@Mostly I've done a bit of digging and come across a well constructed explanation of what you mention. TLDR, the 1903 Wright Flyer used a wooden track as a runway, but not a catapult.
@AN2Felllla Mig-29, F-16, and F-18 were part of a push to develop less expensive alternatives to the Flanker, Eagle, Tomcat etc. Originally, the Soviets planned to keep the Sukhoi plane for domestic use only and export the Fulcrum but with the fall of the USSR, it became financially necessary to export the Flanker as well.
This has basically ruined Mikoyan as their product is considerably inferior to the Flanker series but only slightly less expensive, causing most buyers to skip right over the MiG-29 in favor of the Sukhoi.
@Dathcha The arched shape makes aerodynamic sense, and you can see it repeated on many supersonic aircraft. The B-70 in this post, for example. It's important to keep the line if thrust below the center of mass and the center of drag. Also, raising the cockpit provides better visibility.
@LieutenantSOT The short answer is that history really is this silly sometimes. They hide it most of the time, try to make it look like the leaders always know what they're doing, but the blind lead the blind.
@Mostly His final aircraft, the Demoiselle, is an absolute masterpiece. I am tempted to build one for SP! But the 14 bis was considerably inferior to the Wright designs.
@VolcanicAsh Ader failed to fly. Every single time he made an attempt in front of credible witnesses, his machines wobbled off to one side and crashed. Even if they had ever lifted off the ground, they had no means of steering. Putting yourself in a trebuchet and wearing a parachute would be more effective and far less expensive.
Meanwhile, the Wrights travelled the world, flying hundreds of times in front of hundreds of thousands of people, often with passengers. They even opened a school and taught other people to fly!
This nonsense about Ader is just a fairytale made up by jealous minds.
@PapaKernels Well, I must confess that I have neglected to consider the tremendous virtual impact of the Dassault fighter. It's certainly excellent at pretending to shoot down a variety of modern adversaries.
@WingsOfSteel Its not an opinion. It is literally a fact. The Polikarpov PO-2 has literally engaged and destroyed enemy jet fighters in real combat, in real life. The Rafale has not defeated anything in real air to air combat. It's a confirmed historical fact you can look up and verify for yourself.
@DDVC This ancient biplane that is probably slower than your mom's car has literally won more dogfights with actual jet fighters than the Rafale. That's it.
@wiiplayer1 The F-15 is faster, more heavily armed, longer ranged, has better acceleration, matches it in agility, is easier to maintain and costs less.
@WarHawk95 You see, what I have done here is called "tempting fate." Tomorrow, an Egyptian Rafale will shoot down an Israeli F-15. The pilot will eject and survive, but the Eagle's 50 year winning streak will be over, and I will be to blame. Terrible, isnt it?
@WolfSpark I am not acting like a shill, dont come in here and act like a jerk.
Anything looks favorable when compared to the F-35 as it stands today. My opinions about Lockheed fighters are well known around here, look at my username!
To say "hey, this isnt literally the worst plane ever, you should certainly pay more for it than anything else" makes no sense at all.
@BogdanX Sure, it has the potential to be the biggest flop ever. But saying g Rafale is better than the biggest failure ever isnt saying very much, is it?
@EternalDarkness For a plane from 1986 it is a very nice carrier plane. It holds up well against the limited performance of other naval fighters: F-35, F-18, Mig-29K.
It is against true airforce jets where the comparison falls apart, notably against the Flanker and Eagle series which (as I have already mentioned) exceed Rafale in almost every single conceivable way despite being older and less expensive.
It is in that comparison that I do not understand why any nation would ever pay such a jaw-dropping amount of money unless they desperately needed a small number of carrier planes as "training wheels" whilst they acclimated their navy to carrier ops before switching to some less absurdly priced option.
@WarHawk95 You're surprisingly rude for somebody who wants me to take their irrelevant anecdotes seriously. Does this method normally work better for you?
TODAY, it is the most expensive plane available for export, next to the horribly overpriced F-35. Its is literally the most expensive non-stealth plane on the market in both production cost, purchase price, and maintenance costs.
There are planes in the air that are older, faster, cheaper, more maneuverable, longer ranged, and carry a wider array of weapons. All at the same time.
@BoganBoganTheMan Its a good thing too, because it's almost as expensive as the F-35 and nearly as old as the F-18. I hope it has a comfortable seat, because all that extra range must get awfully tedious when you're travelling so slowly.
