@Phillipsosophy I actually toyed a lot with the fuel. Putting it in the plane made it so when the tank was separated, it lost all access to that fuel, leaving the tank empty on fuel and useless. So I had to put the fuel in the tank itself. But too much fuel made the tank too heavy to drop. Fuel is the major challenge to building something like this.
@SHCow 761.2 exactly. That's at 1atm and 15 degrees C. The speed of sound actually changes as pressure and temperature change, and is also affected by winds.
@ChaMikey Thank you. Always Nice to wake up to a new Lightning.
@Deloreandude "comment of any flaws in the aircraft design"
Lucky for you, I'm a P-38 expert.
Your overhead profile is very good. The dimensions are almost perfect, save for length, which is a little long. The tail is a little messed up, and you need to make all the control surfaces more accurate. The plane is also very flat overall. Certain pieces, particularly the booms need to be taller. The dihedrals are also wrong. The main landing gear needs to be brought farther forward, and the guns need to be more tightly clustered. The propellers need to be much bigger and thicker as well (135in with a 1.6 chord). Also the left propeller rotates in the wrong direction. Usage-wise, the plane is underpowered, and despite the low wing loading, has a very bad pitch-rate.
Overall, I give this P-38 an 8/10. Added.
Not supersonic. The speed of sound at standard sea-level is 761mph.
This falls into the transonic range. You need to break 914 mph to be classified as supersonic.
I'm pretty good at it. IMAGE IMAGE
It's all about understanding your aircraft's minimum sustainable level flight throttle, Low-speed characteristics, and braking distances.
I typically use aircraft with low wing loading, and high maximum sustainable angle-of-attack. Having the plane equipped with flaps also helps. I carefully vary the throttle as I approach to keep me as slow as I can be without sinking or stalling, then I cut the throttle just shy of the carrier to let the plane stall onto the deck. Brakes are applied immediately, and I use the rudders and wheels to zig-zag, which greatly increases the rate of speed loss. If I'm going too fast, I'll kick the rudder hard to induce a ground loop on the deck, since the spin will slow the plane down very quickly.
General Tips:
-Approach from the rear
-Stall onto the deck
-Brake early
-Retract any flaps the moment you land
-Retracting the landing gear can help if your belly is smooth
-Parachutes are extremely useful
-Car wheels can brake much harder
-Bouncy suspension can cause you to kangaroo off the deck
And of course
-Know your plane!
The overhead profile on those wings is almost perfectly shaped. However, you've neglected the dihedrals, and a lot of other important details. Also, it's too fast. I give this Lightning 8/10. Added.
@MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation Wait, you mean ALL his planes are built on one of the earlier builds of the game? I think I have a newfound appreciation for you, @MAHADI
Better safe than sorry with overshot approaches.
Though he still had enough speed to not stall, he bailed because he wasn't sure he'd be able to ride along on ground effect.
If you get stuck in the water without escaping the cockpit, you're pretty much screwed. Water pressure will hold the canopy shut if you tried opening it, and water resistance will prevent it from flying off, so pulling the escape lever will kill you. Not to mention how long it takes to undo all your harnesses.
Sure you'll lose the airframe, but no plane is worth two lives. Plus, if the crew is quick, they can hook the plane to keep it from sinking if it splashes down nearby.
@SHCow That's where slow motion come into play, so I can very precisely aim and tap off a single round.
@Kevinairlines Which ever button is bound to "Toggle Slow Motion" in the control settings.
My favorite thing to do to AI planes is use slow motion to very precisely shoot off a horizontal stabilizer without hurting the rest of the plane so I can watch them spiral into the ground. hehehe.
@SHCow Yeah, the RCAF inventory is kinda lacking. Only other high-performance jet you guys have is the Hawk trainer as far as I remember. You do have a handful of the best cargo planes in the world though. C-17s, and C-130s are the best of the best in that category.
@SHCow Never seen a Hornet up close before. Those are Navy planes. I see plenty of ANG Eagles though. They stop by where I work all the time since their fighter squadron is based nearby. They are booming loud, and always take off in flights of 2 more. Most I've seen was seven in a row, full-burn one after the other. Great fun.
The critical instability would resolve itself if the plane was more to scale. Your wings are too far forward.
In the P-38, the center of mass is lined up just slightly forward of the main spar, which is about 13.5 ft from the nose, and about 24.3 ft from the tail. You want to bring your wings backward.
@Typhlosion130 Smoothing out the control inputs might alleviate some of the oversteering. Making it so they gradually lean into the controls instead of snapping them to the stops. They'd probably have less wobble if they were able to minimally steer to correct their course. Or maybe making wheel steering behave more like landing gear steering, which reduces the maximum wheel angle as ground speed increases.
