@UAIBrasil By the way, about military aircraft. There is a challenge to build an attack aircraft. Do you want to take part?https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/rvPrOp/HVY-CAS-Challenge
@UAIBrasil Yes, I know, glass is better. I did not bother to remodel the cockpit on this aircraft, as the main goal was to gain experience in creating an engine with deflected vector thrust. In fact, all S-11s are experimental aircraft. I think the S-12 and all the aircraft after them will have a glass cockpit.
@UAIBrasil Thank you, I will continue to refine this car, or rather its ability to move on water. By the way, I installed the rearview mirrors from your truck.
Everything is fine, except for the "mrm" missiles. The radius of action is small, almost never reaches the target, the speed is simply very low, when the rocket is launched, there is a high probability that it will explode.
Everything is fine, only the rear tail rotor screws are not needed with the coaxial scheme of the main propellers. They are superfluous, if you remove them, the helicopter feels better in the air.
@Xx24reminder You criticize the quality of another player's planes, while your planes look like they were made with an ax, while their technical characteristics correspond to this ax.
@3aa423 And the origin is a moot point. I recognized the name - coaxial propeller. The idea of using a coaxial propeller in aviation belongs to Britain, but the idea itself was proposed in 1754 by Lomonosov. The first more or less successful helicopters with such a scheme were made by Igor Sikorsky, and almost all serial machines, and Kamov was the only one who began to massively make helicopters with such a scheme.
@3aa423 I don't remember the correct name of such a scheme, and since this scheme is probably only used by Kamov in the world, for clarity, I put it this way.
@3aa423 All helicopters of the Kamov family (KA-25, KA-27, KA-50, KA-52) have 2 main propellers that rotate in different directions. Helicopters with such a device are more stable in flight.
@Cerdd Yes, the fact is that the S-9M2 and the models based on it are more of an interceptor, which is bad in close combat. To compensate for this disadvantage, the aircraft has powerful weapons that prevent the enemy from approaching. At the same time, the aircraft has great speed and armor to withstand fire and break away from pursuit. This is a compromise: the lack of maneuverability is compensated for by firepower and survivability.
I would also like to praise the painting of the F-80. Against the background of the sky, the white wing is poorly visible, which makes it seem that it is not there and the plane was shot down. This is a very cool camouflage that disorients the enemy.
This is my opinion, in principle, about all your planes. Each of them is very beautiful and comfortable to operate, but weak armament negates all its strengths. Concrete example: F-80 versus my S-9M2. Several accurate rounds of the F-80 failed to shoot him down. The very same F-80 fell at the first hit. From here comes the second problem - the fuel tanks in the wings, which are very easy to hit with a machine gun.
@3aa423 Thank you, but the S-7 and S-8 series are the worst. Best suited for aerial combat are the S-9M2, S-9K2 and the new S-10E. They have better maneuverability and more powerful armament.
Problems with the engine, when it gets stuck when deflected, the plane stalls into a tailspin. The armament is already decent, but it loses to my MC-1D and several third-party aircraft.
@Selcukk Yes indeed. You need to go at a high altitude and after dropping the bomb, change the course to move away from the explosion site. Therefore, I try to increase the speed of the aircraft in order to increase the chance of getting out of the affected area.
The cockpit is steep and the missiles move out steeply, but it does not correspond to the attack aircraft class at all.
@UAIBrasil By the way, about military aircraft. There is a challenge to build an attack aircraft. Do you want to take part?https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/rvPrOp/HVY-CAS-Challenge
@UAIBrasil Great, I'll wait for the new version)
@UAIBrasil Especially vertical, horizontal too, but not so critical.
Against the general background of a beautiful aircraft, the tail unit is not very beautiful
@UAIBrasil Yes, I know, glass is better. I did not bother to remodel the cockpit on this aircraft, as the main goal was to gain experience in creating an engine with deflected vector thrust. In fact, all S-11s are experimental aircraft. I think the S-12 and all the aircraft after them will have a glass cockpit.
The variable sweep wing is cool. It's a pity that this mechanic doesn't make much sense in the game :(
+1@AdMiRaLSoviet у меня тоже весело.
+1Ни одной спокойной недели. Я в родном городе практически не нахожусь)
Cool! I really liked this plane! 👍🏻👍🏻
@Clutch 😆👍🏻
@Clutch Thanks a lot!)
@UAIBrasil Thank you!
