Wow, great out of the box thinking on using that command, I really like the sequenced doors. This one is on my favorites list, there’s so much good tech.
@Vampface I don’t know if that’s irony, operator error, or a failure to read the instructions, but if you’re having problems, try this: Be sure AG2 (Afterburner) is engaged and hit AG4 (Jettison drop tanks) and AG5 (jettison centerline stores) after takeoff. She does 900 mph at sea level, she’s not slow...as “Ace” says: “Hey, Slick, this is a REALISTIC representation of the Thud...in the ‘Nam, she would carry the stores seen here: dumb bombs, tanks and missiles, as well as ECM pods. These would significantly impact speed and maneuverability...as they do here. When bounced by MiGs, Thud crews would have to jettison their bombs and tanks to fight. North Vietnamese MiG crews would try and attack prior to the Thuds dropping their bombs, forcing them to jettison their stores in order to spoil their attacks, even if they didn’t manage to shoot one down that day.”
Yes, airspeed gauges do become less sensitive the higher you go. This is due to lower air density at altitude—fewer molecules go down the pitot tube to impact the diaphragm which moves the needle on the airspeed indicator. Depending on your altitude, there can be a huge difference between your indicated airspeed (IAS) and your true airspeed (TAS). Clipping along at 38,000 ft a 737 may be moving at 490 knots through the air, but only indicates 280 knots on the airspeed gauge. Winds at altitude, which can be quite strong, also impact your groundspeed. The wing part of your build acts as the diaphragm of an airspeed indicator (only because an SP wing is programmed to do so, not because there’s actually wind in SP) does—in fact, this build IS an accurate airspeed indicator for SP. The other thing to note is that in SP, that default “airspeed indicator” is not...its actually a groundspeed indicator, that’s why you see the difference. Clever build.
I noticed a couple things on your build. First, nice LG, great details. Second was the flaps, which create a nose up/down effect and the trim being set to roll...I can only assume you are having, or have had, issues with autoroll on the build you’re working. IF you are trying to counter autoroll on your builds there are better ways of doing so. The way I’ve described (flaps for pitch trim, ailerons to counter autoroll) works, but it leaves you with a build that relies on using flaps throughout the speed range, which is highly unrealistic as flaps create a lot of drag in RL. Flaps simply aren’t used at high speeds unless it’s a U-2 in “gust up”. There are two main sources of autoroll: unbalanced weight—which affects builds much more than it would do so in RL and uneven drag. The good news is that, often, 50-100 lbs of dead weight in a wing root will often cure the first problem and inserting “dragscale=0” into the XML file will eliminate drag for details on your plane. Of course, I may be assuming a lot here and may be that you’re not doing any of these things...in that case, nice build.
I recommend the following mods: Overload and FineTuner. Designer Suite is absolutely critical for building accurate replicas. With these tools, you can easily mod the XML files, assign attributes without using other mods that iOS can’t use, do things like assign “LandingGear” to any rotator for custom gear, resize any part and build over 3-views (“Blueprints”). Good luck.
Ok, this is FANTASTIC work—you are definitely NOT a noob! The flying dynamics are probably the best bush plane I’ve flown here on site...it actually flies like a real bush plane, maneuverable but stable, slow...I actually was able to roll it onto one wheel and hold off the other wheel, simply amazing. You have a new follower, who also has 4,000+ hrs of pilot time, so I ought to know.
This is pretty good, nice detail work, I’m impressed by the cockpit. Too bad you’re on iOS, drag reduction would be really good for this build. Also, you don’t need the unlimited fuel or weight reduction, it throws off the performance unrealistically and, frankly, it would have plenty of gas if you used the RL fuel quantity—7,900 gallons of fuel weighs 53,720 lbs all on its own and I can get nearly an hour of flight on my builds which have RL fuel quantities—you just need to fly like a RL pilot would, NOT at full throttle everywhere you go.
Some nice detail work here, looks like a Lincoln, so that’s good. Really needs longer main gear, first, the RL plane had longer main gear, but also, there’s not enough angle to take off—my flight test revealed a takeoff speed of 240 mph—about as fast as a fully laden F-105. Flies appropriately well, though it DESPERATELY needs trim. Nose dives unless you hold aft pressure to keep it up. I swear, does anyone fly these builds? A for effort, it’s a learning process and here’s an upvote.
This actually looks really good, especially considering your experience level. I hope the flight model matches—if you want a flight tester, just tag me.
