Attached Link: FA-40 Detailed Image Views

On sale for one week only.

How could you guys said that it is an original design when it is a TOTAL RIP-OFF from SA-43 Hammerhead from SPACE: Above and Beyond TV series! I think it is very Not cool of you guys not to included that important information. I am including some images to back it up.

Second image

I just downloaded it. It looks great. I think when they say designed they are talking more about the modelling side of things not building an aircraft. The other thing you've got to remember with art is sometimes you see something and it just sticks in your subconscious, and you think it's your idea but don't necessarily remember where you got it from anyway. Also all aircraft have some similarities too. eg they all have wings and little windows at the front. Whatever, but I'm very happy with it. I'd prefer one more seat behind the driver if possible but hey, I can't complain with such a nice aircraft and so many detatchable bombs and misiles, and varying textures. I'm going to find it very very useful. Love esther

I'm a big fan of the series, and I know that the "HAMMERHEAD" configuration is a trademark of Jim Millett who is the orginal designer. Area 51 Production Team created all of the visual effects for the TV series Space: Above and Beyond. It's the same case if someone made a 3D model of "Star Wars." It should be considered as a fan work and iw43d should share with us for free not charge $28. According to you, the models of X-Wing or Tie Fighter are able to put up for sale other by than the original creators/designers and the ceators/designer should not hold trademark by Lucas Art. I find it to be offensive that the designs which came out of TV were not mentioned. The model is not changed enough to claim it to be an orginal design. Everyone who is familar with "Hammerhead" design from the series would agree with me.

I thought you were talking about some documentary program called space. Still maybe they both got the idea from a real aircraft. Anyway I mean what if someone makes a mercedes car model for poser, and there isn't already one like it the same? You could still claim it as your model couldn't you? You wouldn't have to sell it for free just because it looks like a mercedes? Love esther

Just my opinion:

Based on the images I have access to, the FA-40 and the SA-43 are are similar, but entirely different. The fuselage has an entirely different configuration. The engine housings and wing configurations are also completely different, as are hardpoint configurations. The similarities that I see are confined to the cockpit design and the nose winglets, both of which are somewhat common in rear-wing configuration aircraft.

So, while the FA-40 could be considered a cousin to the SA-43, to call it a rip-off or trademark infringement is rude, crass, and totally uncalled for. It is, in my studied opinion, a unique aircraft.

Studied opinion, you say? Yes, studied opinion. My grandfather was an Aeronautical Engineer...one of the best in the business. EVERY U.S. fighter you see take to the sky has some of my grandfather's work in it, from as early as the P-38 Lightning all the way up to the F-22, on which he was used as a consultant. The front-sweep wing configuration was originally designed by him, while working for Lockheed, if I remember correctly. I've been taught the principles of Aeronautics since I was about eight, and the only reason I didn't follow my grandfather's profession was because I didn't care for the amount of school involved.

There's nothing wrong with raising questions, or pointing out similarities. But a modicum of tact and respect usually helps. You showed neither.

And Pam, please convey to Spook and THK that my grandfather would have been impressed. ;-)

Well, I was a huge fan of the Above and Beyond series AND I am very familar with the "Hammerhead" design. So, I want to say that I take extreme exception to your assurance that anyone who is would agree with you, bluepixel773, because I DON'T and I don't like you speaking for me. You are overreacting, reading too much into the likenesses, paying no attention to the differences, and doing it in such a manner that you sound childish. And, no one is going to listen or pay attention - even if you had a valid arguement.

