@Mrwhiskters85 Yeah, the whole program was a challenge in design and stability. The original prototype was still flying in 2010 thanks to an effort to restore and preserve it. Not sure if it still is. Last I heard the plane had suffered an engine fire or something and they were unsure they were going to be able to replace the parts for the engine, since both engines were built specifically for that plane.
@LJSpike Thanks for the honest rating. Flying wings are pretty notorious for being difficult to fly. The B-2 only flies well due to clever design and sophisticated computerized flight control systems.
@d0gma583 Thanks. I checked out your vf-1 and left you a rating. Have you seen my vf-19? It requires beta to fly, but I really like the way it turned out.
@Shmexysmpilot I understand the difficulty in landing. As i said, it's imperfect. As far as the intakes, that won't work. If I bury them in the fuselage (even partway) they won't get air.
This is an interesting design, but it has a lot of issues. The wings are interfering with the fuselage when they fold, and the COM isn't far enough forward, so it tends to pitch up on take-off and stall. Also, I suggest using the shorter landing gear on the tail, as that'll lift the nose up more and give more play when pulling back on the stick for take-off.
I really like the idea, and the design. I hope you can improve it :D
This is almost perfect. The only problem I have is the placement of the ailerons, which should be closer to the wingtips, and not directly over the engine nacelles.
@XVIindustries Again, Semantics. As far as I see, whether it is in service or not, it's still a fighter. The only time that changes is if the air-frame is modified to serve another purpose, such as a P-51 being modified for racing, or a B-25 being modified for fire-bombing. Just because a fighter is no longer used in that role doesn't change what it was designed to do. A bus is still a bus, even if you don't haul people around in it. As I stated before, it's a matter of semantics.
@Dewmeister Yeah. I was going off the Wikipedia which states the G model was the first to use the new intercoolers. But the picture of the G model has the smaller intakes. I suppose that makes sense then. I'll correct the description on my lunch break.
@Verdnan As I said in the description, this is my all-time favorite fighter WWII fighter. The last version wasn't nearly perfect in my eyes, and even this one has a couple of minor issues, like the rear landing gear I mentioned. Later, after I've let this model rest a bit, I may return and add more detail and correct some of the minor flaws. I'm glad you approve though! Or at least I assume you do based on your rating ~_^
Looks great! But needs some work on balancing and control. Definitely has some stability issues.
@Mrwhiskters85 Yeah, the whole program was a challenge in design and stability. The original prototype was still flying in 2010 thanks to an effort to restore and preserve it. Not sure if it still is. Last I heard the plane had suffered an engine fire or something and they were unsure they were going to be able to replace the parts for the engine, since both engines were built specifically for that plane.
@LJSpike Thanks for the honest rating. Flying wings are pretty notorious for being difficult to fly. The B-2 only flies well due to clever design and sophisticated computerized flight control systems.
@d0gma583 Thanks. I checked out your vf-1 and left you a rating. Have you seen my vf-19? It requires beta to fly, but I really like the way it turned out.
@LordofLego Well that's a bummer, sorry to hear that.
@LordofLego That was fast lol. Why can't you download it? Do you not have access to the beta?
@Shmexysmpilot I understand the difficulty in landing. As i said, it's imperfect. As far as the intakes, that won't work. If I bury them in the fuselage (even partway) they won't get air.
@Rohan XML edit, modified the rotation of the parts.
This is an interesting design, but it has a lot of issues. The wings are interfering with the fuselage when they fold, and the COM isn't far enough forward, so it tends to pitch up on take-off and stall. Also, I suggest using the shorter landing gear on the tail, as that'll lift the nose up more and give more play when pulling back on the stick for take-off. I really like the idea, and the design. I hope you can improve it :D
@XVIindustries Just to be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that my opinion differs ~_^
Very cool. If you'd just move the rear landing gear forward it would take off a little easier.
Also, are beta planes allowed?
Three days isn't a lot of time.
This is almost perfect. The only problem I have is the placement of the ailerons, which should be closer to the wingtips, and not directly over the engine nacelles.
@XVIindustries Again, Semantics. As far as I see, whether it is in service or not, it's still a fighter. The only time that changes is if the air-frame is modified to serve another purpose, such as a P-51 being modified for racing, or a B-25 being modified for fire-bombing. Just because a fighter is no longer used in that role doesn't change what it was designed to do. A bus is still a bus, even if you don't haul people around in it. As I stated before, it's a matter of semantics.
@XVIindustries *shrug* semantics.
@XVIindustries The plane still exists, so why should it be referred to in past tense?
@AndrewGarrison Sounds great! I'm glad my plane was able to help in some small way.
@Dewmeister Yeah. I was going off the Wikipedia which states the G model was the first to use the new intercoolers. But the picture of the G model has the smaller intakes. I suppose that makes sense then. I'll correct the description on my lunch break.
@Authros Thanks! That means a lot :D
@AndrewGarrison Thanks for stopping by. Always an honor to see a rating from one of the devs :D
Yeah, I can do that. How short and how thin?
@Ljspike Superchargers :D Or at least as close as I can come to replicating them.
@Verdnan As I said in the description, this is my all-time favorite fighter WWII fighter. The last version wasn't nearly perfect in my eyes, and even this one has a couple of minor issues, like the rear landing gear I mentioned. Later, after I've let this model rest a bit, I may return and add more detail and correct some of the minor flaws. I'm glad you approve though! Or at least I assume you do based on your rating ~_^
5
4
3
2
1
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
@Delphinus You've won third place! Congratulations!
@Unknown1 You've won second place! Congratulations!
@karlosdarkness You've won first place! Congratulations!
Has a serious nose-up tendency, making it prone to stalls and flat spins.
Not sure if the crooked wing is intentional or accidental, but the plane flies pretty well despite that.
I can't get this plane to take off without crashing, even when I pull up as you directed.
Good entry
Looks great!
@AlphOneIndustries Yeah but... Mine flies :P
This thing floats like a leaf in the wind.
Pretty cool. Looks like a tiny space ship :D
Cool plane. The only V tail in the competition.