Entry for MAHADI's WWI Challenge.
An envisioning of the "C1" as though it did NOT fail during the first test flight, and therefore was able to be developed into a fully trialed aircraft for WWI.
My variant is slightly longer, slightly wider wing span , with a little more powerful engine to accommodate that size, but in turn allowing for the full assortment of armaments. Thus, the C1 provides the role of Close Air Support instead of being a Fighter, earning it the nickname of "White Knight" by the infantrymen it has saved -- a rather fitting name considering the fact that it, like a knight in shining armor, is also clad in a metal shell! (a unique attribute for the time)
--== DETAILS ==--
- Fully actuated Canard
- Mid Engine (222HP) Rear Pusher Propeller
- Tricycle Gear + Rear Skid
- 1x TRP 37mm Auto-Canon; 200x HE Ammo (Multirole)
- 1x "Petit Boum 20" (Tiny Boom; less explosive than Boom 25)
- 2x Upper-wing Mounted "Fusées Rapide" (Fast Rockets)
--== CONTROLS and SPEEDS ==--
- AG1 to toggle the Canon (so you can move the camera and not waste ammo!)
- F5 to view Rocket Crosshair (it's the one floating above the cockpit)
- Ideal Takeoff Speed: 125MPH (120MPH w/o ordinance) | Easy
- Short Takeoff Speed: 90MPH (without ordinance) | Difficult
- Cruise Speed: 135MPH (roughly 145MPH w/o ordinance) @ 100% Throttle
- Max Speed: 2° nose-down 155MPH; > 30° nose-down (diving) 200+MPH
- Max Altitude: UNDETERMINED; early (problematic) designs had problems getting above 3,000ft ALT
- Landing Speed: Any!
- Landing Distance: Twice the plane's length (seriously, it stops on a dime! lol)
- Stall Speed: Around 55MPH
- Problems Controlling Speed: Below 80MPH
- Fuel Time: UNDETERMINED; 61GAL was still over 80% after 30mins of flying
--== TAKEOFF and LANDING ==--
Takeoff:
- Full Throttle
- Gently Pitch Up around 120MPH, just enough to get the nose up, at which point it will auto climb a few feet before starting to nose down again
- Climb to desired altitude.
Landing:
- Final approach; throttle @ 5%
- Glide in until wheels are on the ground
- Mash the Brakes
--- NOTE: It can easily land on roughly 1/8th the length of USS Tiny
--- NOTE: 0% Throttle causes odd glide profile where nose wants to continually raise
-= TEST PILOT FEEDBACK =-
- It is still a bit 'squirrely' in flight, to be aware. This is why I opted to make it a Close Air Support instead of a Fighter, since it will suffer in a dog-fight.
- Pitch-Up loops are doable, but has a wide radius.
- Pitch-Down loops are insane, and happen so fast you actually start to fly backwards if you perform numerous ones back-to-back!
- Rolls are laborious and put the nose into a slight dive as the wings level out, thanks to the wonky CoM.
- Yaw....... just.... don't use it.... :}
- No, seriously... I'd have removed those rotators if I didn't think it'd get me disqualified from the challenge!! It brings a whole new meaning to Strafing in an airplane. Instead of using Yaw, simply add a slight Roll in the direction you want to "yaw" towards.
- Advanced maneuvers such as a Barrel Roll will cause all manner. of unwanted stuff to happen, so be prepared to counteract them...
- If you've stalled out in a climb, let the nose come down normally and once it picks up enough speed (~115MPH), only then start to GENTLY Pitch Up! Panicking and holding Pitch Up will only cause it to uncontrollably enter another steep climb, stall again, and dive.
- The Tricycle landing gear is robust! Don't be afraid to come in a bit hard for a landing.
- Since I used the Landing Hook for aircraft carrier landings as the "Tail Skid", it too is extremely robust and you won't have to worry about it breaking; I never managed to. (This is also why I didn't add the additional support braces like the one in real life had back there.)
- It actually flies better upside-down, for anyone curious! lol
Enjoy!
Specifications
Spotlights
- LieutenantSOT 2.7 years ago
General Characteristics
- Predecessor WWI Challenge [CLOSED]
- Created On Windows
- Wingspan 35.3ft (10.8m)
- Length 38.3ft (11.7m)
- Height 16.5ft (5.0m)
- Empty Weight 3,106lbs (1,409kg)
- Loaded Weight 3,873lbs (1,756kg)
Performance
- Horse Power/Weight Ratio 0.057
- Wing Loading 8.3lbs/ft2 (40.4kg/m2)
- Wing Area 467.6ft2 (43.4m2)
- Drag Points 1269
Parts
- Number of Parts 140
- Control Surfaces 8
- Performance Cost 618
Updated Mk.II version is now available (with changelog).
RATING
Looks : 3/10 pts.
Performance : 6/10 pts.
Details : 4/10 pts.
Weaponry : 5/10 pts.
OVERALL RATING : 4.5/10
@RC1138Boss Ooh! ahah
I meant on the description of the plane :)
The end section I had titled as: -= TEST PILOT FEEDBACK =-
It was just my own personal experiences when flying this, to prepare anyone else who downloads it.
