@SHCow Yes. Just a basic set of instructions on an unlisted starting point will suffice if you want me to fix your plane. I could also start from the beginning on the original downscaled version too, which would probably be easiest for my work style, but would undo whatever work you already did.
@SHCow Thanks. The biggest challenge with this plane is getting it stop once it lands. It's got SO much momentum thanks to its weight. One earlier design had engines that swiveled on the pylons to provide reverse thrust, but those had a habit of snapping off or getting stuck. Eventually settled for 2 huge drag chutes.
Also, that frustration with your decals is mostly why I rarely ever do decals on my planes. They always complicate things.
Also, I did more research on the F-15, and found that accurate stabilators would require 4 separate rotators to function realistically. They are affected by pitch, pitch-trim, and roll, and are also automatically shifted by the computer with flap deployment. It's a pretty complex system. The computer control of the Control Augmentation System is very impressive.
Moving it to PC would obviously be tip #1.
Having lots of RAM, and a good processor is tip #2.
That's all there is to it. Don't do resource-intensive things on underpowered hardware.
@SHCow Your F-15 is slightly stretched, so making the wingspan to scale leaves the length at 68.3ft, scale 1.3522.
@lemoose Yours is slightly squashed, and comes up shorter in length when scaled to the wingspan at 56 ft, scale 1.5357.
For both, I'd calculate both ratios for length and width, then average those two values, and use that value as the scaling factor.
Or scale both length and width independently.
@SHCow Pretty sure the fine tuner mod has the ability to scale up the entire plane. All you have to do is do the math to determine the correct scaling factor.
@lemoose Definitely. When you start dealing with bigger, heavier replicas, you just have to start using tricks to keep thrust, balance, and wing loading under control. Like making double-layer wings, and modding engine output.
Honestly, I think this replica still needs more work. There's many aspects of its design that aren't quite realistic. The plane is still pretty nice work though.
@SHCow A Tupolev bomber? My favorite is the Tu-95. The mighty BEAR! The Tu-160 is cool as well, but I like it less for being such a knockoff of our B-1 Lancer.
@SHCow Yeah. The documented top speed of many supersonic aircraft is shy of its true top speed. It's not a matter of thrust, but structural integrity. Turbojets are able to deliver the required thrust, but simply can't handle the heat generated of mach 3 air friction for very long. If you look up the history behind the development of the SR-71's engines, you'll learn all about it.
Nah, don't think that. Building is only a contest when it's an actual contest. Just do you, bro. Improve yourself in your own way. Listen to advice, and ignore the feeling of being inferior. The closer you are to perfection, the less unique you become. for the record, I think your builds are great.
@SHCow Remember top speeds are always measured at high altitude. Also, while it is capable of breaking mach 3, doing so tended to break the engines as well, so its functional top speed is reduced to mach 2.8 or so, with anything higher being reserved to emergencies, and requiring special permission.
@SHCow Ah, the Foxhound. One of the few aircraft in service today that can outpace an Eagle. Had exceptional radar and weapons reach, but was terribly poor in a knife-fight.
You forgot the landing gear, and actual WINGS. This Lightning is entirely incapable of flight. Please fix it soon, the body is on the right track, and I hate to see a decent body be unable to fly.
Canards work the same way all wings do. They will generate lift in what ever direction has the fastest airflow over the surface thanks to the Bernoulli Principle. But, since it's forward of the center of mass, you need a downforce to dip the nose, and a lifting force to raise it. It's why flaps deploy on the the bottoms of wings, and spoilers deploy on the tops. So they should be opposite a tail's elevators.
I crank hardcore tunes when I work, I have a specific playlist for energetic music.
Speedcore mostly. Anything fast, heavy, and electronic.
But I'll listen to just about any form of music, so my casual listening playlist is incredibly varied.
@Deloreandude Short? It's actually slightly too LONG. It's the exaggerated width that makes the length seem off. Should have a wingspan about 18 feet shorter.
@MAHADI Thanks.
@Treadmill103 Thanks!
@SHCow Yes. Just a basic set of instructions on an unlisted starting point will suffice if you want me to fix your plane. I could also start from the beginning on the original downscaled version too, which would probably be easiest for my work style, but would undo whatever work you already did.
@SHCow Yeah, what?
@SHCow If you get too frustrated, I could take a crack at it. All I need are some directions.
@SHCow Thanks. The biggest challenge with this plane is getting it stop once it lands. It's got SO much momentum thanks to its weight. One earlier design had engines that swiveled on the pylons to provide reverse thrust, but those had a habit of snapping off or getting stuck. Eventually settled for 2 huge drag chutes.
Also, that frustration with your decals is mostly why I rarely ever do decals on my planes. They always complicate things.
Also, I did more research on the F-15, and found that accurate stabilators would require 4 separate rotators to function realistically. They are affected by pitch, pitch-trim, and roll, and are also automatically shifted by the computer with flap deployment. It's a pretty complex system. The computer control of the Control Augmentation System is very impressive.
@JackTheBestBoss Thanks.
