@spefyjerbf Exactly. That said, a high-spread, high-hitbox sort of weapon can lock down an entire airspace without fail - if perhaps a bit laggy for low-end devices. Basically, give the bullets the hitbox of the intercipias, and watch the fireworks. I might mention something about integrating the technology of this and the intercipias in a future CIWS build. Its code name? Grid Fire.
And that's only explosionScale ="1.8"
If we take the boom50's 500lb weight into account and assume it's a Mk.82 GP bomb with a filling weight of around 200lbs, and assume the Cleaver is based off the Tomahawk (notice the name, weight, and size of the weapon) with a 1000lb warhead, we'll get that a cleaver should have around 5 times the explosive power of a boom50, and then we plug the data into the Taylor's equation (using boom50's explosionScale = "1.6" as a basis), and we'll get that the Cleaver should have the an explosionScale of 2.25 or so! TL;DR: the Cleaver should be even more overpowered than it already is. That's how powerful a cruise missile is.
@IceCraft Yes. Read the last paragraph. I used the Taylor's formula (graciously gifted by spefyjerbf, the one and only) to sorta determine how they'd work.
@spefyjerbf Yup, that's why trim is important... Same goes for real-life planes (hell, with lifting surfaces trim would be even worse with speed and lift and the like involved!). Also, those dumb-fire rockets are apparently nuclear-tipped for some reason...
One quick question: is the Worker's Republic closer to the Nordic States or to the USSR? Basically, what I mean is that a properly regulated market is good but having an authoritarian (or worse, totalitarian) regime that clamps down on basic human rights and freedoms not so much...
@Blaize1380 Guess not everyone knows orkish... Basically what I wanted to say "that's a lot of guns, although there's never a time we can have too many guns, so perhaps we should add even more". Or literally: "more guns, (you can) never (have) enough guns, *maniacal shouting*"
@GESICHERT Ok, it's just that "you can steer while looking at the left and right windows" sentence seems to contradict with the "folding windsield" part so I asked to be sure.
BTW, what's this plane based on?
@AzureCorp Ok sorry for that threatening tone, but still, for a successor built on the airframe of the A-10 it feels very wrong to have only a single engine...
@Revan13152 The reason why I asked? The last thing I need when discussing about someone's build is to have someone telling me that I used the wrong pronoun. And also, I now view you as a friend, so I now need to know if it's appropriate to call you things along the lines of "bro" and "my lad"! Yeah, guess it's just me being autistic enough to actually care about such things...
@Revan13152 Read my bio, we aspies aren't normally that good at art anyways, and it took me like what, five tries to get their aesthetics right. For each one of them. Just because we aspeis suck at arts doesn't mean we can't even get a basic idea down in orthographic.
@Revan13152 I mean, the point is to first get a clear picture on what you want to build: is it a fighter, a bomber, a transport, or something else? Then with that in mind, we can sketch down some basic shapes on what the plane will look like, including the aesthetics/artstyle, the wing configuration, the fuselage configuration, engine types, etc. Then we build. And try our best (with the help of XML, of course) to recreate what we wanted to make.
A few examples of my sketch: Starfire "Nightprowler" attack bomber, something I've been working on as of now. Roderick Airworks "Nimbus" high-speed bomber and Nelan Drive Yards "War Drake" Aerospace fighter, two projects I'll start working on after I finish my current project.
Revan, waterproof is first, a setting found only on missiles, and its job is to keep missiles functioning after it has touched water. I'm pretty sure they don't help with missiles and bombs disappearing after reaching a certain depth by any means.
@Revan13152 Well, it's not as if I myself am that careful myself... Like, for multiple posts, I only realized I made a typo half a week after I posted it...
Vode An.
+1@spefyjerbf Exactly. That said, a high-spread, high-hitbox sort of weapon can lock down an entire airspace without fail - if perhaps a bit laggy for low-end devices. Basically, give the bullets the hitbox of the intercipias, and watch the fireworks. I might mention something about integrating the technology of this and the intercipias in a future CIWS build. Its code name? Grid Fire.
+1@Grroro Bonus point for both of you guys are hafus, read his bio.
+1@Grroro True. This guy's so underrated.
+1'Grats Greggios!
+1@Macrophage Yes, according to the taylor equation your cleaver would have a yield of around 0.5 kt...
+1@Macrophage Yup, w/ the explosion scale of 9 you're getting a sub-kiloton nuke...
+1And that's only
+1explosionScale ="1.8"If we take the boom50's 500lb weight into account and assume it's a Mk.82 GP bomb with a filling weight of around 200lbs, and assume the Cleaver is based off the Tomahawk (notice the name, weight, and size of the weapon) with a 1000lb warhead, we'll get that a cleaver should have around 5 times the explosive power of a boom50, and then we plug the data into the Taylor's equation (using boom50's explosionScale = "1.6" as a basis), and we'll get that the Cleaver should have the an explosionScale of 2.25 or so!
TL;DR: the Cleaver should be even more overpowered than it already is. That's how powerful a cruise missile is.
@CenturiVonKikie Tag me when it's done.
+1Your desperate pleas only made upvoting this even more pleasurable...