@MDippold1995 yes, recommend you use the “CalculateDrag=False” statement on every part. Then, when you’re done building, add the drag back in until you achieve the correct performance. The mirroring issue happens when you mirror an assembly from one side to the other, often, when it’s mirrored, it will include parts also attached to the mirrored parts which you never intended to mirror. I mirror very carefully, individual part, by individual part to try and avoid the problem, but it still gets me from time to time. As for the 104, good luck, no one here has made one fly correctly, not even close. Either they turn like an F1 car or not at all. They either take off at 350 mph, or float off the ground. It’s a very difficult subject, I haven’t even tried it for the reason that it had a blown wing for takeoff and landing and there’s not a great way to simulate that.
Well, ok, this is easier for me. First, you know some basic XML tricks...engine power multiplier, possibly scaling (those wings certainly don’t look like they’re 1,450 sq ft). That’s all good stuff. If you would like to take your replica builds to the next level, try the following: 1. Get rid of the atrocious autoroll. For autoroll the the degree you have it, try a slight amount of deadly weight, 50-200 lbs, on the side opposite the roll. I believe that autoroll is a mirroring problem, mostly, in that additional parts will spawn, but not be seen and throw off the lateral balance. 2. That cockpit is cool, but not accurate for the F-5. The F-5 does not have MFDs or a side stick. 3. Try custom landing gear...much better than the default. 4. You power multiplied the engines...great, but acceleration is as fast as a hyperactive squirrel that’s been shot out of a cannon. Drag reduction is a better way of achieving your top speed. Plus, 850 mph at low level probably equates to 1,500 mph at altitude, which isn’t the top speed of the F-5, which is a Mach 1.4 jet, at best.
@MDippold1995 both, former USAF, now currently with the airlines. Would you like some hints/tips/tricks and feedback via an unlisted post (not public)?
I like this, someone just starting out and producing something like this is pretty good. Plus, I have around 500 hrs in the T-38, pretty similar to the original F-5, want some actual feedback on your build?
Well, it looks really good, but it should have incorporated trim as it’s slightly nose heavy (most aircraft are) and requires a constant nose up input to maintain level flight.
@BlackhattAircraft ok, so you don’t want to attract the hate over on the Discord server, but that just allows the problem to fester. The only way to fix the problem is for you and others who feel as you do to agree and quit that server. If enough people quit that server, there won’t be anyone left and it may collapse (or not). Either way, you staying there and not saying anything is tacit acceptance of the problem.
I agree the Holocaust is no joking matter, but this would be better served in the forum where you read the offending comments. Last I checked, SP forums are fairly well behaved and managed. If I’m wrong, please show me where and I’ll be sure to call out any stupid comments.
@EngineerOtaku as for cost...IF (and that’s a big IF...I worked several budget cycles on the ACC Staff at Langley, and no one, I mean no one can make sense of actual costs. Lifecycle cost, acquisition cost, BOS cost, all this things are mixed and matched to present the lowest possible dollar amount when competing for funding), I estimate that the USAF could have bought approximately 1.1 F-23s for the cost of an F-22. If the F-22 was the least expensive platform, I estimate that the USAF could have afforded only .9 F-23s for the cost of an F-22. “Less costly” is measured in percents, not whole numbers. It would be wildly inaccurate to assume we might have afforded 2 or 3 F-23s for the cost of a Raptor.
Very nice.
Wow, great out of the box thinking on using that command, I really like the sequenced doors. This one is on my favorites list, there’s so much good tech.
Very detailed and original, I like it. Very cute, I’m impressed with the detail under the cover as well as the way you managed the headlight.
+1Nice build, reminds me of a Dehavilland Beaver. I especially like the Big Gulp in the cup holder.
@Vampface I don’t know if that’s irony, operator error, or a failure to read the instructions, but if you’re having problems, try this: Be sure AG2 (Afterburner) is engaged and hit AG4 (Jettison drop tanks) and AG5 (jettison centerline stores) after takeoff. She does 900 mph at sea level, she’s not slow...as “Ace” says: “Hey, Slick, this is a REALISTIC representation of the Thud...in the ‘Nam, she would carry the stores seen here: dumb bombs, tanks and missiles, as well as ECM pods. These would significantly impact speed and maneuverability...as they do here. When bounced by MiGs, Thud crews would have to jettison their bombs and tanks to fight. North Vietnamese MiG crews would try and attack prior to the Thuds dropping their bombs, forcing them to jettison their stores in order to spoil their attacks, even if they didn’t manage to shoot one down that day.”
