@Jettison Per your suggestion I checked and found, as you suspected, the physics set to medium. Next, I compared runs with physics set to low, medium, and high. Results of all runs were within +-2 mph of 250 mph, so no joy. After that, I repeated the physics test with graphics settings to low, medium, and high. Again, results were the same. Me being a noob I appreciate your help in getting into the game settings and awareness of cross-platform performance differences.
Fun idea and good design! I like your choice on rotator angular velocity with the mushy ball physics. I had to reverse the rotator controls to make them more intuitive for me on my Nexus 7.
One of my favorite aircraft. Few can rival the number of innovations in a single aircraft necessary to make it a reality. Too bad only 2 were built and one of those met such a tragic end.
@SpiritusRaptor Thanks! I was a little surprised at just how energetic the explosion when fired aiming near straight down as possible. The other fun one is aiming straight up, slowly firing the 5 salvos, and then watching a rain of small explosions.
@Verdnan The Simple Planes physics engine needs to allow out of atmosphere travel and near-zero drag will be easy. Of course, they will need to enhance the inventory with a reaction control system and some type of scramjet/rocket solution.
@Jaredis2 Wow! Nice job. You must be at or near the lower drag limit of a prop plane. The canopy dimensions limit the frontal cross sectional area so we need smaller one.
@Rugpeersdude Thanks! Sad, but a real world propeller driven aircraft is going to be limited to the Mach 0.7 range which is about 550 mph if I remember correctly. Spin the propeller too fast and the tips go supersonic degrading thrust and making lots of noise. Also the hinged control surfaces will be ineffective as the shock wave moves back on the wings. So its fast, but only in the SimplePlane universe.
@Verdnan Playing around with your V550 design some more this evening I was able to reduce the drag score to 108 without landing gear. Check out "DragScore108". I tried to add a trolley system so I could take off from airfield instead of doing an air drop, but it was too finicky.
Flies great. I tried a bunch of stuff to lower your 148 drag points. Anything I did to the fuselage just increased drag so it has to be near perfect. Finally, I swapped the engine for a T1000 and put a slim inlet behind the canopy. Had to drop some dead weight in the nose to move the CoM. All that got it down to 143. Top speed I got was similar; 750-752 at 40k feet level fight. Thanks! Learned a lot.
@SpiritusRaptor Thank you! Your Glider Launch System was my inspiration to start experimenting with the detachers. Started with stringing detachers together and activating groups in sequence in an attempt to push heaver airframes without dammage. That failed big, but then I noticed the rotators' elastic property.
Similar to F-104 but with one fifth the wing loading giving it low speed stunt capability. I remembered the F-104 was called "Missle with a man in it", but didnt appreciate why until looking it up; a whopping 105 lbs/sq ft
Fun design! Moved the CoM slightly forward by adding 150 pounds of dead weight to each of the inlet spikes (300 pounds total) to give it more neutral handling. Looks like that increased landing speed a bit.
@AlphaPrion Thanks for the kind words! With just a few hours experience with SimplePlanes I am too much a newb to join a team effort, but thanks for the invite.
@Stingray I didn't think to test design's ceiling, but only tested for a range were very stable level flight occured. That's about 30k-43k feet. Encouraged by your experience at 70k feet I was able to push it to ~93k feet where it got very squirrelly. The real world record for max altitude obtained by a piston aircraft is 67,028 ft by the Boeing Condor UAV. Thanks!
Thanks @jamofdeath for the upvote!
@Jettison Per your suggestion I checked and found, as you suspected, the physics set to medium. Next, I compared runs with physics set to low, medium, and high. Results of all runs were within +-2 mph of 250 mph, so no joy. After that, I repeated the physics test with graphics settings to low, medium, and high. Again, results were the same. Me being a noob I appreciate your help in getting into the game settings and awareness of cross-platform performance differences.
@Jettison I am running whatever stock physics engine comes with v1.2.15.0.
@Jettison Nice run! Best I could do is 870 mph. Per your suggestion I have updated the title and description.
Fun idea and good design! I like your choice on rotator angular velocity with the mushy ball physics. I had to reverse the rotator controls to make them more intuitive for me on my Nexus 7.
