Final version!
In addition to synchronised landing gead doors, refined flaps, remade ailerons (2 section now), corrected a mistake with cockpit view and one window , remade livery (its more or less an early Aeroflot livery of 1950s, though i changed violet strip for brown and omited most details). Significantly refined the way it flies, It feels more real now. And made some smaller changes here and there. Furthermore - made a roll trim control more efficient, it can now completely compensate for one engine flight. Also made an outer ailerons OFF switch (ag 8) - as it is way to sensitive on high speed.
Some background:
Tupolev Tu-104 was famous as a second jet airliner in the world to enter service and the only one in the air in 1956-58 (as DH Comet was withdrawn from service) and notorious for having the worst safety record in Russia and probably in the whole world at 16 hull-losses of just 201 airplanes ever produced, many with everybody on board ending dead. As communist party was never known for admitting their fails and due to most crashes were partially blamed on pilot error, the plane was not withdrawn from service like Comet.
Actually the problem was not really in lack of skill or negligence of pilots and designers, the plane was simply very difficult to fly. Chief designer Andrey Tupolev, one of the most famous russian aircraft designers (and a student of Hugo Junkers) was given only a year from start to mass production, so he decided to simplify plane a lot and used engines, avionics, wings and landing gear from a Tu-16 medium bomber. The plane appeared to be reliable as AK-47 technically, but lacking spoilers (or airbrakes of any other kind), with no adjustable stabilizer (thus making it very sensitive to weight distribution, which was not a problem on a bomber with payload in bomb bay directly in center of gravity), ineffective single-sloted flaps and virtually no automation, no hydraulic assisted controls (on a 75 tonn heavy mach 0.9 jet!) and facing busy urban airports with steep descend patterns, it often overshoot runways (though as it was built like a tank, only the pilots careers suffered usually). Furthermore, it appeared that elevator size was insufficient, so a plane with wrong payload distribution or facing updraft winds, became very susceptible to stall. This was only understood and corrected after 4 crashes... Luckily, later Tupolev planes (i.e. Tu-114, Tu-124/134 and especially Tu-154, which was the first in USSR to receive a basic fly-by-wire and electronic stability system), though having much in common in overall appearance and air-frame construction, received all the needed technical features and where known to be a lot easier to fly.
Controls:
Has completely functional Flaps, Landing gear, Nav. Lights, Aileron trim and two cockpit cameras. It is a 1:1 scale and weight replica. It flies quite realistically. Only left to made is a cockpit interior.
Controls:
G - Landing gear;
AG1 - Landing parachute (activated after touchdown)
AG2 + VTOL slider - Flaps; (0% = Flaps retracted, 100% DOWN = Flaps deployed)
AG3 + VTOL slider - eilerons (roll) trim. UP= roll to the right. Can help with one engine flight. Saves position after AG3 deactivated.
AG4 - Left engine
AG5 - Right engine
AG6 - Landing lights;
AG7 - Nav. Lights;
AG8 - Outer ailerons ON (active) -OFF switch (deactivate for high speed to make less sensitive) + Ground steering (sensitivity adjustment, when AG8 deactiveted - steers to the limit, when activated - steers 5 degrees) Positions - AG8 - ON on Take off/Landing, AG8 OFF on high speed and on the ground movements
Take off procedure - Trim 3/4 up, flaps 1/2 down, full thrust , Rotate at about 150 MPH
Landing procedure - Full flaps, trim ~ 75-85 up, 60% thrust with full flaps at approach, 45% near the runway, approach speed 200 mph, over the runway drop thrust to 25%, deploy parachute (AG1) if needed after touchdown. If bounced up, do not pitch down, just let it drop gently, nose down touch can be fatal). Correct trim constantly, below 190 mph it should be 100% up.
Ascending - 90% thrust, trim 75-80% down.
Level flight - 75% thrust, trim 75-85% down.
One engine flight - thrust 100%, compensate roll with aileron trim (AG3+ VTOL), landing with 50% flaps.
Too heavy for mobile devices...
Specifications
Spotlights
- MrSilverWolf 7.7 years ago
- InternationalAircraftCompany 7.7 years ago
General Characteristics
- Predecessor Tupolev Tu-104A 1956 (Updated)
- Successors 4 airplane(s) +91 bonus
- Created On Windows
- Wingspan 116.0ft (35.3m)
- Length 131.8ft (40.2m)
- Height 39.0ft (11.9m)
- Empty Weight 63,493lbs (28,800kg)
- Loaded Weight 159,178lbs (72,202kg)
Performance
- Power/Weight Ratio 0.423
- Wing Loading 35.1lbs/ft2 (171.6kg/m2)
- Wing Area 4,529.8ft2 (420.8m2)
- Drag Points 41471
Parts
- Number of Parts 747
- Control Surfaces 7
- Performance Cost 3,785
@asteroidbook345
Totally ok) will take a look)
@vonhubert ok cool, thanks!
@MrSilverWolf no problem, i have suggested other players use them somewhere in comments. Write me if smth doesnt work. And note - there are two doors in front that move the same speed as gears themself, and 2 sets of doors in the rear, that move opposite direction, each time you close or open gear, you see one pair going down, while the other goes up into fuselage. Take a look on this one, gear doors work the same, but you can see more clear how it works:
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/E3O7xD/017-cv-880-0-4
I have a quick question, would you be ok if I modified the gear doors on this plane and use it on one of my planes? (And I would add credit in the description if I ever upload the plane)
@PINK im lazy) these complex flaps and wing shape are pain in the ass to make and tune, and all my tupolev planes were designed on same base, this allows me to use same assemblies for landing gear, wing parts, flaps, ailerons and so on, just rescaling them and modifying)) but im working on a Convair CV880 now, again because it has a wing and fuselage similliar to Tu-104))) but i'm remaking flaps, spoilers and landing gear from scratch, so it is slow). And also i just make planes that i like visually.
I like you . . . you oddly always stick to the same airplane company and general design. @vonhubert
@vonhubert ok
@22zxSnakeEyes Thanks a lot! I made them on some models, but one of two most significant problems of this plane in real life was exactly lack of trust reversers and airbrakes) Use a braking parachute like they had to in 1956))) btw, european airport services were not so fond of having to catch it after any tu-104 landing)
@vonhubert this is a cool plane but if only it had reverse thrusters
@BaconEggs well, its a replica of a not so well known plane) b747 would not need a description at all) And controls are complex, they need a description anyway)
Very long description.. cool plane though