Great model as always IW43D I'm going to have to scrape some pennies together to get this one

hmmmm... i wasn't aware that there was a "controversy" about this model. i do not share in any compensation for the sale of this model - contributing my minimal efforts because i really think IW43D does fantastic work; but i can discuss the origins of the project - to whit: i approached IW43D to commission a PRIVATE model based on questor's "hammerhead" mesh - which he distributed for free on his website (and from whom i received permission for use in the project). this was a one-off for which i was willing to pay for time and efforts at a daily rate. this was delivered to me, and i posted an image accordingly. done. but i then inquired about a proto-design of the "hammerhead." the storyline of the series, "S:AAB," suggests that the "hammerhead" was introduced as a scramjet-powered, deep-space and orbital fighter in and around 2063. and certainly there would have been prior design iterations. i suggested to tom that a model could be created based on the NOTION of the "hammerhead" but based on the contemporary work being done with the eurofighter and canard-fitted fighters currently - aiming for the year 2024 or so. i composited some images of f-15 with f-22 and eurofighter, and suggested a fuselage geometrically similar to the "hammerhead" - with turbojet engines. the result? an FA-40 "warhawk" - named in tribute to its P-40 predecessor. in neither scale nor configuration does the FA-40 in any way resemble the SA-43 "hammerhead" from S:AAB. it DOES have an earlier, less refined nose and cockpit shape with a geometry that "hints" of the SA-43 yet-to-come. and that was intentional - as the one suggesting the design. my own work has involved some defence analysis. and i doubt there is a plane that has ever been produced that didn't echo a predecessor in some way or another. as a fan of the former series, i appreciated the lines of the imaginary SA-43; it seems natural that its predecessor would be familiar. i think that IW43D's tom knight has done brilliant ORIGINAL work creating this model. and having the privilege of knowing tom and pam at IW43D, i'm pleased to be associated with this new FA-40. i thank him for all of his efforts to date. and all my regards to pam, too.

here's an image i posted recently of the FA-40 for comparison.... thank you!

NO MORE WORDS are needed here!! You just added 2 more wings and slightly changed the angle of the main 2 wings. IT still DOES NOT make it an ORIGINAL design!!

Folks, this is easy to resolve. There is NOTHING AT ALL wrong with having made a model inspired by the Hammerhead. Hell, 99% of every ship, plane, car and other model ever done in 3D is inspired by something else or another design. So anyone getting all bent that this plane is a close cousin of the Hammerhead really, really needs to chill out. What SHOULD be done, hoever is is to acknowledge the lineage on the product page and in the read.me . It simply would not be a problem to say ... "This contemporary technology design was inspired by musings as to a possible origin of the futuristic Hammerhead space fighter" See? sheesh.

Thanks Soulhuntre. Long time no see. Let's talk soon (off the forum, of course.) Let me try my hand at this, then, I'm going to go on to something a bit more constructive. If I built a plane that looked like a Boeing 737, would that be a problem? My brother is a cartoonist, and several years ago he designed a character he made up called a Freebley. It was a cross between an insect and a fairy, but what it resembled more than anything was my stuffed Bullwinkle I used to lug around (EVERYWHERE) when I was a kid. He also has Murray who is a little cricket character he created years ago based on one of our favorite (as far as CUTE goes) cartoon characters growing up, Gimini Cricket. And while I'm more than certain Gimini Cricket is trademarked, Steve's cricket looks nothing like him, but then again, he IS a cricket. So you see, every creation an artist transfers from his mind to the media he works in, is a culmination of things. Like a spaceship is a spaceship. We've been told that our Sc1 resembles the shuttlecraft from Alien. And while that very well may be in some respects, Tom did not use pictures or reference images of that craft to build the Sc1 model. So if some of the features resemble features from something else, be it conscious or unconscious, it is because this item helped to inspire the thing. So let me ask you this, what about a Boeing Jet? How many models of that are out there in the market? OR a Ford Mustang, etc., etc., etc. What are the rules on this? You might say, Yes, but this is a TV Series with a Unique Original Design. But then so were all of these items at one time or another. So where is the line drawn? Should we switch to making clothes for Victoria? And if so, what if we come up with a shirt design that looks similar to something someone created here a recently or two years ago that we'd never seen, but our shirt is similar enough that we are then accused of ripping this persons design off? It's a shirt, and shirts look like shirts and if you were to break this down, I believe more often than not, every shirt out there that has been created by all the artists who have created shirts for Poser, would have more similarities than differences, if you want to look at it that way. What if we built something like a lace up sandal? Now there are already lace up sandals out there, and while they may have similarities, the one we made has a completely different pattern, laces, and sandal foot design, what then? Do you see my point here, Blue Pixel? Would you like to continue being riled up (because this is your favorite show) or can we move on? I am a person who prefers conflicts be resolved. So, rather than continuing on the forum with more accusations, speculations, or ill will or feelings, let's try to resolve the matter, please. You tell me what you would like us to do? Would you like us to pull the model? Would that do it for you, if we just eliminate the problem? And I do not mean this as a sarcasm. I say this in all sincerity Because I dont know about you, but I'd like to get on with more constructive things on this beautiful Saturday afternoon. Besides, its Valentine's Day and I have a Newsletter to get out with download information for a new Freebie. I think people might want to know about that, more than they'd like to beat this poor horse (FA40 topic ;) to death/any further. What do you say? Please let me know. Cheers! Pam

