Weird alternate-universe Thunderbolt, I like it...@XxcreedexX, @DestinyAviation is correct, given the technology at the time (all analog/mechanical), it was just impracticable to adjust the two gear retract motors or mechanisms to operate at exactly the same speed, plus not really necessary, provided they both eventually came up or down. If you watch any of the older WWII films of airplane takeoffs, you'll clearly see it. Even the Duchess I recently flew didn't have perfectly synch'd gear. When I put that LG handle down, I would watch to see those green "down and locked" lights came on and would hold my breath for the half second between the first and last green light illuminating! So glad someone else built a plane with asymmetric gear operation, I did the same on my B-24 build, but no one noticed...:(
So, I did a little engine-out work on your C-46 myself. I put the left (critical) engine on AG1. I then took off and climbed to 5,500', where I shut down the left engine at 150 mph. Full right rudder and around 5 - 10 degrees of right bank maintained directional control without much difficulty. However, I could not maintain 150 mph and 5,500' on one engine. I then slowed at a controllable rate (1 - 5 mph per second) while losing airspeed and the aircraft began an uncontrollable left roll below 120 mph; I was able to regain control by letting the nose forward and accelerating or, alternatively, pulling power on the good engine (which led to more altitude loss). Lowering flaps only made the Vmc much higher, above 130 mph in fact and really exacerbated the thrust deficiency as even partial (as opposed to full) flaps here add a lot of drag, but not much lift (plus, pitch the nose UP, which is not what I would expect). Restarted the dead engine for approach and landing. Overall impression: Flies very nicely on two engines and very easy to land; in single-engine situations, this C-46 doesn't have a controllability problem, but does have a power deficiency at higher gross weights. As far as SP modeling is concerned, the single-engine physics seem realistic, though I cannot verify the DEGREE of accuracy (i.e., whether a 27,000 lb C-46 with 1700 hp each engine and 108 ft wingspan would react the same way). The flaps, however, are another story. I use flaps in some of my builds, but unfortunately, SP flaps do not do the same things flaps do in real life, which would be to change the camber of the wing, increase lift, pitch the nose DOWN (generally), add little/some drag initially and more drag at increased extension.
Controllability in single engine situations depends on several factors, but power setting (max power results in less controllability and necessity to fly faster) and speed (have to fly faster to stay in control). So, how fast are you flying when you go out of control? Any airplane, if flying below Vmc (Single-Engine Minimum Control Airspeed), will spiral out of control. SP physics replicates that; not sure how accurately, it's difficult to compare, but I don't think it's totally unrealistic.
I've evaluated engine out characteristics on several builds, including my own B-24 build. I have to keep it above 200 mph if I fail an outboard, otherwise it goes out of control.
Use the "Parts" tag to search, there are several alphabets and insignia packs uploaded by users. One of the very best is by @thealban, that's what I've used in the past for my U.S. aircraft. Otherwise, download Fine Tuner Mod (it's in the mods pages) and start experimenting on making your own. Tedious at times, but the results are well worth it.
Great detail, the engines look fantastic, but if you're looking for suggestions: Make the fuse slimmer and the wings longer. The Connie had a very graceful shape which should be accentuated.
If you don't mind my asking, how did you get the tapering airfoil shape on the vertical stabilizer? I can only manage "curved" on the leading edges and "round" on the trailing edges, but my fuselage-made airfoils don't truly taper. Looks like you managed it here...
Pretty nice overall, what does "3D" mean? It definitely looks like a MiG-29, which is good, I like the rocket pods, those are accurate Soviet-style pods, bit of a cheater with using the guns instead of rockets, less punch than rockets and essentially unlimited ammo, but it works overall. The things we think of to get around some of the SP limitations... You could mod this one with some Soviet stars, which I think you could find under the "Parts" tag, that would really make it "pop" out of the page, even though with 25+ upvotes, I think you're getting plenty of attention with this one. Also, I would put the main gear a little further forward for a more accurate side profile...
Agree with @BogdanX F-22s have distinctively gold canopy glass, maybe change for mobile version...which is a must!!! This thing is AWESOME! Proportions, shape, weapons bay, custom gear are all amazing, wish I could spotlight you, but you're higher ranked.
By the way, awesome mod, really revolutionizes building in the game. Question: Would if be possible to add a way to scale one face or side of a part, vice scaling the entire part equally?