@Zott well, sinking the Tiny with gunfire alone is a bit much, but you need to be able to at least destroy the convoy by strafing, so they work!
+1I was just playing with this plane, very nice. I like the accuracy of the build.
+1I like the paint. Perhaps I’m now inspired to try that Gee Bee again!
@Hyattorama thank you very much, I appreciate the in depth assessment. Not many take the time to do so.
+1@AWESOMENESS360 that makes me sad...I’ve been thinking about uploading a stripped down version. Out of curiosity, how many parts can you run?
Nice.
Yes, airspeed gauges do become less sensitive the higher you go. This is due to lower air density at altitude—fewer molecules go down the pitot tube to impact the diaphragm which moves the needle on the airspeed indicator. Depending on your altitude, there can be a huge difference between your indicated airspeed (IAS) and your true airspeed (TAS). Clipping along at 38,000 ft a 737 may be moving at 490 knots through the air, but only indicates 280 knots on the airspeed gauge. Winds at altitude, which can be quite strong, also impact your groundspeed. The wing part of your build acts as the diaphragm of an airspeed indicator (only because an SP wing is programmed to do so, not because there’s actually wind in SP) does—in fact, this build IS an accurate airspeed indicator for SP. The other thing to note is that in SP, that default “airspeed indicator” is not...its actually a groundspeed indicator, that’s why you see the difference. Clever build.
+4I noticed a couple things on your build. First, nice LG, great details. Second was the flaps, which create a nose up/down effect and the trim being set to roll...I can only assume you are having, or have had, issues with autoroll on the build you’re working. IF you are trying to counter autoroll on your builds there are better ways of doing so. The way I’ve described (flaps for pitch trim, ailerons to counter autoroll) works, but it leaves you with a build that relies on using flaps throughout the speed range, which is highly unrealistic as flaps create a lot of drag in RL. Flaps simply aren’t used at high speeds unless it’s a U-2 in “gust up”. There are two main sources of autoroll: unbalanced weight—which affects builds much more than it would do so in RL and uneven drag. The good news is that, often, 50-100 lbs of dead weight in a wing root will often cure the first problem and inserting “dragscale=0” into the XML file will eliminate drag for details on your plane. Of course, I may be assuming a lot here and may be that you’re not doing any of these things...in that case, nice build.
+2I recommend the following mods: Overload and FineTuner. Designer Suite is absolutely critical for building accurate replicas. With these tools, you can easily mod the XML files, assign attributes without using other mods that iOS can’t use, do things like assign “LandingGear” to any rotator for custom gear, resize any part and build over 3-views (“Blueprints”). Good luck.
Nice plane. You’re on PC, right?
Did you ever make a tutorial on making interiors?
Beautiful jet.
+1Ok, this is FANTASTIC work—you are definitely NOT a noob! The flying dynamics are probably the best bush plane I’ve flown here on site...it actually flies like a real bush plane, maneuverable but stable, slow...I actually was able to roll it onto one wheel and hold off the other wheel, simply amazing. You have a new follower, who also has 4,000+ hrs of pilot time, so I ought to know.
+2This thing is ridiculous—but in the best possible way! Here’s a Spotlight!
Such a nice, simple replica build. I have to ask, though, why’d you put the gun on top of the nose?
This is pretty good, nice detail work, I’m impressed by the cockpit. Too bad you’re on iOS, drag reduction would be really good for this build. Also, you don’t need the unlimited fuel or weight reduction, it throws off the performance unrealistically and, frankly, it would have plenty of gas if you used the RL fuel quantity—7,900 gallons of fuel weighs 53,720 lbs all on its own and I can get nearly an hour of flight on my builds which have RL fuel quantities—you just need to fly like a RL pilot would, NOT at full throttle everywhere you go.
@WarHawk95 @Brayplane101 WILCO.
This is really fun, by the way.
Holy crap, I completely forgot to test this for you...doh!
@BlackhattAircraft Wilco.
@Othawne ok, no prob, wasn’t sure what you meant.
@Othawne pardon? Don’t understand what you mean.
Very nice, low and slow!
+1Nice...and only 100 parts, impressive, very impressive.
