He’s a nut, no one to be taken seriously. Conspiracy theorists want to believe what they believe and will argue anything and everything and will not listen to reason. And to attack you for swearing on the Bible? That drives me nuts...he probably believes in aliens, but not God?
Getting the 3-views should be the very first step. Trying to re-engineer a build after the fact is sometimes more difficult than a whole new build. Hope the 3 views help. If you need a tester, have a question or need some help, please let me know.
@AikoFoxNeko good. Now, you should work on flight characteristics. In order to attain realism in your replicas, you need to make them reasonably easier to takeoff and land, plus turn realistically. There are ways of doing all those things in SP. Since you’re trying to build a Blackbird (by no means an easy build), download this 3-view of the jet. It has a scale next to it which is vitally important in getting proportions correct—in SP, 2 units equal 1 meter. Don’t get caught up in details, just get the proportions of the major parts, fuselage, wings, tail, landing gear placement correct. The Blueprints sure is great for 3-views, almost everything is on there.
@AikoFoxNeko and you have not yet discovered that you can search “parts” in SP. Both structural wings with control surfaces and more powerful engines are freely available for you to use. Go to highest rated builds of all time, find a parts pack (many towards the top of the list), click on the “Parts” tag. That’s what I did when I built this on iOS.
@AikoFoxNeko there’s no difference between planes flying 800 mph or 2000 mph in SP. Besides, in RL, the different airspeed regimes are around .8 M to M 1.0 (transonic), then faster than Mach 1.0 (supersonic), and faster than around Mach 4 (hypersonic), all of which actually don’t correlate at all in SP. There are no Mach effects, no rapid increase in drag in transonic flight, no Mach tuck and no shockwave. Going faster simply increases drag on an exponential curve and requires an exponential power increase. If you can build an 800 mph airplane in SP, you can build a 2,000 mph in SP. The difficult part is building an airplane that can take off well (i.e., rotates at/around 200 mph or less, accelerates realistically, is controllable on takeoff...no wild swerving) and land well (controllable in pitch, roll and yaw at approach speeds—around 200 mph or less, has enough nose up trim to fly hands off, enough pitch authority to flare and not bang the nosegear or explode on touchdown and is controllable on touchdown). THAT’S the challenge in SP. Flying faster than 800 mph in SP is not a challenge. All you need is to XML edit structural wings and engine power. Anyone can do that, no problem.
A reverse engineered B-29 with turboprops and a radar antenna...very interesting. Too bad the yokes got attached at the wrong point, otherwise I really like the cockpit. But, what are the two red crescents in the cockpit supposed to be? Also, accelerates too quickly. But it flies nicely.
Looks great, the J50 restriction really hurts your build here. I really appreciate your audacity in entering a jet that can’t turn well into this tourney. I entered an “F-100”...notice the quotes ...but chickened out because I wanted a shot at winning. Props to you for sticking to your guns!
Gee, why did you stop at one gun? If you want to win this you should have loaded it out with 4 guns, the max for this challenge. I like the looks though.
I like the 450 hp option better...more realistic, but I can see why you went with the higher power, much snappier and easier to fly! Nice work at any rate!
A little faster than the real thing, but beautiful work, was able to land it successfully on the first try, so I appreciate the fact you included the increased drag on the tail skid.
@F104Deathtrap sure. That way people have to think before they post, otherwise they lose their opportunity; at the same time it doesn’t stink of censorship.
A limit is fine, but 3 is a better limit than 1, IMHO. If it’s limited too much, it’ll have the opposite effect than intended, that is, to kill the forum traffic.
@Simba4999 I realize that, but I can’t bring myself to do that; there has to be a hint of realism in my creations, which means they need to be able to takeoff and land.
@Sarin as much as you think you need. AI dogfights usually take a lot longer than in RL, however not as long as what a builder might usually equip a plane with. I go for a light fuel load to keep weight down, wing loading low and maneuverability high. Hopefully that helps my build get the kill before I flameout...but that’s all part of the challenge. As for infinite fuel should always be banned in challenges!
And if so, can I XML the landing gear to be smaller. Here’s the problem: SP drag model is way too high, so in order to have a realistically performing aircraft, you have to build small...buuut the SP stock LG is way outsized when building small.
