem to have largely gone out of fashion in the real world (largely because to make them worthwhile you need big honking and consequently expensive aircraft) in favour of 'explodey things fall off the bottom' on smaller vehicles (and unless the figure in the cockpit is seriously tall I don't expect this craft to be noticeably larger than modern-day tactical aircaft), but this thing does seem to have a wide enough fuselage (for its assumed size anyway) for a goodly number of external stores pylons (and while I shudder to think about the aerodynamics you could probably mount a decent selection of weapons on the for want of a better word wings, too). And I'm reasonably certain dive bombers went the way of the Dodo when we learned how to lob LGBs at people we don't like from 20 km away.

[Beowulf]

Bomb-bays are going back into fashion in the real world, largely due to stealth requirements. It doesn't make much sense to have a stealth aircraft with a weapon that has a larger radar signature that itself hanging off it. That said, still have external stores pylons for when you don't care about stealth.

[Batman]

I stand corrected. Would it be acceptable to say that large bomb bays have gone out of fashion due to the size of the aircraft required to be able to to put them into?

[Sea Skimmer]

The US and Russia are designing new bombers with will most certainly have large internal bays, and China may also be doing work on such a plane, so not really? Fighter plane sizes have been going up steadily too, which is what is making internal bays on them possible. We just don't get many examples because so few people can design new combat planes. That's what changed big time. Very few new planes, at least until more of the Asian powers become credible designers. Though that may just be balanced out by the extinction of all remaining western European design capability.

The only thing that's really gone away is the classic twin engine light and medium bombers... except, F-35A/C kinda torpedoes even that thinking. It has a 4,700lb internal payload, in comparison the He 111 bombers the Nazis were using in the Battle of Britain had a maximum 4,400lb internal payload. The Do 17Z had 2,200lb, the Ju-88 3,100lb. The F-35 has similar unrefueled range on internal fuel only to these aircraft as well. So... ha? Talk about technological progression.

In fairness, the F-35 is also much bigger in terms of MTOW, around twice as big in fact, but then it can also carry as much as 18,000lb of bombs with external pylons so you'd hope it was huge. None of the Nazi planes had over 6,000lb external carriage, and could only do so without internal payload.

I suppose though we no longer get jet age light bombers, but those never existed for long anyway, Il-28 and Vautour style planes. On the other hand stealth bomb pods, more or less detaching bomb bays you can reuse under the wings, have been wind tunnel trialed on the F-35 and F-22, and shown in models on the French Rafael. So... things get open to interpretation.

[Thanas]

Though that may just be balanced out by the extinction of all remaining western European design capability.

Can you elaborate on that one a bit? EADS and Rafale are still trying to design new planes, aren't they? (Though admittedly I haven't heard a bit out of EADS after the last news of possible cuts).