I forgot to specify [7] + [Throttle + VTOL] - vehicle control while driving on water. And also the car can fire on the move or afloat.
@ALTMTR This is for better stability when driving.
@UAIBrasil Thank you, I will continue to refine this car, or rather its ability to move on water. By the way, I installed the rearview mirrors from your truck.
@SRAICJianhang0 Да, я русский.
+1@AdMiRaLSoviet Hallo, Genosse! Как проходит работа по освоению Дальнего Востока.
@UAIBrasil Yes, they are mostly on KamAZ, but they can also be found on DT-30 Vityaz, BTR-80/82 (Pantsir-C1-O) or BMP-3 (TKB-841)
@UAIBrasil "Pancir S1"
Congratulations!👏🏻🎉
@UAIBrasil Yes, I made the headlights like the UAZ-452 "Loaf", and the three upper lights like the ZiL-131 trucks)
Da ist sie! Das wahre und einzige Deutschland! Die Stasi schätzt Ihre Arbeit, Genosse!
+2Everything is fine, except for the "mrm" missiles. The radius of action is small, almost never reaches the target, the speed is simply very low, when the rocket is launched, there is a high probability that it will explode.
+1@Selcukk Thanks!)
+1Cool, very cool! Viet Cong liked🇻🇳👍🏻
Everything is fine, only the rear tail rotor screws are not needed with the coaxial scheme of the main propellers. They are superfluous, if you remove them, the helicopter feels better in the air.
@Xx24reminder You criticize the quality of another player's planes, while your planes look like they were made with an ax, while their technical characteristics correspond to this ax.
+1Cool aircraft👍🏻 and rockets also performed well at medium range.
+2Something this plane is not very successful in comparison with the previous ones.
Cool👍🏻
👍🏻
👍🏻
+1@3aa423 Sorry, I just pay a lot of attention to details :)
@3aa423 And the origin is a moot point. I recognized the name - coaxial propeller. The idea of using a coaxial propeller in aviation belongs to Britain, but the idea itself was proposed in 1754 by Lomonosov. The first more or less successful helicopters with such a scheme were made by Igor Sikorsky, and almost all serial machines, and Kamov was the only one who began to massively make helicopters with such a scheme.
@3aa423 I don't remember the correct name of such a scheme, and since this scheme is probably only used by Kamov in the world, for clarity, I put it this way.
@3aa423 All helicopters of the Kamov family (KA-25, KA-27, KA-50, KA-52) have 2 main propellers that rotate in different directions. Helicopters with such a device are more stable in flight.
The helical circuit is not very good. According to Kamov's principle, it seems to me it will be easier and better. And the look is cool.
@Cerdd Yes, the fact is that the S-9M2 and the models based on it are more of an interceptor, which is bad in close combat. To compensate for this disadvantage, the aircraft has powerful weapons that prevent the enemy from approaching. At the same time, the aircraft has great speed and armor to withstand fire and break away from pursuit. This is a compromise: the lack of maneuverability is compensated for by firepower and survivability.
@Cerdd Well, it's better that the plane will live a little longer and do a little more :)
I would also like to praise the painting of the F-80. Against the background of the sky, the white wing is poorly visible, which makes it seem that it is not there and the plane was shot down. This is a very cool camouflage that disorients the enemy.
This is my opinion, in principle, about all your planes. Each of them is very beautiful and comfortable to operate, but weak armament negates all its strengths. Concrete example: F-80 versus my S-9M2. Several accurate rounds of the F-80 failed to shoot him down. The very same F-80 fell at the first hit. From here comes the second problem - the fuel tanks in the wings, which are very easy to hit with a machine gun.
I liked the armament, especially the bfc.👍🏻
+1@3aa423 Thank you, but the S-7 and S-8 series are the worst. Best suited for aerial combat are the S-9M2, S-9K2 and the new S-10E. They have better maneuverability and more powerful armament.
Cool👍🏻
Very beautiful, but the tail and elevators look ugly and rather weak armament.
Problems with the engine, when it gets stuck when deflected, the plane stalls into a tailspin. The armament is already decent, but it loses to my MC-1D and several third-party aircraft.
+1@AdMiRaLSoviet Hallo, Genosse!
+1It's funny:)
+1The party is proud of you!
+2@Selcukk Yes indeed. You need to go at a high altitude and after dropping the bomb, change the course to move away from the explosion site. Therefore, I try to increase the speed of the aircraft in order to increase the chance of getting out of the affected area.
+1