Ok, the laser beam cannons are a bit silly and it should roll a little faster, while pitching a little more slowly (I scraped the pilot off the inside of the canopy). It should also fly a little more slowly, especially at S.L., but there’s a lot of passion in this build and I appreciate that.
@Sarin sure. As for the flame color , you can change it but it won’t disappear completely. You can bury the engine (nudge it forward) towards the center of the fuse so that the plume is not visible or less noticeable than before.
Also the wing should have a greater chord and a bit more taper towards the tip and you should try and use a nose cone to form the tips themselves. Also you need to revamp the intakes, try a different profile and shape on the intake piece.
The Hunter T7 was the training version, so you should include the bar which splits the canopy and study the windshield, and hitch actually consists of two hoops side by side, not the single loop you have depicted. Also the tailpipe extends well aft of the tail, which you can see in you photo. Fix those and it will look a lot more like a T7, good luck.
@Tang0five perhaps, we could self publish online, I think we could write a better story than that Fifty Shades crap. We could definitely write the tactical aspects of the story (especially if you have British Army experience), fake the operational/strategic aspects, it might work...
Making an F-35B?
Nice P-38. Couldn’t find a Spitfire (Merlin or Griffon powered) or a P-51. Would have upvoted those as well!
He’s a nut, no one to be taken seriously. Conspiracy theorists want to believe what they believe and will argue anything and everything and will not listen to reason. And to attack you for swearing on the Bible? That drives me nuts...he probably believes in aliens, but not God?
Getting the 3-views should be the very first step. Trying to re-engineer a build after the fact is sometimes more difficult than a whole new build. Hope the 3 views help. If you need a tester, have a question or need some help, please let me know.
I always liked the Barrel, kind of an F-86 alternative from those ingenious Swedes.
I have no idea how you manage all the details on iOS. Nice work as always.
@AikoFoxNeko good. Now, you should work on flight characteristics. In order to attain realism in your replicas, you need to make them reasonably easier to takeoff and land, plus turn realistically. There are ways of doing all those things in SP. Since you’re trying to build a Blackbird (by no means an easy build), download this 3-view of the jet. It has a scale next to it which is vitally important in getting proportions correct—in SP, 2 units equal 1 meter. Don’t get caught up in details, just get the proportions of the major parts, fuselage, wings, tail, landing gear placement correct. The Blueprints sure is great for 3-views, almost everything is on there.
What’s your old handle?
Here’s the same pack, someone added a structural wing. Good luck
Here is a useful engine pack I’ve used in the past.
@AikoFoxNeko and you have not yet discovered that you can search “parts” in SP. Both structural wings with control surfaces and more powerful engines are freely available for you to use. Go to highest rated builds of all time, find a parts pack (many towards the top of the list), click on the “Parts” tag. That’s what I did when I built this on iOS.
@AikoFoxNeko there’s no difference between planes flying 800 mph or 2000 mph in SP. Besides, in RL, the different airspeed regimes are around .8 M to M 1.0 (transonic), then faster than Mach 1.0 (supersonic), and faster than around Mach 4 (hypersonic), all of which actually don’t correlate at all in SP. There are no Mach effects, no rapid increase in drag in transonic flight, no Mach tuck and no shockwave. Going faster simply increases drag on an exponential curve and requires an exponential power increase. If you can build an 800 mph airplane in SP, you can build a 2,000 mph in SP. The difficult part is building an airplane that can take off well (i.e., rotates at/around 200 mph or less, accelerates realistically, is controllable on takeoff...no wild swerving) and land well (controllable in pitch, roll and yaw at approach speeds—around 200 mph or less, has enough nose up trim to fly hands off, enough pitch authority to flare and not bang the nosegear or explode on touchdown and is controllable on touchdown). THAT’S the challenge in SP. Flying faster than 800 mph in SP is not a challenge. All you need is to XML edit structural wings and engine power. Anyone can do that, no problem.
Put the rear landing gear much closer to the CoM, as in RL. Then, the aircraft can pivot around them at a much lower speed on takeoff and fly.
A reverse engineered B-29 with turboprops and a radar antenna...very interesting. Too bad the yokes got attached at the wrong point, otherwise I really like the cockpit. But, what are the two red crescents in the cockpit supposed to be? Also, accelerates too quickly. But it flies nicely.
