@asteroidbook345 “modded fuel tanks allowed” may not be infinite fuel, but being able to cram 1,000 gallons of fuel into any fuse piece makes it a whole lot easier and kind of breaks the laws of physics anyway...
Well, by making unlimited fuel, you made it easy to simply build a really big airplane that can carry your 15 bombs, so not much of a challenge anymore.
USAF Insignia. Here you go, created by @TheAlban, accurately proportioned. These days, you can also make the parts lighter with the Overload mod (I think these weigh 22 lbs apiece). I have a set I made and use, but it’s easier to post this link here. Also, you can search “Parts” and find many modded parts to suit your building needs.
@ColonelStriker that 5 - 15 secs is a guesstimate and “target lock” is jargon. The time it takes for a radar to acquire and determine azimuth and distance really has to do with sweep time, or how long it takes the radar antenna (old style parabolic/directional antennas) to complete a rotation and “paint” the target twice. The speed of light will add a fraction of a second, but not too much (it takes about .0014 secs for light to cover 420 miles). Newer phased array antennas are able to paint and track targets multiple times per second, thanks to the magic of computers. The faster the processor, the faster the paints and the better the tracking.
The SP world is actually relatively small, so not surprising an airborne radar could cover that area. Where radar performance really counts is in antenna size and transmitter power, which translates to resolution (ability to break out multiple small targets at range).
@Sunnyskies maybe just a little, buuuuut, 200 mph and 10 degrees nose up at 500,000 lbs is probably close (don’t know for sure, never flew the Galaxy). Plus I’m sure the C-5 doesn’t true out at much more than 500 knots, though SP works in mph (dumb).
Each degree nose down (from level flight) equals 100’ lost per mile. Example: You will lose 1000’ per mile at 10 degrees nose low.
Rate of Descent: Mach times degrees from level flight equals feet per minute down/up. Example: 120 knots/mph equals .2 Mach, multiplied by 3 degrees nose down (typical final approach angle) equals 600 fpm down (too bad we don’t have a variometer/rate of descent indicator).
Glide ratio: Altitude lost per mile. To get miles per minute, divide speed by 60.
Pilot math equals easy math. 60 to 1 rule makes all these calculations very easy and close enough for flying use. Unfortunately, I don’t know the metric equivalents for these calculations, but as SP uses English units, these work!
For realism sake, I would increase it to at least 100 miles. From 30,000, the horizon is 211 miles, which is the theoretical range for even a low powered radar.
The Tu as there are hundreds of civil twin jets and hardly any Concord/Concordskis here...I think you should ditch the wing flex on it as delta wings are fairly rigid and don’t really exhibit much, if any, flex.
Do you happen to build RC aircraft? You use torque tubes for your control surfaces...which work great by the way, no floppy control surfaces here. Also, why no trim? The only vices I can see here is that it’s slightly nose-heavy and requires a constant back stick to avoid the nose drop and it’s also slightly pitch sensitive, which might have been solved by making it a little longer, or moving the canards farther forward...very nice fictional build, though and the cannon is fun though my aiming skills leave something to be desired.
@GermanWarMachine no, the original “Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo” (not 60 Seconds like I originally wrote) was an1944(?) movie starring Spencer Tracy about the real-life Tokyo raid in which the USAAF launched 16 B-25 medium bombers off the USS Hornet on 14 April 1942 against Japan. Yes, it’s black and white, but fantastic, one of my all-time favorite flying movies. It’s based on Maj Ted Lawson’s (the aircraft commander for the famous “Ruptured Duck” B-25 on the raid) book of the same name. Find the movie, it’s fantastic. As much as I like Michael “Explosions” Bay, “Pearl Harbor” is crap!
So, the question was, can it take off from the USS Beast? Easily, without bombs and a partial fuel load. With bombs and full fuel, it clawed its way into the air, but still made it! Ever watch “60 Seconds Over Tokyo”? The launch scene still gives me goosebumps to this day!