The current AI resolves its pathfinding based on headings as far as I can tell. It tries very hard to stick to a straight line, and grossly overcompensates as a result. I figure it'd be more fluid if it used a trajectory-based system where the line to follow was a tolerance instead of a rail, and the track is planned ahead 2 or 3 rings in advance, letting the AI throw itself through the course in a single seamless curve. Maybe also include invisible waypoints to help the AI clear obstacles, so they're less likely to try and tunnel through a wall to get to the next ring. Also, for airborne AI specifically, having the AI prioritize pitch above roll in maneuvers, and making it so it doesn't want to fly totally inverted would help it perform better all around.
Most of the time, I'll have a pretty good idea of how something will handle just by looking at its specifications, mass distribution, and design. I open the plane up in the editor, look at it a bit, pick it apart to see how it's built, then I delete it (or occasionally save it). I don't really need to test a plane to know it's good.
@MAHADI The concept is good, and it flies just fine. There is room for improvement, however. My two biggest complaints are it has a significant amount of drag for its cross-sectional area, and the modded engine takes a long time to spool up, and properly shut off afterward. Also, added improvements like neater aesthetics and functional weaponry would be nice as well.
I usually skim for operating instructions, and important information about the flight characteristics.
I tend not to read descriptions about the made-up history of a fictional aircraft, or copy-pasted wikipedia articles.
The people who lose are the ones that trip and get comfortable in the dirt.
Stand up again and again, keep climbing even when you've reached the top.
When life closes a door on you, find a key. Can't find a key, break a window.
@luzernsaphir Very good. Skills come with time and practice. Believe it or not, my first attempt at a P-38 came out way worse than yours. Good luck for the future.
@Tully2001 I don't really consider much. I try to avoid making too many assumptions. Especially pessimistic ones. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt.
In my opinion, an upvote is merely affirmation that a user liked your creation. It feels good to know someone thought your creation was worth their time.
Aw yiss.
@Phillipsosophy I actually toyed a lot with the fuel. Putting it in the plane made it so when the tank was separated, it lost all access to that fuel, leaving the tank empty on fuel and useless. So I had to put the fuel in the tank itself. But too much fuel made the tank too heavy to drop. Fuel is the major challenge to building something like this.
Also, thanks!
Somehow, this P-38 has nearly perfect performance!
@SHCow 761.2 exactly. That's at 1atm and 15 degrees C. The speed of sound actually changes as pressure and temperature change, and is also affected by winds.
1500 downloads
eh?
Now I wish I made the plane part look better.
@ChaMikey Thank you. Always Nice to wake up to a new Lightning.
@Deloreandude "comment of any flaws in the aircraft design"
Lucky for you, I'm a P-38 expert.
Your overhead profile is very good. The dimensions are almost perfect, save for length, which is a little long. The tail is a little messed up, and you need to make all the control surfaces more accurate. The plane is also very flat overall. Certain pieces, particularly the booms need to be taller. The dihedrals are also wrong. The main landing gear needs to be brought farther forward, and the guns need to be more tightly clustered. The propellers need to be much bigger and thicker as well (135in with a 1.6 chord). Also the left propeller rotates in the wrong direction. Usage-wise, the plane is underpowered, and despite the low wing loading, has a very bad pitch-rate.
Overall, I give this P-38 an 8/10.
Added.
Not supersonic. The speed of sound at standard sea-level is 761mph.
This falls into the transonic range. You need to break 914 mph to be classified as supersonic.
I'm pretty good at it.
+1IMAGE
IMAGE
It's all about understanding your aircraft's minimum sustainable level flight throttle, Low-speed characteristics, and braking distances.
I typically use aircraft with low wing loading, and high maximum sustainable angle-of-attack. Having the plane equipped with flaps also helps. I carefully vary the throttle as I approach to keep me as slow as I can be without sinking or stalling, then I cut the throttle just shy of the carrier to let the plane stall onto the deck. Brakes are applied immediately, and I use the rudders and wheels to zig-zag, which greatly increases the rate of speed loss. If I'm going too fast, I'll kick the rudder hard to induce a ground loop on the deck, since the spin will slow the plane down very quickly.
General Tips:
-Approach from the rear
-Stall onto the deck
-Brake early
-Retract any flaps the moment you land
-Retracting the landing gear can help if your belly is smooth
-Parachutes are extremely useful
-Car wheels can brake much harder
-Bouncy suspension can cause you to kangaroo off the deck
And of course
-Know your plane!
The overhead profile on those wings is almost perfectly shaped. However, you've neglected the dihedrals, and a lot of other important details. Also, it's too fast. I give this Lightning 8/10. Added.
@BogdanX Currently, I've catalogued 176 individual P-38s.
@SHCow Thank you.
@DXReallm I've never had that happen on any of my test runs.
What are your physics set to? And are you remembering to extend the landing gear?
@ACMECo1940 Well, that's fine. At 175 planes, the current list is pretty bloated.
@MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation Wait, you mean ALL his planes are built on one of the earlier builds of the game? I think I have a newfound appreciation for you, @MAHADI
@MAHADI Thanks I think
@Treadmill103 Thanks. It took a lot of tweaking to get a good blend of good ground/air operation.
Better safe than sorry with overshot approaches.
Though he still had enough speed to not stall, he bailed because he wasn't sure he'd be able to ride along on ground effect.
