Beautiful build. However, things can be improved:
1. Rudder. Why no rudder?
2. Trailing edge on tail surfaces. They're round and blunt. A good fix would be to panel them in some way such that the trailing edge isnt as thicc.
3. Main wings. The airfoil is nice, but lacks work towards the tips, and missing the raked wingtip.
4. Drag. Disable drag plz.
5. Yes.
@jamesPLANESii Yes thy is joke to thee. Playing sp while watching online lectures and modeling stuff in Fusion360. PC cant really run the Illyushin under such loads.
This It aint cessna but make it cessna... put fairing on it and call it some wacky 1960s marketing term like "omni-dampen" or "land-o-matic" and for the fairing call it "speed-cap" or something along the lines.
@InternationalAircraftCompany Da comrade, we apologize for our mistake in our title. We promise in the name of our glorious motherland such atrocity will not happen again.
@jamesPLANESii sorry forgot to respond Your paneling skills are incredible. How do you do it so seamlessly omg
You know how? TSAD software. definitely /s
Nah incremental cross section build up every few feet and paneling one section at a time. Painfully long, but results are very favourable.
Here's some incremental steps:
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/F92M7s/Cessna-172H-Wireframe-1-0
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/wxtdPX/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/1LiEyz/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/u6l1pT/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/zTgXM4/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/Qcbx4j/Cessna-172H-Tail
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/uBy627/Cessna-172H-Airframe
@SouthTunnel because for one to become one with the yeet, one must master the yeet, and thus for one to master the yeet, one must become one with the yeet; or one must be yoten.
This gives me PTSD from war thunder.
If your playing against the Soviet and you see a BT-5 J out in the first 2 min after capping a point, you know a Pe-8 with a 5000kg nuke is coming with your name on it.
@Thecatbaron Yeah. Go ahead. I warned in the description tho that it isn't totally accurate or realistic, as for SP we had to either model it off airspeed or AoA, and not a combination of both.
@Thecatbaron Indeed. I do agree, from what MrSilverwolf has been telling me, under-sensitive is the case. However, we tuned down the sensitivity because we wanted something that would resemble the flying by a sane person who doesn't over-G the airframe.
I do understand your point though, incase you want to change it, here's a few things you can edit to make it more sensitive.
- On the horizontal stabilizer, there are 2 rotators on either side. The innermost on both is correspondent to pitch.
- Inside the horizontal stabilizer, the wing has 1 control surface on either side.
^
Change clamp01((400 / (abs(IAS) + 200)) - 1) * Pitch to just Pitch.
Beautiful build. However, things can be improved:
+11. Rudder. Why no rudder?
2. Trailing edge on tail surfaces. They're round and blunt. A good fix would be to panel them in some way such that the trailing edge isnt as thicc.
3. Main wings. The airfoil is nice, but lacks work towards the tips, and missing the raked wingtip.
4. Drag. Disable drag plz.
5. Yes.
dalao
0/10 Trees still not funky enough. Needs more dry-aging.
+6No @TrislandianAlliance
@jamesPLANESii Yes thy is joke to thee. Playing sp while watching online lectures and modeling stuff in Fusion360. PC cant really run the Illyushin under such loads.
+1Can't help but bother putting it in here. Maus Haus
+3This It aint cessna but make it cessna... put fairing on it and call it some wacky 1960s marketing term like "omni-dampen" or "land-o-matic" and for the fairing call it "speed-cap" or something along the lines.
+2Ching chong ur helicopters be launched.
@SupremeDorian Ye virgins and your star destroyers. Chads put the whole death star on it. Bruh
STRONK)))))
Funky.
@QingyuZhou it runs off 100% glorious people's vodka. da, da clean energy yes. good for motherland.
+1@whereby Because its not done.... who could have thought!?!?
@whereby Because its not done.... who could have thought!?!?
No @whereby
Lmao Sherman’s and M10s are free food. @CaptainEssen
+4Yes @Bennet23
@Fartspoppop
Oh. That’s neat. @Khanskaya
Yes @AerialFighterSnakes
T what @Fartspoppop
Ah thanks. Is that the default for YouTube now? Interesting. @Khanskaya
@AerialFighterSnakes
+1"Comments on the video have been disabled by YouTube to protect minors."
Apparently the IL-76 isn't appropriate...
@Pulkit beacons must taste terrible
@Brields95 Yes'nt
@InternationalAircraftCompany Da comrade, we apologize for our mistake in our title. We promise in the name of our glorious motherland such atrocity will not happen again.
+4Best of luck comrade. Best wishes to your health. You will get through this. Stay strong.
+3@AircraftoftheRedStar da
+1Blyat blin bloody brilliant.
Gaijibbles plz add 6.7 premium.
@ForeverPie Thanks, I hate it.
+1@jamesPLANESii than it must be the tsad software :thinking:
+1@jamesPLANESii sorry forgot to respond
+1Your paneling skills are incredible. How do you do it so seamlessly omg
You know how? TSAD software. definitely /s
Nah incremental cross section build up every few feet and paneling one section at a time. Painfully long, but results are very favourable.
Here's some incremental steps:
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/F92M7s/Cessna-172H-Wireframe-1-0
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/wxtdPX/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/1LiEyz/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/u6l1pT/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/zTgXM4/Cessna-172H-Fuselage-Panel
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/Qcbx4j/Cessna-172H-Tail
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/uBy627/Cessna-172H-Airframe
@SouthTunnel because for one to become one with the yeet, one must master the yeet, and thus for one to master the yeet, one must become one with the yeet; or one must be yoten.
Blyat. Mfw I can't spotlight it because comrade has more points than me.
+1@Bthom9090 mU rI cA oNl Y cO uNtrY iN tHe WorL d
+1I was thinking of OH-COK actually.
Read the description. All you had to do was press 1 and 2 to not miss the best part. :)
+1https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-patent-shows-plans-for-a-ridiculous-flying-ak-47-drone-2019-3
@teodor99 I'm ganna pretend I don't use the Ju-288.
This gives me PTSD from war thunder.
+1If your playing against the Soviet and you see a BT-5 J out in the first 2 min after capping a point, you know a Pe-8 with a 5000kg nuke is coming with your name on it.
Somewhat mobile friendly variant with half the exterior detail and no interior details:
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/p2k2Wc/Cessna-172S-Reduced-Partcount
@Fighterpilot91 Heh. Started work on this almost a year and a half ago. I don't have too much time on my games.
+2@Kweed10 In an hour? Idk. Working on them rn.
+1@Thecatbaron Yeah. Go ahead. I warned in the description tho that it isn't totally accurate or realistic, as for SP we had to either model it off airspeed or AoA, and not a combination of both.
@Thecatbaron Indeed. I do agree, from what MrSilverwolf has been telling me, under-sensitive is the case. However, we tuned down the sensitivity because we wanted something that would resemble the flying by a sane person who doesn't over-G the airframe.
I do understand your point though, incase you want to change it, here's a few things you can edit to make it more sensitive.
- On the horizontal stabilizer, there are 2 rotators on either side. The innermost on both is correspondent to pitch.
- Inside the horizontal stabilizer, the wing has 1 control surface on either side.
^
Change clamp01((400 / (abs(IAS) + 200)) - 1) * Pitch to just Pitch.
@Gameboi14 What other thing? heh
@Gameboi14 Lol I messed up a screenshot. You saw nothing.
@Gameboi14 ja.
Cute chonker
+1@Gameboi14 no. comrade it is of sekrit dokument.
@Gameboi14 no time, no motivation, project is 2 years old and i think it sucks.