@KarlovyVary A flight computer to calculate the height, and a rocket...... ZOGGIN' BRILLIANT IF I SEY SO MESELF!
.
..
... So, can we use a similar setup to make those wooden-tailed torpedoes? IIRC both Japan and America attached wooden fins to their air-dropped torpedoes so that they can be dropped from greater heights at greater airspeeds.
@EternalDarkness
Sorry, just spam-upvoting everything I liked as usual, and curiosity got the better of me and I can't help but ask what happened between the two of ya for the apparent animosity...
@FalHartIndustries
It's pretty much the alternate-universe version of the WWII saying "If you want to get the girls, fly the Mustang. But, if you want to get back home, fly the Thunderbolt."
In case anyone's wondering this IS my alternate-universe version of the P-47 Thunderbolt.
.
... and if I'm ever to finish this I'll probably be quoting directly from the original.
.
.
. Edit: apparently Curt Tank, the designer of the Focke-Wulf 190, also expressed his ideals that warplanes need to be sturdy and rugged, instead of just fast and agile.
.... Wasn't MRNS Yamato lost in a space-time anomaly instead of being sunk in combat?
... unless the MGLA, Snowstone, or Cobrastan claimed responsibility for such a large-scale space-time discontinuity, of course.
@Graingy Kek. Although here I thought the Yanks had it worse back during the years HMS Agamemnon was active? IIRC the Brits were pretty unionized during the 1910s and 1920s, the Yanks - especially the miners - not so much.
FDR have the right idea on how to run a state, shame about the state of affairs after Richard Nixon though.
@V Cannons. Whereas projectileLifetime is a fixed value, fuseInput supports funky trees and alows for timed detonation - something invaluable for making flak guns.
@TheAviator77
They detect missile lock alright - and that's why I said such a weapon might be pointless in the first place! The difference, though, is that IIRC the target only detect missile lock after the missile ignites, and you don't need to worry about actually "locking" onto the target as the missile automatically counts as locked.
The only way to make a truly undetectable missile in SP is through tons upon tons of FT-based XML'ing - something I have problems doing myself due to both hardware (phone is already as crispy as-is, laptop cannot funky tree) and personal skill (read: me dumb) issues.
@RamboJutter
First thing first, a Mustang isn't a British design either - it's an American one that just happen to function better with British engines than their homegrown counterparts. Plus, a P-51 fin flares out at its base at the leading edge, while the Halocene's flares out at the trailing edge... and TBPH the Supermarine Attacker looks much closer to a British-built "jet P-51".
.
Plus, a trapezoidal fin (or a triangular tailplane) does not as readily identify an airframe's lineage (especially because the Ju 287 had a very similar fin) as the shape of its engine nacelles and the canopy - and both are all German.
.
Seriously, this plane is a dead ringer for the Junkers/OKB-1 EF-131 sans the third pair of engines (preemptive apologies for not being able to find a good English source), which, given that IRL British post-war designs usually take a drastically different approach with a cylindrical cross-section, cigar-shaped outline, sharp nose, bubble canopy, and trapezoidal wings (see: de Havilland Vampire, Gloster Meteor, EE Canberra, Hawker Sea Hawk, and the aforementioned Supermarine Attacker; incidentally the Canberra looks like an overgrown Meteor) compared to their WWII counterparts, still look really out of place.
.
..
... and sorry for hogging the channel.
TL;DR: Incorporating elements from captured enemy planes is all well and fine, but a British designer building something without any British features but rather a mish-mash of Junkers, Heinkel, and Arado would probably be a bit out of place.
I'Z 'ERE FOIST! WAAAGGGHHH! !
+1... where did you even find me....
Great build anyways.
@Cereal Where did you get the font?
Congrats!
+1What, exactly, is up to 2024 standards?
+1.
..
... Or, what's the change between the original and this one?
@Karroc9522 It's literally the predecessor of the X-wing so...
+2@KarlovyVary A flight computer to calculate the height, and a rocket...... ZOGGIN' BRILLIANT IF I SEY SO MESELF!
+1.
..
... So, can we use a similar setup to make those wooden-tailed torpedoes? IIRC both Japan and America attached wooden fins to their air-dropped torpedoes so that they can be dropped from greater heights at greater airspeeds.
Wait don't bombs disappear underwater?
150mm "Grenade Launcher"
... isn't it just a breech-loaded mortar then?
@Gs
@Jaspy190
I... I'm sorry for overstepping. I would not pry any further.
@EternalDarkness
Sorry, just spam-upvoting everything I liked as usual, and curiosity got the better of me and I can't help but ask what happened between the two of ya for the apparent animosity...
@Jaspy190
@EternalDarkness
I smell plot~
@Ownedpilot Gratz on Platz, Ownie!
Gratz on gold!
+1@Jaspy190
This.
Leman Russ, is that you?
s m o l - p a n t h e r
+1.
..
...
p t h r
Welcome back Et!