I want fuselage block faces and lengths to be able to go past 5. That limit is pretty annoying for larger builds.
@MediciAviation243 I see. Welcome back.
The F-14 is a challenging plane to properly replicate. You should do that one.
Taking "B-ONE" quite literally I see.
Can it bullseye Womp Rats?
Moving it to PC would obviously be tip #1.
Having lots of RAM, and a good processor is tip #2.
That's all there is to it. Don't do resource-intensive things on underpowered hardware.
@SHCow Your F-15 is slightly stretched, so making the wingspan to scale leaves the length at 68.3ft, scale 1.3522.
@lemoose Yours is slightly squashed, and comes up shorter in length when scaled to the wingspan at 56 ft, scale 1.5357.
For both, I'd calculate both ratios for length and width, then average those two values, and use that value as the scaling factor.
Or scale both length and width independently.
@SHCow Pretty sure the fine tuner mod has the ability to scale up the entire plane. All you have to do is do the math to determine the correct scaling factor.
@lemoose Definitely. When you start dealing with bigger, heavier replicas, you just have to start using tricks to keep thrust, balance, and wing loading under control. Like making double-layer wings, and modding engine output.
Pretty great! You should scale it to 1:1 scale also. Wingspan is 43 feet.
Woo, buddy. That's pretty nice.
Honestly, I think this replica still needs more work. There's many aspects of its design that aren't quite realistic. The plane is still pretty nice work though.
That was pretty impressive. Worked well when I tested it.
@MAHADI Yep.Thanks!
@SHCow Yeah, it does look like a tough design. Getting it to blend smoothly into the fuselage looks like a chore.
This is pretty good actually. You got a lot of details right. Definitely deserves more looks.
@SHCow The Berkut?
@BogdanX Oh I see. I upload unlisted updates to it periodically too. The link is in the description.
@SHCow A Tupolev bomber? My favorite is the Tu-95. The mighty BEAR! The Tu-160 is cool as well, but I like it less for being such a knockoff of our B-1 Lancer.
@BogdanX Thanks!
You have an asymmetry on the inboard wings. Nice canopy by the way.
@Treadmill103 Thanks for the input!
@SHCow Yeah. The documented top speed of many supersonic aircraft is shy of its true top speed. It's not a matter of thrust, but structural integrity. Turbojets are able to deliver the required thrust, but simply can't handle the heat generated of mach 3 air friction for very long. If you look up the history behind the development of the SR-71's engines, you'll learn all about it.
@R4phizzZ So do I. The real P-38 was able to fly believe it or not. I can suggest ways to fix it if you want.
Nah, don't think that. Building is only a contest when it's an actual contest. Just do you, bro. Improve yourself in your own way. Listen to advice, and ignore the feeling of being inferior. The closer you are to perfection, the less unique you become. for the record, I think your builds are great.
@SHCow Remember top speeds are always measured at high altitude. Also, while it is capable of breaking mach 3, doing so tended to break the engines as well, so its functional top speed is reduced to mach 2.8 or so, with anything higher being reserved to emergencies, and requiring special permission.
@SHCow Ah, the Foxhound. One of the few aircraft in service today that can outpace an Eagle. Had exceptional radar and weapons reach, but was terribly poor in a knife-fight.
@SHCow Saturday night would strike me as a time most people would be out doing things instead of making planes.
@SHCow A lot. A whole lot.
@SHCow Never seen a prop tanker? Look up the KC-130.
@SHCow Throw this around for while for sure. I had a bit of fun with it during test flights. It behaves pretty interestingly.
@Alienbeef0421 What? That's a company, not a plane.
You forgot the landing gear, and actual WINGS. This Lightning is entirely incapable of flight. Please fix it soon, the body is on the right track, and I hate to see a decent body be unable to fly.
@drdoom222 Here be thy post.
LINK
Oh no! You made a P-38 I haven't catalogued yet. I'll add it right away.
@EasternHorizon Haha yeah. And Thanks!
@SHCow It's a nod to Hans Huckebein, a character from a story by Wilhelm Busch in the 1860s.
Both the F-86 and the MiG-15 and its relatives were strongly based on a previous German design. Look up the Ta 183 Huckebein.
Time to spoil all the surprises.
LINK
Everything is actually pretty much neatly lined up.
Oh god. I don't even want to imagine the nightmares that would come with trying to make boats AI-friendly.
Canards work the same way all wings do. They will generate lift in what ever direction has the fastest airflow over the surface thanks to the Bernoulli Principle. But, since it's forward of the center of mass, you need a downforce to dip the nose, and a lifting force to raise it. It's why flaps deploy on the the bottoms of wings, and spoilers deploy on the tops. So they should be opposite a tail's elevators.
I crank hardcore tunes when I work, I have a specific playlist for energetic music.
Speedcore mostly. Anything fast, heavy, and electronic.
But I'll listen to just about any form of music, so my casual listening playlist is incredibly varied.
hmm... What's that disembodied long piece for?
@Deloreandude Short? It's actually slightly too LONG. It's the exaggerated width that makes the length seem off. Should have a wingspan about 18 feet shorter.