Looks great, the J50 restriction really hurts your build here. I really appreciate your audacity in entering a jet that can’t turn well into this tourney. I entered an “F-100”...notice the quotes ...but chickened out because I wanted a shot at winning. Props to you for sticking to your guns!
Gee, why did you stop at one gun? If you want to win this you should have loaded it out with 4 guns, the max for this challenge. I like the looks though.
Looks great, like a T-50, in my book. Flies well (I would have detuned the elevator by 50% for realism). Nice work, I like it.
@BogdanX here you go again, your 12 hour reminder, thanks again in advance!
@BogdanX any way you can overlay a 3 view over this build and tell me what I would need to change for accuracy?
Not bad!
I like the 450 hp option better...more realistic, but I can see why you went with the higher power, much snappier and easier to fly! Nice work at any rate!
A little faster than the real thing, but beautiful work, was able to land it successfully on the first try, so I appreciate the fact you included the increased drag on the tail skid.
I like it. I like it a lot.
Of course it’s all academic and not up to us to decide.
@F104Deathtrap sure. That way people have to think before they post, otherwise they lose their opportunity; at the same time it doesn’t stink of censorship.
A limit is fine, but 3 is a better limit than 1, IMHO. If it’s limited too much, it’ll have the opposite effect than intended, that is, to kill the forum traffic.
Very easy to fly assault landings to Bandit Airfield. Fun to fly, I like the work with the drag reduction, accelerates pretty realistically.
@ChiChiWerx yeah, quality build, really, really good, your best so far. Lands easily, as well (I.e., not impossible).
Great build, flies very realistically. How fast have you gotten this? I can get to 400 mph at around 10,000' or so.
@Simba4999 I realize that, but I can’t bring myself to do that; there has to be a hint of realism in my creations, which means they need to be able to takeoff and land.
@Sarin as much as you think you need. AI dogfights usually take a lot longer than in RL, however not as long as what a builder might usually equip a plane with. I go for a light fuel load to keep weight down, wing loading low and maneuverability high. Hopefully that helps my build get the kill before I flameout...but that’s all part of the challenge. As for infinite fuel should always be banned in challenges!
Great build, this thing is going to be lethal in the tourney!
@Tang0five no worries, thanks! 😃👍. I think I’m finally done building F-100s...but I already thought I was done with Huns until I saw this challenge!
@Sarin read this: Infinite Fuel, The Dumbest Thing in SP
And if so, can I XML the landing gear to be smaller. Here’s the problem: SP drag model is way too high, so in order to have a realistically performing aircraft, you have to build small...buuut the SP stock LG is way outsized when building small.
Does it need landing gear or be able to takeoff or land?
Ok, the laser beam cannons are a bit silly and it should roll a little faster, while pitching a little more slowly (I scraped the pilot off the inside of the canopy). It should also fly a little more slowly, especially at S.L., but there’s a lot of passion in this build and I appreciate that.
Here’s an M-7, which I think you have a few already, but it’s the closest I could find, sorry.
That’s where the engine on most jets is anyways, more towards the center of the fuselage.
@Sarin sure. As for the flame color , you can change it but it won’t disappear completely. You can bury the engine (nudge it forward) towards the center of the fuse so that the plume is not visible or less noticeable than before.
Also the wing should have a greater chord and a bit more taper towards the tip and you should try and use a nose cone to form the tips themselves. Also you need to revamp the intakes, try a different profile and shape on the intake piece.
The Hunter T7 was the training version, so you should include the bar which splits the canopy and study the windshield, and hitch actually consists of two hoops side by side, not the single loop you have depicted. Also the tailpipe extends well aft of the tail, which you can see in you photo. Fix those and it will look a lot more like a T7, good luck.
Don’t get it, how the heck do you fire the main gun???
@Mrjace22 how are they impossible?
Made my iPhone 8 crash...how did you even manage to build it? It doesn’t even fit in my designer view.
Absolutely fantastic, we see far too few WWI builds.
Nice build, well thought out, keep building!
@ThomasRoderick thanks!
Very nice!
@Tang0five perhaps, we could self publish online, I think we could write a better story than that Fifty Shades crap. We could definitely write the tactical aspects of the story (especially if you have British Army experience), fake the operational/strategic aspects, it might work...