+1Some nice detail work here, looks like a Lincoln, so that’s good. Really needs longer main gear, first, the RL plane had longer main gear, but also, there’s not enough angle to take off—my flight test revealed a takeoff speed of 240 mph—about as fast as a fully laden F-105. Flies appropriately well, though it DESPERATELY needs trim. Nose dives unless you hold aft pressure to keep it up. I swear, does anyone fly these builds? A for effort, it’s a learning process and here’s an upvote.
+2This actually looks really good, especially considering your experience level. I hope the flight model matches—if you want a flight tester, just tag me.
Nice!
Methinks you’re all ducked out...
Nice Spit...why didn’t I see this one before?
Reminds me of the F-94, nice.
Wow, great build. It melted my phone, but it’s fantastic.
+1@MDippold1995 yes, recommend you use the “CalculateDrag=False” statement on every part. Then, when you’re done building, add the drag back in until you achieve the correct performance. The mirroring issue happens when you mirror an assembly from one side to the other, often, when it’s mirrored, it will include parts also attached to the mirrored parts which you never intended to mirror. I mirror very carefully, individual part, by individual part to try and avoid the problem, but it still gets me from time to time. As for the 104, good luck, no one here has made one fly correctly, not even close. Either they turn like an F1 car or not at all. They either take off at 350 mph, or float off the ground. It’s a very difficult subject, I haven’t even tried it for the reason that it had a blown wing for takeoff and landing and there’s not a great way to simulate that.
Very nice build, great subject, well-executed details!
Well, ok, this is easier for me. First, you know some basic XML tricks...engine power multiplier, possibly scaling (those wings certainly don’t look like they’re 1,450 sq ft). That’s all good stuff. If you would like to take your replica builds to the next level, try the following: 1. Get rid of the atrocious autoroll. For autoroll the the degree you have it, try a slight amount of deadly weight, 50-200 lbs, on the side opposite the roll. I believe that autoroll is a mirroring problem, mostly, in that additional parts will spawn, but not be seen and throw off the lateral balance. 2. That cockpit is cool, but not accurate for the F-5. The F-5 does not have MFDs or a side stick. 3. Try custom landing gear...much better than the default. 4. You power multiplied the engines...great, but acceleration is as fast as a hyperactive squirrel that’s been shot out of a cannon. Drag reduction is a better way of achieving your top speed. Plus, 850 mph at low level probably equates to 1,500 mph at altitude, which isn’t the top speed of the F-5, which is a Mach 1.4 jet, at best.
+1@MDippold1995 both, former USAF, now currently with the airlines. Would you like some hints/tips/tricks and feedback via an unlisted post (not public)?
I like this, someone just starting out and producing something like this is pretty good. Plus, I have around 500 hrs in the T-38, pretty similar to the original F-5, want some actual feedback on your build?
Freakin’ awesome!
@Topfighter the early versions did, this is a later version.
This is a pretty fun build, actually.
Well, it looks really good, but it should have incorporated trim as it’s slightly nose heavy (most aircraft are) and requires a constant nose up input to maintain level flight.
@BlackhattAircraft which Discord server is it? I assume it’s related to SP?
+1@BlackhattAircraft ok, so you don’t want to attract the hate over on the Discord server, but that just allows the problem to fester. The only way to fix the problem is for you and others who feel as you do to agree and quit that server. If enough people quit that server, there won’t be anyone left and it may collapse (or not). Either way, you staying there and not saying anything is tacit acceptance of the problem.
@BlackhattAircraft yes, and that’s my point. This should be posted on Discord, doesn’t have to be posted here. Have you posted this on Discord?
+4I agree the Holocaust is no joking matter, but this would be better served in the forum where you read the offending comments. Last I checked, SP forums are fairly well behaved and managed. If I’m wrong, please show me where and I’ll be sure to call out any stupid comments.
+3@EngineerOtaku as for cost...IF (and that’s a big IF...I worked several budget cycles on the ACC Staff at Langley, and no one, I mean no one can make sense of actual costs. Lifecycle cost, acquisition cost, BOS cost, all this things are mixed and matched to present the lowest possible dollar amount when competing for funding), I estimate that the USAF could have bought approximately 1.1 F-23s for the cost of an F-22. If the F-22 was the least expensive platform, I estimate that the USAF could have afforded only .9 F-23s for the cost of an F-22. “Less costly” is measured in percents, not whole numbers. It would be wildly inaccurate to assume we might have afforded 2 or 3 F-23s for the cost of a Raptor.
+2