.
That's what I meant by adding you. If you were to determine if the Hook still functioned, I'd add to that section whatever details you provide with it working (or even if it doesn't work), as well as credit you for it :)
@Formula350 on ur bio as a pilot
@RC1138Boss Sorry, I'm not quite following... What do you mean by "go on [my] profile"?
Can I go on ur profile? @Formula350
@Formula350 All good, dude! No worries lmao
That's a good way to do it tbh. I just saw that you mentioned that you had seen someone else's, and mine is basically the only one on this site lmao. I want to remake it with the new cockpit parts once the update becomes available to mobile
@RC1138Boss That's a good question, I don't actually know lol
I've locked its orientation (0deg) and it has no actiongroup assigned, so that it can't move either way.
The fact it's facing the wrong way, though, I wondered myself if it'd work still.
.
I suppose you could go in (via XML) and edit to have like -1deg (to 'drop' forward, since it's backwards), then assign it to
AG2and try it out...Or take the more laborious route, and rotate it so it faces the correct way, then try it out.
.
I'll happily credit you as a fellow Test Pilot, with testing and providing your findings :)
@LieutenantSOT Man I apologize! I apparently glossed over the notification for your message...
I actually try not to look for other builds of a plane I make (be it real or even a fictional design by a third part), as to ensure that anything I do while building it, is 100% my own idea. That way I'm totally innocent to any design choices that I may claim as my own, but which someone else may have similarly come up with.
.
That being said, while I was researching some element later on when this was almost complete, a friend did link me to someone's SP build of this...
Which after checking yours, I can confirm it was indeed that one! :P The yellow makes it unmistakable as being it. Yours is actually the one I reference in my first post, when I said " this thing is not the BEST flying aircraft... A fact that appears to be inherent to the design, considering another C1 in SP also seemed to be a pain in the butt to fly!"
I hadn't flown yours -- as I mentioned, to not influence my work -- so I based that presumption on the description and comments on your build. :P It just seemed to mirror my experiences while building mine! haha
Will the landing skid work on carrier?
@Formula350 this is cool!!
I'm assuming you saw mine? XD
.
Yeah... it's a pain in the butt, but a cool plane nonetheless. Good job!
@Flewey Yes lol That sums it up rather well...
As does the couple pictures of the real one's crash. (I spare linking since all one has to do is plug into Google Images: de Bruyere C1)
Which on that note, for a plane that was not successful and did not make it beyond a first test flight... it's impressive that there are ANY photos of it, over 100 years later! Makes me feel as though it really was cutting edge and forward thinking, or at the very least that it was "unique enough" to people that merited holding onto the photos!
I have plans to "continue development" of this plane, in an Alternate Timeline sort of sense. I already have one variant made, which I absolutely love, It's not quite finished yet, but just about.
It flies a little better, though definitely has a lot of the same (not-ideal) flight characteristics about it... lol
@MAHADI I had thicker ones in place, but was playing around with them and just liked how these looked (visually). They may indeed be a little too "Pizza Cutter" though, and in reality I suspect they would all but require operating on a tarmac runway.
.
I did waffle about the Cockpit Block, to be honest.
My logic was this: The cockpit is, or was at one point, having an impact on drag. As the plane developed and I worked out the early, severe, bad flight behaviors... I had gotten worried that if I messed with it, I'd have to start over.
.
I suppose with it submitted as it is, it can act as a baseline and I can now go back through and fine tune some elements I may have overlooked or been reluctant to tackle. I'll certainly post the Fix when I do, as per you challenge rules.
Thanks for the feedback! ;)
EDIT: Yep, monkeying with that cockpit causes all sorts of new Drag Points...
As I've uploaded it: 1268
Calc Drag
False: high 1500sTruebut Scaled: 1609*sigh* Well, I'm always up for a challenge, but usually they're enjoyable. Down the rabbit hole I go!!
Me before flying: "Well this is a fun looking plane."
VS.
Me after flying: "The French are crazy I say, CRAZY!!"
looks quite nice but the rear wheels are too thin
also the cockpit area should be empty rather than having the cockpit block
True to life, as I imagine, this thing is not the BEST flying aircraft... A fact that appears to be inherent to the design, considering another C1 in SP also seemed to be a pain in the butt to fly!
.
This took considerable effort to fine tune its flying, and in the end it is vastly superior to what it was when I first built it. Unfortunately, the realism is slightly lost because so much XML editing of Drag was required, and even then the engine needed more power than it had in real life (which was only 150HP).
.
While my first flight did not end in a crash due to a sudden Roll... it DID crash from a continued Pitch Up (loop) after liftoff. Alas, I managed to nail down a workable CoM point along with dialing down the Drag on a lot of parts at the front. Not ideal, but, necessary. Admittedly, it is NOT what I'd envision a combat plane to have for flight behavior, but it would make for a great Leisure Plane.
@MAHADI Here is my entry for the WWI Challenge. :)