OK, here you go: If you want more notice, try a replica. Surf the internet for pictures and pick the most colorful/cool looking airplane with a fairly simple structure, a single engine and fixed gear. Pick something which excites your interest, as you will spend some time working it and you don't want to lose interest. Civil aircraft make great subjects as military aircraft tend to be grey or camo'd (difficult to accurately replicate). Also, learn to use "nudge" [Shift + Q, W, E, A, S, D] and download "FineTunerMod" from Hellfirekoder under the "Mods" page, here. That mod will allow you fine tune part sizes, angles and precisely move parts for more accurate replicas. I also noticed you posted two helicopters and you need some help to make them fly correctly. Helicopters are very tough to make fly correctly (hardly any on the site do, partly because helicopters are difficult to fly in real life) and don't really make great subjects unless you're willing to spend a LOT of time to make them fly correctly. I'd put aside helos for now. Last point: You really need to zoom in for your screenshots, read this for some tips: Screenshots. The X-Ray view was cool for this build, but the novelty won't last.
If you pull this one off with the accuracy I see here and it's able to fire the missiles out of the weapons bay without blowing up, you'll have the top scoring plane...EVER
You built the entire front of the fuse out of intake shapes? How did you get a pointy nose then? It's pretty much perfectly shaped from what I can see (which isn't much right now)
Innovative experiment. Mentioning the speed thing, it would be great if we had some supersonic effects in SP, but, alas, straight wing and swept wing aircraft fly exactly the same way...
@MethaManAircraft well, if you read the fine print, the Platinum players are also affected if they have never had a feature and the rules haven't changed for Bronze or Silver players, simply expanded to now include Gold players.
Wow, a bit of a shift in the Devs' thinking, I think it'll be beneficial to the community as some amazing creations can now appear as the very first thing a prospective user might see.
It's nice, don't take the critiques the wrong way, side profile is very accurate.
Nice, love those classic planes!
Weird alternate-universe Thunderbolt, I like it...@XxcreedexX, @DestinyAviation is correct, given the technology at the time (all analog/mechanical), it was just impracticable to adjust the two gear retract motors or mechanisms to operate at exactly the same speed, plus not really necessary, provided they both eventually came up or down. If you watch any of the older WWII films of airplane takeoffs, you'll clearly see it. Even the Duchess I recently flew didn't have perfectly synch'd gear. When I put that LG handle down, I would watch to see those green "down and locked" lights came on and would hold my breath for the half second between the first and last green light illuminating! So glad someone else built a plane with asymmetric gear operation, I did the same on my B-24 build, but no one noticed...:(
So, I did a little engine-out work on your C-46 myself. I put the left (critical) engine on AG1. I then took off and climbed to 5,500', where I shut down the left engine at 150 mph. Full right rudder and around 5 - 10 degrees of right bank maintained directional control without much difficulty. However, I could not maintain 150 mph and 5,500' on one engine. I then slowed at a controllable rate (1 - 5 mph per second) while losing airspeed and the aircraft began an uncontrollable left roll below 120 mph; I was able to regain control by letting the nose forward and accelerating or, alternatively, pulling power on the good engine (which led to more altitude loss). Lowering flaps only made the Vmc much higher, above 130 mph in fact and really exacerbated the thrust deficiency as even partial (as opposed to full) flaps here add a lot of drag, but not much lift (plus, pitch the nose UP, which is not what I would expect). Restarted the dead engine for approach and landing. Overall impression: Flies very nicely on two engines and very easy to land; in single-engine situations, this C-46 doesn't have a controllability problem, but does have a power deficiency at higher gross weights. As far as SP modeling is concerned, the single-engine physics seem realistic, though I cannot verify the DEGREE of accuracy (i.e., whether a 27,000 lb C-46 with 1700 hp each engine and 108 ft wingspan would react the same way). The flaps, however, are another story. I use flaps in some of my builds, but unfortunately, SP flaps do not do the same things flaps do in real life, which would be to change the camber of the wing, increase lift, pitch the nose DOWN (generally), add little/some drag initially and more drag at increased extension.
+1An F-4 with a mid-mounted wing...
I can fly yours and tell you what I think, if you would like.
Controllability in single engine situations depends on several factors, but power setting (max power results in less controllability and necessity to fly faster) and speed (have to fly faster to stay in control). So, how fast are you flying when you go out of control? Any airplane, if flying below Vmc (Single-Engine Minimum Control Airspeed), will spiral out of control. SP physics replicates that; not sure how accurately, it's difficult to compare, but I don't think it's totally unrealistic.
You might be interested in this Pilot Report.
I've evaluated engine out characteristics on several builds, including my own B-24 build. I have to keep it above 200 mph if I fail an outboard, otherwise it goes out of control.
Use the "Parts" tag to search, there are several alphabets and insignia packs uploaded by users. One of the very best is by @thealban, that's what I've used in the past for my U.S. aircraft. Otherwise, download Fine Tuner Mod (it's in the mods pages) and start experimenting on making your own. Tedious at times, but the results are well worth it.
