Therapist: don't worry Bri'ish draken doesn't exist it can't hurt you.

Bri'ish draken:

@Afellowuser09 maybe, i have something nearly built, thinking about doing a 2 seat version so might do that in NZ colours.

@RamboJutter And that is why I'm planning to make Complex Planes.
I'm also getting into RC. Though it wasn't included when calculating my budget...

@MethaManAerospace thanks for the reply, its good to discuss these things. I do tend to make the builds slightly nose heavy, as you say with keyboard inputs its all or nothing so you need to reduce the rotation around col - easiest way is move cog forward a bit. It also harks back to my rc model aircraft were you start off with the build being nose heavy to ensure its stable before fine tuning it (nothing worse than getting your 100hr+ build to the field and watching it fly like a sycamore leaf into the ground on first flight...)

This game, in my opinion, is only really missing the 4 axis on blocks to allow a twist, if we had that we could much more easily make aero shaped wings etc without using the triangle method which is time consuming and not exact.

@RamboJutter I had a look too and realised that I was being a bit harsh... You have made really cool builds (that one probs being my fav), but on the others you just miss out on that detail... which does lower the part count...
Being an aero student I've become somewhat of a maniac about aero accuracy... And I guess you focus more on the livery... which I am hopeless at... (collab?)

About the drag, that's fair enough. Though there still is something strange about your flight models which I cant quite pinpoint yet... Maybe you balance your builds a bit nose heavy? That's quite common in SP as using full inputs (such as keyboard) is highly unrealistic and accentuates the feeling of instability. Hence far forward COM to be 500% stable.

IDK exactly but I've always looked up at your builds, so keep going!

@Dimkal no worries man, I looked back at my more recent builds and agree they do lack some pizaz (the ww1 ones are good though). See where my next creations take me :)

@RamboJutter I didn't mean to sound so bitter. I mean that your recent builds were quite good but didn't have that "thing" to make me fly with them for a 2nd or 3rd time. Your builds are always good, detailed and with nice handling!

Next Build Can You Maybe Do A New Zealand Air Force Fighter Jet Please?

@Dimkal thanks :) glad you like it and thanks fir the support as always. Sorry you feel some of the more recent builds have been sub-par, they were never intended to be.

oooo a not Saab Draken

At last! After some quite average builds you found your good old RJ! Great aircraft, with realsitic handling, sexy shape and amazing livery! Love the weapons and the background story! I really enjoyed flying with that British lady!

@MethaManAerospace further to the below I've just had a flick through my last couple of pages and I don't think your comments regarding dihedral and wing thickness/taper are accurate. Have a look at !this for one example

@MethaManAerospace tha for the comments. This one was a bit heavy on wing load but otherwise relatively close to a "real" aircraft but I found that acceleration was unrealistic thus having to play with drag and thrust etc.

I always build with drag and mass off then add it where required, this stops random autoroll and other effects that come with the game calculations. It also speeds up load times (im pretty sure it was eternaldarkness that told me about this a good few years ago.)

In regards to dihedral etc. I fo use it but only on builds that would benefit, check out my ww1 builds, most have dihedral on them as that's period accurate, more modern aircraft tend not to have much dihedral and tend to be horizontal or have anhedral (i white often use anhedral on tail planes like the first etc.) Its horses for courses really.

As for thicker wing ribs at the root as opposed to the tip, I use that on quite a lot of wings (look st my weasel build for instance) however I do sacrifice this bit if I want to add a complicated colour scheme as panelling becomes more complicated otherwise.

@RamboJutter To make a plane handle realistically, It seems like the best way is to give it real specs (empty+loaded mass, thrust, wing loading, etc) and then adjust the speed by manually changing the drag scale (even on wings) using overload, NOT the engine power.

This means that your plane has proper acceleration, climb rate and manoeuvrability, and after tinkering speed too.

Another 2 things that sadly puts me off a little with your planes:
1- you rarely seem to give your wings any di/anhedral, which a lot of planes have (even if it is very minimal on most). It would really add depth to your builds if you added that.
2 - You also rarely change the wing thickness along the span, which for a start is unrealistic but also makes your wing look like a long plank from the front, again decreasing the visual depth of the build.

I just find it a bit sad that you don't do these two things when your RJ "mashup" planes are such cool concepts with very smooth liveries and shapes...
Your builds are already quality but your best builds are the ones you did do these things.
Maybe you've thought of these and decided otherwise...

edit: I just noticed you disabled drag on all parts but 2? Why, performance?

@ChiChiWerx yep, brit draken sums it up nicely, I used a modified lighting fuselage with single engine etc so it definitely has the brit bit. I always struggle with the compromise between speed at altitude and speed at low level. If I have it right for one its wrong on the other... I was fighting the game again towards the end of the build or it would have had some more red bits (eg im fitting a pitot tube to the nise cone but the right hand u/c and adjacent door become stuck...) thanks again for your input, it gives me something to work on.

Ah...a Brit Draken! Very fast at altitude, just as fast as an F-106, the “Ultimate Interceptor”, easy enough to land on the boat, though it does help to have the speedbrakes locked out in on approach as it really likes to accelerate given the least bit power input.