+1Of course not an Ju-52. Different gear and different flight deck.
+1@WolfSpark Yup, the literal point is that it's a bit too short to have the same proportions as the Wildcat...
+1Blood for the Blood God! Skull for the Skull Throne!
+1@Greggory005
+1This hack is gonna be pretty useful!Finally...
@IceCraft IIRC there's a mission called the convoy assault...
+1@IceCraft Feel free to try them out! Bombing truck convoys is my favorite past-time anyways...
+1@IceCraft And also yes, those metric-ton monstrosities (the Mk.84 and the tomahawk) is gonna put a huge dent in whatever they hit.
+1@IceCraft Yes. Read the last paragraph. I used the Taylor's formula (graciously gifted by spefyjerbf, the one and only) to sorta determine how they'd work.
+1Kako! Good ta see ya 'round 'ere!
+1Am I the only one who just spawns a plane loaded with a shit ton of missiles (all set to multirole) and try my damndest to shoot them all down?
+1@Hardy1 Better question: is the replica of a fictional design considered replica or fictional?
+1@spefyjerbf Yup, that's why trim is important... Same goes for real-life planes (hell, with lifting surfaces trim would be even worse with speed and lift and the like involved!). Also, those dumb-fire rockets are apparently nuclear-tipped for some reason...
+1One quick question: is the Worker's Republic closer to the Nordic States or to the USSR? Basically, what I mean is that a properly regulated market is good but having an authoritarian (or worse, totalitarian) regime that clamps down on basic human rights and freedoms not so much...
+1Is it just me or does this resemble the GOG Milano? And of course half of the Star Citizen fleet was added into the mix as well.
+1Cool!
+1@Blaize1380 Guess not everyone knows orkish... Basically what I wanted to say "that's a lot of guns, although there's never a time we can have too many guns, so perhaps we should add even more". Or literally: "more guns, (you can) never (have) enough guns, *maniacal shouting*"
+1@GESICHERT Ok, it's just that "you can steer while looking at the left and right windows" sentence seems to contradict with the "folding windsield" part so I asked to be sure.
+1BTW, what's this plane based on?
A Focke-Wulf Fw. 200 Condor?
+1The gears look a tad bit too small, but pretty nice otherwise.
+1@Greggory005 So the enemies are made out of graphite?
+1f i r s t
+1@AzureCorp True, as long as you don't dive in too steep on a target and got caught by AA further out all is fine, right?
+1@AzureCorp Ok sorry for that threatening tone, but still, for a successor built on the airframe of the A-10 it feels very wrong to have only a single engine...
+1@Revan13152 There are three more of us aspies that I know of: MintLynx from Texas, Avro683Lancaster from Australia, and FeatherWing from the UK.
+1@Revan13152 The reason why I asked? The last thing I need when discussing about someone's build is to have someone telling me that I used the wrong pronoun. And also, I now view you as a friend, so I now need to know if it's appropriate to call you things along the lines of "bro" and "my lad"! Yeah, guess it's just me being autistic enough to actually care about such things...
+1@Revan13152 Read my bio, we aspies aren't normally that good at art anyways, and it took me like what, five tries to get their aesthetics right. For each one of them. Just because we aspeis suck at arts doesn't mean we can't even get a basic idea down in orthographic.
+1@Revan13152 I mean, the point is to first get a clear picture on what you want to build: is it a fighter, a bomber, a transport, or something else? Then with that in mind, we can sketch down some basic shapes on what the plane will look like, including the aesthetics/artstyle, the wing configuration, the fuselage configuration, engine types, etc. Then we build. And try our best (with the help of XML, of course) to recreate what we wanted to make.
+1A few examples of my sketch:
Starfire "Nightprowler" attack bomber, something I've been working on as of now.
Roderick Airworks "Nimbus" high-speed bomber and Nelan Drive Yards "War Drake" Aerospace fighter, two projects I'll start working on after I finish my current project.
@Revan13152 Also, what's your preferred pronoun?
+1Revan,
+1waterproofis first, a setting found only on missiles, and its job is to keep missiles functioning after it has touched water. I'm pretty sure they don't help with missiles and bombs disappearing after reaching a certain depth by any means.Below 15,000 meters / 45,000 feet? Seriously, it depends on what you're trying to build.
+1@Revan13152 Well, it's not as if I myself am that careful myself... Like, for multiple posts, I only realized I made a typo half a week after I posted it...
+1The old and trusty flare gun, for some reason it can only damage ships and can't even damage USS Beast while we're at it...
+1Well, other than the fact that bombs automatically disappear under water, not too much of an issue...
+1Ok, perhpas, just perhaps, you should put something like "activate 1 to fire the cluster" somewhere in the description...
+1@Sadboye12 I'm pretty sure you haven't missed any forum posts either...
+1Although I myself hate any weapon that's not "plug n' play" with a passion, the weapon is still pretty nice.
+1@Sadboye12 No, it's because I don't upload that many things...
+1@Sadboye12 No, I man IIRC you haven't missed out on anything as of yet...
+1@Sadboye12 ...Again? Thanks anyways
+1Wait wait wait wait where the -bleep- are the horizontal stabilizers?
+1