@SyntheticL I think we must agree to disagree here. Some planes are bound for greatness, and others are found wanting when they are weighed by the trials of history.
While I certainly understand your intent to spare people their feelings, I must insist that there is nothing wrong with sharing my opinions regarding real world aircraft.
@Vastalen Look, my favorite jet is the PZL M15 "Belphegor" and I think the A-10 is Heaven's gift to infantry. I love an ugly duckling. But it would take quite a bit of French wine to make this ugly duckling look like a swan.
@KnightOfRen If you think a jet with the performance envelope of a F-16 and the price tag of a F-35 is a good deal then I've got some lovely real estate I'd like to sell you.
Without a doubt, the best time to upload is after the plane has been carefully tested and fixed.
This includes
-speed at cruising altitude
-checking the stall speed at low altitude and high
-taking off and landing safely at reasonable speeds
-ground handling
-maneuverability
-controls and activation groups
-and finally, what I like to call a "drop test" where you let the plane fall 10 or 15 feet to see if it hurts the landing gear
9/10 Great job, but not an airplane
@CRATE52PART2 Hard to say, they've just always disturbed me
Looks great, maybe skip the crash dummies next time
@Mostly I've done a bit of digging and come across a well constructed explanation of what you mention. TLDR, the 1903 Wright Flyer used a wooden track as a runway, but not a catapult.
If you fast forward to 15:45 this video sums it up nicely.
+1Nice work
+1@Vincent If it is any consolation, your country exports excellent heavy metal.
@dTitanplanesb Hubris and a long series of misunderstandings lead to the development of the definitive planes of the 4th generation of jet fighters.
@AN2Felllla Mig-29, F-16, and F-18 were part of a push to develop less expensive alternatives to the Flanker, Eagle, Tomcat etc. Originally, the Soviets planned to keep the Sukhoi plane for domestic use only and export the Fulcrum but with the fall of the USSR, it became financially necessary to export the Flanker as well.
This has basically ruined Mikoyan as their product is considerably inferior to the Flanker series but only slightly less expensive, causing most buyers to skip right over the MiG-29 in favor of the Sukhoi.
+1@Dathcha The arched shape makes aerodynamic sense, and you can see it repeated on many supersonic aircraft. The B-70 in this post, for example. It's important to keep the line if thrust below the center of mass and the center of drag. Also, raising the cockpit provides better visibility.
@PapaKernels I would say the Flanker is probably one of the 3 best fighters any country could buy. It might even be the best value, I don't know.
I am so tired of seeing them on SP, but I have to admit that it's a beast.
@LieutenantSOT The short answer is that history really is this silly sometimes. They hide it most of the time, try to make it look like the leaders always know what they're doing, but the blind lead the blind.
+1@Tully2 Sometimes you have to tone down the cri cri a little bit so that you can pump up the volume and finish strong with some cri cri
+2@BagelPlane Thanks! I will try
Broseidon, lord of the brocean.
+14 3 3 2
@Mostly His final aircraft, the Demoiselle, is an absolute masterpiece. I am tempted to build one for SP! But the 14 bis was considerably inferior to the Wright designs.
+1@VolcanicAsh Ader failed to fly. Every single time he made an attempt in front of credible witnesses, his machines wobbled off to one side and crashed. Even if they had ever lifted off the ground, they had no means of steering. Putting yourself in a trebuchet and wearing a parachute would be more effective and far less expensive.
Meanwhile, the Wrights travelled the world, flying hundreds of times in front of hundreds of thousands of people, often with passengers. They even opened a school and taught other people to fly!
This nonsense about Ader is just a fairytale made up by jealous minds.
Have you considered 3D wings and tail surfaces?
+1@RajkoGavrilovic Josip Broz Tito, well said.
+1@PapaKernels Well, I must confess that I have neglected to consider the tremendous virtual impact of the Dassault fighter. It's certainly excellent at pretending to shoot down a variety of modern adversaries.
@WarHawk95 In real life, the only reason I haven't defeated Alduin, First Son of Akatosh is that he hasn't threatened to devour Earth. Yet.
@WingsOfSteel Its not an opinion. It is literally a fact. The Polikarpov PO-2 has literally engaged and destroyed enemy jet fighters in real combat, in real life. The Rafale has not defeated anything in real air to air combat. It's a confirmed historical fact you can look up and verify for yourself.
@DDVC This ancient biplane that is probably slower than your mom's car has literally won more dogfights with actual jet fighters than the Rafale. That's it.
@WingsOfSteel Yeah, but it's actually true though.