Good looking replica, turns are extremely wide due to the CoM being soooo far ahead of the CoL. I added 2000 lbs and a bunch of fuel in the back of the plane to bring the CoM back as far as possible. Helped the range, too, as the ‘Bucc was a long range strike jet. Oh, plus I enabled the trim on the horizontal stabs and changed the nose wheel steering to “Yaw”. Flies a little better, but still turns like a Buccaneer!
Yeah, I can’t download this at all, it’ll even lag my PC, I am certain. But you deserve an upvote simply for putting 3000+ parts together in a coherent manner, making it 1:1 and beautiful to look at. This is the Sistine Chapel of SP!
Gorgeous, deserves a feature and I don’t say that much. Only gripes...and they are minor...is that the national insignia was never subdued on the Blackbird and the top speed and altitude is in excess of the real SR-71. But this is beautiful, flies well and I love the AB! Nice!
Lead computing gunsight...! (Pick up jaw from floor...). I really, really wish I could Spotlight you, but you have far exceeded my skill level (and my total points).
Nice job on the super chargers! Flies beautifully. Have you ever considered ditching the stock cockpits (i.e., burying a cockpit into a custom canopy shape)?
Yes, agree with @EternalDarkness that you did a good job capturing the shape on this one!
@asteroidbook345 “modded fuel tanks allowed” may not be infinite fuel, but being able to cram 1,000 gallons of fuel into any fuse piece makes it a whole lot easier and kind of breaks the laws of physics anyway...
Yeah, this one is pretty cool as well, I like the details.
Never been done before? Check this out...
Well, by making unlimited fuel, you made it easy to simply build a really big airplane that can carry your 15 bombs, so not much of a challenge anymore.
@ColonelStriker 👍
USAF Insignia. Here you go, created by @TheAlban, accurately proportioned. These days, you can also make the parts lighter with the Overload mod (I think these weigh 22 lbs apiece). I have a set I made and use, but it’s easier to post this link here. Also, you can search “Parts” and find many modded parts to suit your building needs.
@ColonelStriker that 5 - 15 secs is a guesstimate and “target lock” is jargon. The time it takes for a radar to acquire and determine azimuth and distance really has to do with sweep time, or how long it takes the radar antenna (old style parabolic/directional antennas) to complete a rotation and “paint” the target twice. The speed of light will add a fraction of a second, but not too much (it takes about .0014 secs for light to cover 420 miles). Newer phased array antennas are able to paint and track targets multiple times per second, thanks to the magic of computers. The faster the processor, the faster the paints and the better the tracking.
+2The SP world is actually relatively small, so not surprising an airborne radar could cover that area. Where radar performance really counts is in antenna size and transmitter power, which translates to resolution (ability to break out multiple small targets at range).
@Alienbeef0421 yes, it is
Well, sure, l would also fix the elevator controls as they’re reversed...
@Sunnyskies maybe just a little, buuuuut, 200 mph and 10 degrees nose up at 500,000 lbs is probably close (don’t know for sure, never flew the Galaxy). Plus I’m sure the C-5 doesn’t true out at much more than 500 knots, though SP works in mph (dumb).
Pilot math:
Each degree nose down (from level flight) equals 100’ lost per mile. Example: You will lose 1000’ per mile at 10 degrees nose low.
Rate of Descent: Mach times degrees from level flight equals feet per minute down/up. Example: 120 knots/mph equals .2 Mach, multiplied by 3 degrees nose down (typical final approach angle) equals 600 fpm down (too bad we don’t have a variometer/rate of descent indicator).
Glide ratio: Altitude lost per mile. To get miles per minute, divide speed by 60.
Pilot math equals easy math. 60 to 1 rule makes all these calculations very easy and close enough for flying use. Unfortunately, I don’t know the metric equivalents for these calculations, but as SP uses English units, these work!
For realism sake, I would increase it to at least 100 miles. From 30,000, the horizon is 211 miles, which is the theoretical range for even a low powered radar.
Yeah, the big jets are very popular, probably as there are fewer of them. Yours does fly like a big jet, very majestic.
@BaconAircraft yes, that would be good. Tu-144, definitely.
The Tu as there are hundreds of civil twin jets and hardly any Concord/Concordskis here...I think you should ditch the wing flex on it as delta wings are fairly rigid and don’t really exhibit much, if any, flex.
