@WinsWings Actually, a Gloster-looking Ho 229 sounds mighty fine as of now.... or a Northrop-looking one, for that matter.
.
Also, aside from vertical stabilizers and wingtips, this Allied flying wing design would probably also have large round or square intakes (like the ones shown here), unlike the elliptical monstrosities on the 229.
@WinsWings
It's the same picture as the one shown there, right?
... and among all three models, only the green "Italian" design actually looks flyable, whereas the shovelwing (aka Monarchii's build) is tail-heavy (would've made much more sense to extend the wing all the way back), and this "British" jet incapable of surviving asymmetrical thrust.
... and something tells me flying wings also work pretty nicely with split brakes.
The only thing I can think about is the asymmetrical thrust if anything happened to one of the engines... Seriously, it would've looked much more realistic if we moved the nacelles closer to the cockpit.
@Dracul0Anderson Yup, but it's only AFTER the missile's activated (or, in in-universe terms, when the missile's own radar kicks online). Still, ground targets wouldn't start shooting at you until the first missile actually hits, whereas they would normally be alerted by the first locking attempt.
Fun fact: early straight-winged F9F Panthers are really slow compared to the swept wing fighters like the MiG-15 or the F-86. Later swept-wing F9F Cougars are faster but was outshone by the FJ-4 Fury, the navy version of the F-86 Sabre.
please explain more to me on what do you really mean
Well, yesterday you uploaded that not! F9F Panther of yours, so it's pretty clear in whichever AU your world's in, the "G" prefix means "fighter jet". "FJ-4B" was the U.S. Navy designation for their variant of the F-86 Sabrejet, and that specific model carried 4 20mm guns with an ROF at 1000 shots/min each. The guns mounted on the F9F Panther/Cougar (the IRL F9F Cougar was the swept-wing version of the Panther) was the AN/M3 20mm, which had an ROF at 750 shots/min, while the M39 Cannon carried by F-86F-2 and F-86H variants have an ROF at 1500 shots/min. The Navy never had a Sabre/Fury variant with M39 cannons though, but this being your AU so nitty-gritty details like that would be easily forgiven.
@LunarEclipseSP Nah you're more than forgiven - I'm just the ungrateful nitpicker who can't take a joke. Just like all older battleships predating those WWII fast battleships are commonly referred to as a "dreadnought" even though most are either super-dreadnoughts (standard-type battleships) or early fast battleships (Queen Elizabeth class) in their own right.
@LunarEclipseSP Errr.... sorry to nitpick, but... Ol' Ironsides is a heavy sailing frigate.... A galleon looks... ahem, curvier with a raised forecastle and higher aftcastle, whereas a fully-rigged ship-of-the-line have a straighter deck and a lower quarterdeck.
@Galaxees Marvelous job for a first-timer! That said.... here's Tom's Ungrateful Nitpicking Time™: the main gears are a bit too far back (and a tad bit too small), and the engine nozzle looks a bit small for a fourth-gen - especially a fighter meant for insane speeds. More speed means more drag, and more drag means more thrust would be needed - ergo, larger engine cross section.
My suggestion, as usual, would be to make a quick sketch on the aesthetics of any original project beforehand and see where different parts should go and how well they would fit with each other.
@WinsWings Actually, a Gloster-looking Ho 229 sounds mighty fine as of now.... or a Northrop-looking one, for that matter.
+1.
Also, aside from vertical stabilizers and wingtips, this Allied flying wing design would probably also have large round or square intakes (like the ones shown here), unlike the elliptical monstrosities on the 229.
@WinsWings Nah, I'm just sifting through your entire upload history and I won't stop until I upvoted each and every high-quality build of yours...
+1* sniff * Someone please make it into a reality...
+1@WinsWings
It's the same picture as the one shown there, right?
... and among all three models, only the green "Italian" design actually looks flyable, whereas the shovelwing (aka Monarchii's build) is tail-heavy (would've made much more sense to extend the wing all the way back), and this "British" jet incapable of surviving asymmetrical thrust.
... and something tells me flying wings also work pretty nicely with split brakes.
+1The only thing I can think about is the asymmetrical thrust if anything happened to one of the engines... Seriously, it would've looked much more realistic if we moved the nacelles closer to the cockpit.
+1Jus' sayin', but staysails are more than welcomed on any square-rigged ship...