@FalHartIndustries
+1It's pretty much the alternate-universe version of the WWII saying "If you want to get the girls, fly the Mustang. But, if you want to get back home, fly the Thunderbolt."
In case anyone's wondering this IS my alternate-universe version of the P-47 Thunderbolt.
.
... and if I'm ever to finish this I'll probably be quoting directly from the original.
.
.
.
Edit: apparently Curt Tank, the designer of the Focke-Wulf 190, also expressed his ideals that warplanes need to be sturdy and rugged, instead of just fast and agile.
@FalHartIndustries Thanks!
+1('_')7
Salut.
+1.... Wasn't MRNS Yamato lost in a space-time anomaly instead of being sunk in combat?
+1... unless the MGLA, Snowstone, or Cobrastan claimed responsibility for such a large-scale space-time discontinuity, of course.
@Gs I dunno, cuz I was craa~aazy~
[cuteness sensor overloaded] Who's a good girl? Who's a good girl? You are! You are!
Absolutely B O O T I F U L.
+2I'Z 'ERE 'FORE DAT MOUSEY! WAAAAGGGHHH! ! !
+4@LunarEclipseSP
+2Freefoot? Frogfighter?
Nose of a frog, tail of a tiger, F r u g f i t e r.
@Graingy Kek. Although here I thought the Yanks had it worse back during the years HMS Agamemnon was active? IIRC the Brits were pretty unionized during the 1910s and 1920s, the Yanks - especially the miners - not so much.
FDR have the right idea on how to run a state, shame about the state of affairs after Richard Nixon though.
@Graingy
+1🎵 This was the charter, the charter of the laaaaand! 🎶
🎵 Britons never ever ever shall be slaves! 🎶
Is this... the ol' Monarchii with Iowa's 1980s modernization?
+2f r u g f u t
+2I'm here!
+2@AluminiumFX No worries, drywall isn't normally made out of aluminum anyways....
+2@upperflat Thanks!
f r u g
@UseGooglePlay Thanks!
+1Which maps did you use for the two screenshots?
OI! I'Z 'ERE FOIST! ! WAAAGGGHHH! ! !
+1@V Sorry, wrong guy.
Thanks anyways for keeping the XML sheet up and running either way.
@TheMouse Thanks!
@V Cannons. Whereas projectileLifetime is a fixed value, fuseInput supports funky trees and alows for timed detonation - something invaluable for making flak guns.
+1@V You missed
fuseInputNorrköping-class?
@TheAviator77
They detect missile lock alright - and that's why I said such a weapon might be pointless in the first place! The difference, though, is that IIRC the target only detect missile lock after the missile ignites, and you don't need to worry about actually "locking" onto the target as the missile automatically counts as locked.
The only way to make a truly undetectable missile in SP is through tons upon tons of FT-based XML'ing - something I have problems doing myself due to both hardware (phone is already as crispy as-is, laptop cannot funky tree) and personal skill (read: me dumb) issues.
S Q U I D
+1@RamboJutter
First thing first, a Mustang isn't a British design either - it's an American one that just happen to function better with British engines than their homegrown counterparts. Plus, a P-51 fin flares out at its base at the leading edge, while the Halocene's flares out at the trailing edge... and TBPH the Supermarine Attacker looks much closer to a British-built "jet P-51".
.
Plus, a trapezoidal fin (or a triangular tailplane) does not as readily identify an airframe's lineage (especially because the Ju 287 had a very similar fin) as the shape of its engine nacelles and the canopy - and both are all German.
.
Seriously, this plane is a dead ringer for the Junkers/OKB-1 EF-131 sans the third pair of engines (preemptive apologies for not being able to find a good English source), which, given that IRL British post-war designs usually take a drastically different approach with a cylindrical cross-section, cigar-shaped outline, sharp nose, bubble canopy, and trapezoidal wings (see: de Havilland Vampire, Gloster Meteor, EE Canberra, Hawker Sea Hawk, and the aforementioned Supermarine Attacker; incidentally the Canberra looks like an overgrown Meteor) compared to their WWII counterparts, still look really out of place.
.
..
... and sorry for hogging the channel.
@RichardScepton @SenSkysh
Here is my personal backup of table 1.
To make sure the table would not get damaged again through either accident or vandalism, the sheet is protected this time.
@Hahahahaahahshs
True, presumably just like how the XP-72 was a P-47 Jug with elements from captured Fw-190s, and the F-86 Sabre was a jet-powered P-51D Mustang (aka the FJ-1 Fury) with the wings of an Me 262, the OG Halocene B1 9.8 was probably a Mossie with a lot of elements from captured Ju 287 and Ju 288s... then the Halocene A2 11.6 variant incorporated some elements from both an He 219 and a B-26, and now apparently an Arado Ar 234C as well...
TL;DR: Incorporating elements from captured enemy planes is all well and fine, but a British designer building something without any British features but rather a mish-mash of Junkers, Heinkel, and Arado would probably be a bit out of place.
Where did the original biplane go?