I posted another messae on this thread (or so I thought) earlier today.... but am not seeing it here. Let me go get that. It was to preceed this post. Be right back. pg

It's a long one too but didn't get posted. Sorry. Here it is. Glad I saved it/don't have to re-write this bad boy. Blue Pixel, Pam from iw43d here. I thought Spook's response to your post had resolved your issues, but seeing this post you've made here ed all of your questions, but with this latest post of yours, I thought I had better jump in to address your concerns. Let me start out by saying that perhaps this entire ordeal is my fault for not mentioning that Spook's Custom Design was loosely based on the Hammerhead (from whatever TV series it is from/that you refer to). Would this have cleared things up for you or kept us from ruffling your feathers so much? If so, I sincerely apologize because I am the one who adds new products to our website, and who is also responsible for the marketing of these products (among other things ;). Not being familiar with this TV series, I did not mention the origin of what Spook's original design was based upon. That being said I NEED TO ADDRESS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE regarding your last post about our FA40 model (that is being sold on our site) and Questors model. PLEASE KNOW THAT Spook commissioned us to do TWO JOBS for him: 1. CONVERT QUESTOR'S HAMMERHEAD MODEL TO POSER, which we did after FIRST getting Questor's permission to do so. Upon completion of the conversion, we sent Spook the only copy we made, and would never attempt to sell this model on our own site, OR ANYWHERE ELSE. 2. CREATE the FA40 MODEL WITH % SETS OF TEXTURE MAPS per Spook's design notes and specifications. These models are completely separate of one another. If you prefer to stand by your accusation in your recent post, I would be more than happy to provide images of both wire meshes and post them here for you. I will have to get the wire mesh image from Spook of the model conversion, (Questor's model) however, since we no longer have a copy of it. Just FYI, the FA40 took us 3 weeks to create the mesh to build from scratch, and then prefect all the mats, By NO MEANS did we (or would we) attempt to manipulate Questor's mesh and then resell it. Hell, if was difficult enough just trying to convert the thing to Poser, let alone try to rework with the mesh. It probably has five times the polys count than the FA40 model we created. (Point being that we wouldn't do this anyway.) And just so you are clear on what transpired... Spook commissioned us to convert Questor's model. To pay for our time, we charged him a considerable fee to do so. When we completed this conversion, he wasn't exactly "thrilled" with the outcome, and we felt very bad about this because not only is Spook a great customer, he's also a friend. With that, we made a compromise and suggested to him that if in the future, he wanted to create his own custom design himself and provide us with some drawings, that we would be happy to have him commission us to do build a model of it. Since we are well aware that most of the Poser Community consists of hobbyists, we understand that most people here don't have sizeable budgets to justify the time spent to create custom models for them. However, and as I told Spook, if anyone comes up with an original custom design, we can try to keep the price of the commissioned job as low as we possibly could, if we would be able to sell the model in an effort to compensate us for our time. We can justify labor costs if we think the item has a potential for us to recoup through stock model sales. So this is what we did. I think you already know that this is our business, and not just a hobby to us, yes? I hope my explanation helps resolve any misunderstanding in the matter, and eliminates any ill feelings you might be building up simply because I neglected to mention what "inspired", or what the model premise was loosely based on, or the word Hammerhead, (if you wanted me to mention the TV series, youd have to give me the name of it.) Please let me know. And as I said, we're happy to post the meshes if it would help you to put this behind you. Thanks much. And Happy Valentine's Day! :) Pam

