Roses are red, water is wet, flying school bus full of children has a mid-air structural failure, nose-dives into the ground at 500 mph and everyone is dead.
@rexzion It will be more worth the effort as you will end up with a superior machine. Also that comparison is flawed since even the most primitive of aircraft are vastly superior to the most modern helicopters.
You have a couple of options to make your life easier:
1. increase power
2. increase wing area
3. decrease weight
4. change mass distribution to improve stability
5. increase prop diameter for better power absorbtion and acceleration
6. add flaps
7. decrease drag, although this will have minimal effect at low speed
Did a simple test with a jet plane with symmetrical airfoils, here's the results:
Drag points: 911
Thrust: 6000 N
Top speed reached at sea level (IAS): 83 m/s
Thrust power assuming constant thrust: 6000 * 86 = 498000 W = 498 kW
The thrust power should be equal to the work done by the incoming air,
but I have no idea how to use this number to arrive back at 911. Obviously this is as simple as it gets and there are a lot more variables in reality, so the answer is probably in that. The wing area and weight of the aircraft turn out to play a role as well even though their effects are not reflected in the number of drag points.
emginar
All aircraft canceled
Roses are red, water is wet, flying school bus full of children has a mid-air structural failure, nose-dives into the ground at 500 mph and everyone is dead.
+2The answer has always been there
This right here belongs in the hall of fame
+6dude yes
@Placeacceleration It's a fortunate son reference
@KnightOfRen SOME FOLKS WERE BORN
phish has spoken
+3You know, this is really damn useful. Thank you!
head spun
If the pointy end is not facing the wind it's usually a bad thing
+1When u maxxed out on simpleplanes
@rexzion It will be more worth the effort as you will end up with a superior machine. Also that comparison is flawed since even the most primitive of aircraft are vastly superior to the most modern helicopters.
I recommend you to build a plane, since that is a superior type of vehicle.
disgusting
vtol barrel, a worthy opponent for the vtolfire?
@StepBro profound
ok
German F-16
+1@xiaofootball That reminds me of some nuclear ramjet named the SLAM
@F104Deathtrap I would love to see that happen in my lifetime tbh.
+3You have a couple of options to make your life easier:
1. increase power
2. increase wing area
3. decrease weight
4. change mass distribution to improve stability
5. increase prop diameter for better power absorbtion and acceleration
6. add flaps
7. decrease drag, although this will have minimal effect at low speed
We have come a long way
he vibin
@Isfsisyouman If you're on android it won't work anymore because it's not supported
That thing looks hurt..
Thats a strong helicopter lol
@robloxweponco
Demonetized
Did a simple test with a jet plane with symmetrical airfoils, here's the results:
Drag points: 911
Thrust: 6000 N
Top speed reached at sea level (IAS): 83 m/s
Thrust power assuming constant thrust: 6000 * 86 = 498000 W = 498 kW
The thrust power should be equal to the work done by the incoming air,
but I have no idea how to use this number to arrive back at 911. Obviously this is as simple as it gets and there are a lot more variables in reality, so the answer is probably in that. The wing area and weight of the aircraft turn out to play a role as well even though their effects are not reflected in the number of drag points.
Top 10 Photos Taken SECONDS Before Disaster
+6Can confirm, every part in SP actually contains a couple grams of high explosive.
+19The Star Wars Canyon of simpleplanes
Just go around!
+1@rexzion Yes thats possible, as long as the shells are not explosive
How do you transfer the power through a bent shaft like that?
Murica
Because it's worth 30 upvotes. And that's not necessarily bad.
Oof
Was thinking of a good gravity joke bUt I drOpPed iT
+2@Mostly Would be really interesting tho, you did a very good job on this plane.
+1I would really enjoy a series of those fictional/concept german planes from luftwaffe 1946
+1@RAF1 Just looked that up. How in the hell? Never heard of that one before...
Fun fact: The F-16 has a climb rate of 72.000 ft/min. Absolutely insane.
They are here
This didn't age well
+2@MrPorg137 Yes
Looks like a TSAD build
+2@MrPorg137 Because Britain
EGG-335 confirmed?