+1For my fraying sanity, is it correct to assume that the torpedoes are heavy wire-guided ASW torps instead of their WWII straight-run ancestors?
+1Well, they aren't called airpods for nothing!
+1Always good to see a post from ya!
+1@Monarchii Yes.
+1@Monarchii And good to see you back too, my chii-sy friend.
+1f I r S t
+1Grats on gold!
+1@Dracul0Anderson Yup, but it's only AFTER the missile's activated (or, in in-universe terms, when the missile's own radar kicks online). Still, ground targets wouldn't start shooting at you until the first missile actually hits, whereas they would normally be alerted by the first locking attempt.
+1@MAPA
Thanks! Good to be up first :)
+1s m o l n o s e
+1@LunarEclipseSP
I ain't 'fraid of no ghost.
+1Ah, the Boebus 7480, developed from the original 74-XX project...
+1b i r b
+1HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONSE
+1@Zaineman And feel free to use 'em!
+1G O N T O N K
+1ZOGGIN' BOOTIFUL, BOSS!
+1> <
+1o o
> <
+1ÖÖ
TOS-1 Buratino?
+1@GlassyBiomNewSPUser Thanks! How's the system?
+1Grats on plat my friend!
+1Sadboye12? You're back! Welcome back!
+1@LunarEclipseSP ... setting the part collision response to "none" then? Or you've already done that as well.
+1Perhaps... increasing the weight would help a bit? The Yamato IRL is about a thousand times heavier than this... and that's before modernization.
+1Hey, look who's back!
+1f I r s T
+1@Weisbrich
+1A prototype of the "shortened P-47" as promised a few months back: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/689T1H
Damn, it has been a year... and yet in recent months I've done astonishingly little to help this project grow...
+1Good to see ya again!
+1Beautiful...
+1f r u g f u t
+1@14FanFlight What tar?
+1@14FanFlight NoTaR stands for No Tail Rotor.
+1Fun fact: early straight-winged F9F Panthers are really slow compared to the swept wing fighters like the MiG-15 or the F-86. Later swept-wing F9F Cougars are faster but was outshone by the FJ-4 Fury, the navy version of the F-86 Sabre.
+1@Adilan
Well, yesterday you uploaded that not! F9F Panther of yours, so it's pretty clear in whichever AU your world's in, the "G" prefix means "fighter jet". "FJ-4B" was the U.S. Navy designation for their variant of the F-86 Sabrejet, and that specific model carried 4 20mm guns with an ROF at 1000 shots/min each. The guns mounted on the F9F Panther/Cougar (the IRL F9F Cougar was the swept-wing version of the Panther) was the AN/M3 20mm, which had an ROF at 750 shots/min, while the M39 Cannon carried by F-86F-2 and F-86H variants have an ROF at 1500 shots/min. The Navy never had a Sabre/Fury variant with M39 cannons though, but this being your AU so nitty-gritty details like that would be easily forgiven.
+1Yup, the not! F-86 Sabre, the quartet of quick-firing 20-mils is a dead giveaway.
+1@LunarEclipseSP Nah you're more than forgiven - I'm just the ungrateful nitpicker who can't take a joke. Just like all older battleships predating those WWII fast battleships are commonly referred to as a "dreadnought" even though most are either super-dreadnoughts (standard-type battleships) or early fast battleships (Queen Elizabeth class) in their own right.
+1@LunarEclipseSP Errr.... sorry to nitpick, but... Ol' Ironsides is a heavy sailing frigate.... A galleon looks... ahem, curvier with a raised forecastle and higher aftcastle, whereas a fully-rigged ship-of-the-line have a straighter deck and a lower quarterdeck.
+1@Galaxees Marvelous job for a first-timer! That said.... here's Tom's Ungrateful Nitpicking Time™: the main gears are a bit too far back (and a tad bit too small), and the engine nozzle looks a bit small for a fourth-gen - especially a fighter meant for insane speeds. More speed means more drag, and more drag means more thrust would be needed - ergo, larger engine cross section.
+1My suggestion, as usual, would be to make a quick sketch on the aesthetics of any original project beforehand and see where different parts should go and how well they would fit with each other.
@LunarEclipseSP
What galleon?
+1Welcome back pal!
+1Congrats!
+1b a b y j u g
+1