If you get stuck in the water without escaping the cockpit, you're pretty much screwed. Water pressure will hold the canopy shut if you tried opening it, and water resistance will prevent it from flying off, so pulling the escape lever will kill you. Not to mention how long it takes to undo all your harnesses.
Sure you'll lose the airframe, but no plane is worth two lives. Plus, if the crew is quick, they can hook the plane to keep it from sinking if it splashes down nearby.
@MrMecha Wow thanks!
@Booster456 Thanks
@ACMECo1940 Is it unlisted?
Bleh, you used my worse Lightning.
My best one is this one. Should have used that one.
@MediciAviation243 Start from the top.
@KingDeadshot @Liquidfox @Treadmill103 @MAHADI @aloushi605 @TheFlash54 @ChiChiWerx @vlas52 Thanks all!
@Kevinairlines 👍
@Kevinairlines No clue. I play PC. There isn't a GUI button for it.
@SHCow That's where slow motion come into play, so I can very precisely aim and tap off a single round.
@Kevinairlines Which ever button is bound to "Toggle Slow Motion" in the control settings.
My favorite thing to do to AI planes is use slow motion to very precisely shoot off a horizontal stabilizer without hurting the rest of the plane so I can watch them spiral into the ground. hehehe.
What's a heat shield's favorite genre of literature?
Science FRICTION
@SHCow You should try a replica some time.
@SHCow Yeah, the RCAF inventory is kinda lacking. Only other high-performance jet you guys have is the Hawk trainer as far as I remember. You do have a handful of the best cargo planes in the world though. C-17s, and C-130s are the best of the best in that category.
@mikoyanster Thanks.
@SHCow Never seen a Hornet up close before. Those are Navy planes. I see plenty of ANG Eagles though. They stop by where I work all the time since their fighter squadron is based nearby. They are booming loud, and always take off in flights of 2 more. Most I've seen was seven in a row, full-burn one after the other. Great fun.
I get to watch C-5s take off and land right from the apron.
I've even had one taxi not 100 feet away from me.
Well worth the hearing loss.
The critical instability would resolve itself if the plane was more to scale. Your wings are too far forward.
In the P-38, the center of mass is lined up just slightly forward of the main spar, which is about 13.5 ft from the nose, and about 24.3 ft from the tail. You want to bring your wings backward.
Holy Moses. the Optica's top speed is only 132 mph!
@Typhlosion130 Smoothing out the control inputs might alleviate some of the oversteering. Making it so they gradually lean into the controls instead of snapping them to the stops. They'd probably have less wobble if they were able to minimally steer to correct their course. Or maybe making wheel steering behave more like landing gear steering, which reduces the maximum wheel angle as ground speed increases.
The current AI resolves its pathfinding based on headings as far as I can tell. It tries very hard to stick to a straight line, and grossly overcompensates as a result. I figure it'd be more fluid if it used a trajectory-based system where the line to follow was a tolerance instead of a rail, and the track is planned ahead 2 or 3 rings in advance, letting the AI throw itself through the course in a single seamless curve. Maybe also include invisible waypoints to help the AI clear obstacles, so they're less likely to try and tunnel through a wall to get to the next ring. Also, for airborne AI specifically, having the AI prioritize pitch above roll in maneuvers, and making it so it doesn't want to fly totally inverted would help it perform better all around.
Most of the time, I'll have a pretty good idea of how something will handle just by looking at its specifications, mass distribution, and design. I open the plane up in the editor, look at it a bit, pick it apart to see how it's built, then I delete it (or occasionally save it). I don't really need to test a plane to know it's good.
Updated.
Nicely done.
@MAHADI The concept is good, and it flies just fine. There is room for improvement, however. My two biggest complaints are it has a significant amount of drag for its cross-sectional area, and the modded engine takes a long time to spool up, and properly shut off afterward. Also, added improvements like neater aesthetics and functional weaponry would be nice as well.
I usually skim for operating instructions, and important information about the flight characteristics.
I tend not to read descriptions about the made-up history of a fictional aircraft, or copy-pasted wikipedia articles.
@DisferGoatz This.
Changing them to structural wings in the XML will prevent all wobbling, fluttering, and bending.
The people who lose are the ones that trip and get comfortable in the dirt.
Stand up again and again, keep climbing even when you've reached the top.
When life closes a door on you, find a key. Can't find a key, break a window.
@luzernsaphir Very good. Skills come with time and practice. Believe it or not, my first attempt at a P-38 came out way worse than yours. Good luck for the future.
@Tully2001 I don't really consider much. I try to avoid making too many assumptions. Especially pessimistic ones. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt.
@Tully2001 Nah, If that were true, I'd get 50 upvotes for every single thing I posted.
In my opinion, an upvote is merely affirmation that a user liked your creation. It feels good to know someone thought your creation was worth their time.
@luzernsaphir Oh, this one isn't even my best one. This one is the most realistic.
@Treadmill103 Thanks.
@dogspit Thanks!