@Stampede First, second, or third dunno, but upvotes are definitely good. Thanks for yours!
One of my favorite aircraft. Few can rival the number of innovations in a single aircraft necessary to make it a reality. Too bad only 2 were built and one of those met such a tragic end.
@goboygo1 Thanks for the upvote!
@SpiritusRaptor Thanks! I was a little surprised at just how energetic the explosion when fired aiming near straight down as possible. The other fun one is aiming straight up, slowly firing the 5 salvos, and then watching a rain of small explosions.
Great detail and performance. Also like that it isn't too complex to run on my Nexus 7 Gen2. tablet!
Thanks!
Excellent detail... Right down to the pitot tube!
Thanks everybody for the upvotes!
@SpiritusRaptor Just tried your ballista. Elegantly beautiful near flawless design.
@SpiritusRaptor Thanks for the upvote! I was thinking about using the torsion bars in something like a Roman ballista.
@Verdnan The Simple Planes physics engine needs to allow out of atmosphere travel and near-zero drag will be easy. Of course, they will need to enhance the inventory with a reaction control system and some type of scramjet/rocket solution.
@Jaredis2 Wow! Nice job. You must be at or near the lower drag limit of a prop plane. The canopy dimensions limit the frontal cross sectional area so we need smaller one.
@Jaredis2 Check out "82 Drag Points" by ForzaFanlvl4. He managed to buff another drag point off the fuselage!
@Rugpeersdude Thanks! Sad, but a real world propeller driven aircraft is going to be limited to the Mach 0.7 range which is about 550 mph if I remember correctly. Spin the propeller too fast and the tips go supersonic degrading thrust and making lots of noise. Also the hinged control surfaces will be ineffective as the shock wave moves back on the wings. So its fast, but only in the SimplePlane universe.
Superb attention to detail. Good design.
Elegant fusalage shape!
@Jaredis2 Thanks!
@Verdnan Clever out-of-the-box solution to the canopy drag problem!
@Verdnan Playing around with your V550 design some more this evening I was able to reduce the drag score to 108 without landing gear. Check out "DragScore108". I tried to add a trolley system so I could take off from airfield instead of doing an air drop, but it was too finicky.
Flies great. I tried a bunch of stuff to lower your 148 drag points. Anything I did to the fuselage just increased drag so it has to be near perfect. Finally, I swapped the engine for a T1000 and put a slim inlet behind the canopy. Had to drop some dead weight in the nose to move the CoM. All that got it down to 143. Top speed I got was similar; 750-752 at 40k feet level fight. Thanks! Learned a lot.
@SpiritusRaptor Thank you! Your Glider Launch System was my inspiration to start experimenting with the detachers. Started with stringing detachers together and activating groups in sequence in an attempt to push heaver airframes without dammage. That failed big, but then I noticed the rotators' elastic property.
@SpiritusRaptor Thanks! I found the elastic property of the detacher connections by accident and created the catapult to test its limits.
Similar to F-104 but with one fifth the wing loading giving it low speed stunt capability. I remembered the F-104 was called "Missle with a man in it", but didnt appreciate why until looking it up; a whopping 105 lbs/sq ft
Could outrun a bullet, turn around, and do it again. Cool!
@Garuda1 Thanks! Practicing manual low-speed maneuverability and short takeoffs. Too bad SimplePlanes doesn't have a flight control system module.
When I launched the rocket I was surprised by the string of explosions. Nice effect!
Fun design! Moved the CoM slightly forward by adding 150 pounds of dead weight to each of the inlet spikes (300 pounds total) to give it more neutral handling. Looks like that increased landing speed a bit.
@AlphaPrion Thanks for the kind words! With just a few hours experience with SimplePlanes I am too much a newb to join a team effort, but thanks for the invite.
Great performance! I'm new to SimplePlanes so I did a teardown and learned a lot.
@Stingray I didn't think to test design's ceiling, but only tested for a range were very stable level flight occured. That's about 30k-43k feet. Encouraged by your experience at 70k feet I was able to push it to ~93k feet where it got very squirrelly. The real world record for max altitude obtained by a piston aircraft is 67,028 ft by the Boeing Condor UAV. Thanks!
@Stingray Thanks!
@BigCat Thanks!
brilliant!