What is the Black Magic begins this?!?
@Awsomur yes you are correct, learn and emulate the style of the screenshot which appeals to you...
How come I didn’t see this when you posted it? This is great!
@Sunnyskies check out my latest!
Hey, welcome back!
Find a screenshot you like and copy it.
You might want to consider releasing it as the B version, the C is the carrier (Navy) version and is not VTOL capable, while the B is is.
Do you happen to build RC aircraft? You use torque tubes for your control surfaces...which work great by the way, no floppy control surfaces here. Also, why no trim? The only vices I can see here is that it’s slightly nose-heavy and requires a constant back stick to avoid the nose drop and it’s also slightly pitch sensitive, which might have been solved by making it a little longer, or moving the canards farther forward...very nice fictional build, though and the cannon is fun though my aiming skills leave something to be desired.
Interesting build techniques here...I don’t recognize the nose gear wheel shroud, what part is that?
Very nice, dispatches the soft-skinned convoy vehicles with ease!
@GermanWarMachine no, the original “Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo” (not 60 Seconds like I originally wrote) was an1944(?) movie starring Spencer Tracy about the real-life Tokyo raid in which the USAAF launched 16 B-25 medium bombers off the USS Hornet on 14 April 1942 against Japan. Yes, it’s black and white, but fantastic, one of my all-time favorite flying movies. It’s based on Maj Ted Lawson’s (the aircraft commander for the famous “Ruptured Duck” B-25 on the raid) book of the same name. Find the movie, it’s fantastic. As much as I like Michael “Explosions” Bay, “Pearl Harbor” is crap!
So, the question was, can it take off from the USS Beast? Easily, without bombs and a partial fuel load. With bombs and full fuel, it clawed its way into the air, but still made it! Ever watch “60 Seconds Over Tokyo”? The launch scene still gives me goosebumps to this day!
@Alien YW, a very good looking bird, for certain. Many advanced building techniques here, keep it up, you have a new follower!
Fun. Cool. What else is there?
Good looking replica, turns are extremely wide due to the CoM being soooo far ahead of the CoL. I added 2000 lbs and a bunch of fuel in the back of the plane to bring the CoM back as far as possible. Helped the range, too, as the ‘Bucc was a long range strike jet. Oh, plus I enabled the trim on the horizontal stabs and changed the nose wheel steering to “Yaw”. Flies a little better, but still turns like a Buccaneer!
Yes, it is a bit bizarre, the first time I found it, it startled the heck out of me!
See? 😀👍
I’ve landed MANY planes on the beast, a true challenge MIGHT be to land the Bush Plane on the small carrier...why don’t you issue THAT challenge?
Even the Hellcats, Helldivers and Avengers are spot-on and beautiful to look at!
Yeah, I can’t download this at all, it’ll even lag my PC, I am certain. But you deserve an upvote simply for putting 3000+ parts together in a coherent manner, making it 1:1 and beautiful to look at. This is the Sistine Chapel of SP!
Best Blackbird on the site...there, I said it! @TheLatentImage deserves a feature!
Gorgeous, deserves a feature and I don’t say that much. Only gripes...and they are minor...is that the national insignia was never subdued on the Blackbird and the top speed and altitude is in excess of the real SR-71. But this is beautiful, flies well and I love the AB! Nice!
@ForeverPie I am pretty sure this isn’t @thealban ‘s build. I’ll tag him and let him check it out.
@ForeverPie I looked, length is shorter and part count is way off, plus landing gear is way better on this one. Not sure...
@ForeverPie it is? I didn't recognize it
@TheFreemaker have you seen this?
Hmmm...looks a lot like this He-111
@Weaverfish what do you think about building a cockpit for this one?
Lead computing gunsight...! (Pick up jaw from floor...). I really, really wish I could Spotlight you, but you have far exceeded my skill level (and my total points).
Nice job on the super chargers! Flies beautifully. Have you ever considered ditching the stock cockpits (i.e., burying a cockpit into a custom canopy shape)?
Nice, with moderate left roll, keep building them!
Nice subject, nice build. The engine must be XML modded for 5x power or something as it accelerates like a scalded cat!