Great detail, the engines look fantastic, but if you're looking for suggestions: Make the fuse slimmer and the wings longer. The Connie had a very graceful shape which should be accentuated.
Nice little jet. I think Austria(?) still flies these?
Cool, now I can practice my dive-bombing!
Fair enough, missed it the first time, though.
Nice build.
If you don't mind my asking, how did you get the tapering airfoil shape on the vertical stabilizer? I can only manage "curved" on the leading edges and "round" on the trailing edges, but my fuselage-made airfoils don't truly taper. Looks like you managed it here...
Ohhhh....wow...!
@Phaz3Shift, yes it is.
@Phaz3Shift exactly correct, glad you recognize the U-2!
Nice little plane!
@PilotOfFuture huh...how? Is there some sort of timeout in the coding of the SP guns that makes the rounds ineffective after a set period of time?
Love it! This one deserves an upvote and a spotlight! Sorry I can't spotlight this one, though X)
You could have called it an F-4 or F-5 Lighting as those were the photo-reconnaissance versions of the P-38 and didn't have guns...:)
Vroom, vroom!!!
Very nice.
Only 4 upvotes? This should have many more, it's very good and a unique build!
Very nice build.
Interesting looking design. You should expand your builds to larger and more complex designs, but don't forget to make them fun to fly like this one!
Pretty nice overall, what does "3D" mean? It definitely looks like a MiG-29, which is good, I like the rocket pods, those are accurate Soviet-style pods, bit of a cheater with using the guns instead of rockets, less punch than rockets and essentially unlimited ammo, but it works overall. The things we think of to get around some of the SP limitations... You could mod this one with some Soviet stars, which I think you could find under the "Parts" tag, that would really make it "pop" out of the page, even though with 25+ upvotes, I think you're getting plenty of attention with this one. Also, I would put the main gear a little further forward for a more accurate side profile...
You're featured, congrats!
Featured...nice!!!
Agree with @BogdanX F-22s have distinctively gold canopy glass, maybe change for mobile version...which is a must!!! This thing is AWESOME! Proportions, shape, weapons bay, custom gear are all amazing, wish I could spotlight you, but you're higher ranked.
By the way, awesome mod, really revolutionizes building in the game. Question: Would if be possible to add a way to scale one face or side of a part, vice scaling the entire part equally?
Weirdly wonderful...
Holy cow, my Spotlight of the Day and should be featured! And all of this on iOS, amazing...
OK, here you go: If you want more notice, try a replica. Surf the internet for pictures and pick the most colorful/cool looking airplane with a fairly simple structure, a single engine and fixed gear. Pick something which excites your interest, as you will spend some time working it and you don't want to lose interest. Civil aircraft make great subjects as military aircraft tend to be grey or camo'd (difficult to accurately replicate). Also, learn to use "nudge" [Shift + Q, W, E, A, S, D] and download "FineTunerMod" from Hellfirekoder under the "Mods" page, here. That mod will allow you fine tune part sizes, angles and precisely move parts for more accurate replicas. I also noticed you posted two helicopters and you need some help to make them fly correctly. Helicopters are very tough to make fly correctly (hardly any on the site do, partly because helicopters are difficult to fly in real life) and don't really make great subjects unless you're willing to spend a LOT of time to make them fly correctly. I'd put aside helos for now. Last point: You really need to zoom in for your screenshots, read this for some tips: Screenshots. The X-Ray view was cool for this build, but the novelty won't last.
@saturn28 thanks!
Noice!!!
Suggest you use semi-reflective for the paint because that's how the actual plane's paint is...
If you pull this one off with the accuracy I see here and it's able to fire the missiles out of the weapons bay without blowing up, you'll have the top scoring plane...EVER
Very close to a Mirage III, you should consider going all out on a Mirage III replica...
Cool, nice first build.
I do, so keep building!
Cool configuration.
Pleasing lines, though the default screenshot really doesn't do it justice!
You built the entire front of the fuse out of intake shapes? How did you get a pointy nose then? It's pretty much perfectly shaped from what I can see (which isn't much right now)
Innovative experiment. Mentioning the speed thing, it would be great if we had some supersonic effects in SP, but, alas, straight wing and swept wing aircraft fly exactly the same way...
@MethaManAircraft well, if you read the fine print, the Platinum players are also affected if they have never had a feature and the rules haven't changed for Bronze or Silver players, simply expanded to now include Gold players.
Wow, a bit of a shift in the Devs' thinking, I think it'll be beneficial to the community as some amazing creations can now appear as the very first thing a prospective user might see.
NIce! @Sunnyskies, check out this one!
Wow, ok, nice!
Nice job, I was just looking at an old copy of Flight 174 that I had on my bookshelf and thinking about building one of these, but you beat me to it!