Can't remember where the inspiration came from but the Sr71 and B1 comes to mind. Also the FW X1000 in Luft '46. It's more like an exercise in aesthetics rather than flight dynamics. As I said, the jets didn't work where I wanted them to but the props did.
Thanks for the comments:)
Yes, the physics don't seem to be right. The water is draggy from 0 to 130 when it takes off but if you botch the take-off it'll skid around like its on ice.
Once airborne I throttle back to about 50% (150mph-ish). It's designed to be flown with a gentle hand- there's not a lot of control authority.
I think you should try harder.: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/2gfQM0/HL10-Lifting-Body
ThunderscreechEngineering Er, ok. Obviously it's a glider. I didn't know whether it was worth getting the wings to flap. So I didn't bother.
@ThunderAircraft Yes, this is the sub species: Q. craperi
Can't remember where the inspiration came from but the Sr71 and B1 comes to mind. Also the FW X1000 in Luft '46. It's more like an exercise in aesthetics rather than flight dynamics. As I said, the jets didn't work where I wanted them to but the props did.
Thanks for the comments:)
Yes, the physics don't seem to be right. The water is draggy from 0 to 130 when it takes off but if you botch the take-off it'll skid around like its on ice.
Once airborne I throttle back to about 50% (150mph-ish). It's designed to be flown with a gentle hand- there's not a lot of control authority.
@Mustang51 Technically, it does fly. It's not supposed to.
Not sure what you mean by 'decreases the torque'. You mean prop pitch? I did drop the blade dia but upped the blade count to compensate.