Well, gosh. Amazing what you find sometimes isn't it? I shouldn't think Spook would be making the poser version available seeing as he paid to have it converted and doesn't have permission to redistribute the model. I certainly won't be making the 3ds version available anytime soon. It was for a while on my website but after having found one industrious wanker selling one of my movie related models for 250 dollars I decided that'd be the end of it. I am making another version - as Pam has said the first one is so poly heavy it's like a lead brick - but that will most likely be for my use only. As for the accusations in this thread, I find them unfortunate. Yes the FA-40 loosely "resembles" the hammerhead. It doesn't however, take much imagination to pick out the very obvious differences. Even in the second image posted as "proof" (which was my SA43) there are some major differences obvious in the model from the x-scaling through the nose winglets to the external hardstorage, lack of nose cannon, tailfins, engine intake differences, cockpit design etc etc. The one by IW43 more of a cross between an FA22, F14 and SA43. Not to mention of course that the SA43 is not equipped with Helfires or AMRAAM's or external fuel tanks. But never mind. I gave Spook and IW43 permission to create a one off poserised version of my model (which wasn't originally created with Poser in mind). To the best of my knowledge that's precisely what they did. I've been perfectly happy that the FA40 is a different plane altogether and no doubt the creators of SAAB would be happy to acknowledge that as well. So, similarities in concept aside it's quite patently a different model.

"no more words" indeed... questor! it's really unexpected and nice to see you post in this thread. thank you. it is unfortunate when someone tries to create issues where none exist. and given the sometimes volatile nature of the community here, it does need to be addressed - if for no other reason than to lessen the stress on innocent parties and make it clear that such libelous and injurious comments are not allowed to stand. IW43D's work is original. the notions, concept, and execution of the model do not infringe on anyone's creative work. the FA-40 is a conjecture - a fiction not posited by anyone else. i had a hand in its design - which was enjoyable. but is it a derivative work? no - neither derived from questor's mesh nor from the series in question. as for the poserised SA-43 mesh, it will never be made available. that is the agreement that i made with questor and IW43D. that model IS derived completely from the fighter plane developed for the show "space: above and beyond" created by morgan and wong (of "x-files" fame). and it was created for my use alone with the kind permission of questor. and the few hundred dollars spent was well worth the effort, i think. these "accusations" are mischievous and unfair. and i wish that pam and tom hadn't been subjected to such ignorance and insult.

Gawsh, Blue Pixel, be a nice lad and stop trolling, yes? Like, who cares whether you like the model or not... We do.

"I'm a big fan of the series... It should be considered as a fan work and iw43d should share with us for free not charge $28."

One Word: Nutshell. :)

well.. lets see here Cockpit - while similar, obivous differences. Canards - different shape engine intakes - on the SA43 they are higher and set into the body more than the FA40. Tailplane - Sa43 has none. wingshape - different shape / lengths now.. calling these the same is like calling a VW Golf the same as a new style beetle. may I suggest that you take another more detailed look bluepixel773? it is quite obivous that these are different aircraft.

As a former fan of Space: Above and Beyond, which is now a dead, defunct series, I don't see what the fuss is about. There may be superficial similarities,but this whole thread is a bit extreme in the accusations. All aircraft have wings, so everyone since Wilbur and Orville have stolen their ideas, right ? That's about as stupid as this whole thing sounds. Some of you guys need to get out more and get a LIFE !