@WarHawk95 I virtually saved all of Tamriel from Alduin the World-Eater.
+1@wiiplayer1 The F-15 is faster, more heavily armed, longer ranged, has better acceleration, matches it in agility, is easier to maintain and costs less.
@WarHawk95 You see, what I have done here is called "tempting fate." Tomorrow, an Egyptian Rafale will shoot down an Israeli F-15. The pilot will eject and survive, but the Eagle's 50 year winning streak will be over, and I will be to blame. Terrible, isnt it?
+1@WolfSpark I am not acting like a shill, dont come in here and act like a jerk.
Anything looks favorable when compared to the F-35 as it stands today. My opinions about Lockheed fighters are well known around here, look at my username!
To say "hey, this isnt literally the worst plane ever, you should certainly pay more for it than anything else" makes no sense at all.
@wiiplayer1 The F-16 is extremely cheap for a fighter and very easy to maintain. Rafale is twice as expensive.
@BogdanX Sure, it has the potential to be the biggest flop ever. But saying g Rafale is better than the biggest failure ever isnt saying very much, is it?
@EternalDarkness For a plane from 1986 it is a very nice carrier plane. It holds up well against the limited performance of other naval fighters: F-35, F-18, Mig-29K.
It is against true airforce jets where the comparison falls apart, notably against the Flanker and Eagle series which (as I have already mentioned) exceed Rafale in almost every single conceivable way despite being older and less expensive.
It is in that comparison that I do not understand why any nation would ever pay such a jaw-dropping amount of money unless they desperately needed a small number of carrier planes as "training wheels" whilst they acclimated their navy to carrier ops before switching to some less absurdly priced option.
@WarHawk95 You're surprisingly rude for somebody who wants me to take their irrelevant anecdotes seriously. Does this method normally work better for you?
+1@BoganBoganTheMan Same speed as F-18 and slower than basically any other fighter on earth. Its slower than a Fishbed
@goboygo1 "For its time"
TODAY, it is the most expensive plane available for export, next to the horribly overpriced F-35. Its is literally the most expensive non-stealth plane on the market in both production cost, purchase price, and maintenance costs.
There are planes in the air that are older, faster, cheaper, more maneuverable, longer ranged, and carry a wider array of weapons. All at the same time.
@BoganBoganTheMan Its a good thing too, because it's almost as expensive as the F-35 and nearly as old as the F-18. I hope it has a comfortable seat, because all that extra range must get awfully tedious when you're travelling so slowly.
@DarthAbhinav I do hope India has no great need of the colassal sum of money France has swindled from them.
@SyntheticL I think we must agree to disagree here. Some planes are bound for greatness, and others are found wanting when they are weighed by the trials of history.
While I certainly understand your intent to spare people their feelings, I must insist that there is nothing wrong with sharing my opinions regarding real world aircraft.
@Vastalen Look, my favorite jet is the PZL M15 "Belphegor" and I think the A-10 is Heaven's gift to infantry. I love an ugly duckling. But it would take quite a bit of French wine to make this ugly duckling look like a swan.
@KnightOfRen If you think a jet with the performance envelope of a F-16 and the price tag of a F-35 is a good deal then I've got some lovely real estate I'd like to sell you.
@Ergi @SyntheticL First of all, I sincerely hope that you are not comparing the quality of my planes with your own.
Secondly, I am not discussing anyone else's builds. So kindly dry up and blow away.
@goboygo1 It looks like a Typhoon got left out in the sun and melted.
@Captain247 Yeah, that vertical speed is crucial for takeoff and landings, especially landings, in real life.
Rudder pedals, oil pressure, vertical speed indicator (how fast you're climbing/falling), landing gear indicator, flaps indicator
Beware of huns in the sun!
+1Amazon is cancer
Without a doubt, the best time to upload is after the plane has been carefully tested and fixed.
This includes
-speed at cruising altitude
-checking the stall speed at low altitude and high
-taking off and landing safely at reasonable speeds
-ground handling
-maneuverability
-controls and activation groups
-and finally, what I like to call a "drop test" where you let the plane fall 10 or 15 feet to see if it hurts the landing gear
Any time before all this is certainly sub-optimal
+4@KnightOfRen I was thinking the same thing. I remember you being very excited about the Voodoo, I am pleased to see you made one.
@Kennneth Old enough to be a grandfather in Australia. You either grow up young or end up food for the wallabies in the Outback!
+3@Ergi Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998
You're an artist for building this, but a maniac for wanting to. Great job!
+2