Juuuust a little too fast and high-performing...the real thing flies like a pig! I worked with an RAF WSO/RIO who had flown on these and was subsequently out of a flying job when her squadron transitioned to Typhoon and she was not laudatory about its ability to turn or burn!
There's only one HF-24 on the site that I can find, so it would be a unique build. I was thinking about building one myself, as I think the platform can handle it--just a few tricky spots, such as the exhausts, but I think it could be done.
The attach point is at the back of the intake, the other side from the open end. You have to attach them to a fuse block, then stick that assembly where you want it on your build.
Yeah...this should be called a P-84 Thunderjet, because this is exactly what Alexander Seversky had in mind when he created the P-84, a jet-powered Thunderbolt.
@vonhubert I'm working on an Su-11 now, if/when I encounter problems with the landing gear, I will post it unlisted and tag you. I am sure to have problems.
@vonhubert I fixed this one, it was my JA37. I fixed it by using the stock double tire wheel instead of 2 resizeable wheels for the nose gear, which instantly solved my veering problems. However, I might need help on my current build, will let you know. BTW, do you know what causes the resizeable wheels to veer at high speeds when used for custom built landing gear? Also, how do you avoid this problem?
I have to ask you to clarify how you build your gear doors. I see you use two rotators, stacked, I think, but not sure how one rotator moves before the other.
I've done it. You need to employ the right tactics...visually sight the missile early, fly straight at the smoke trail, right before it's going to hit you (3-5 seconds prior), execute a break turn to put your aircraft's flight path 90 degrees to the missile's flight path. Your advantage is that you are flying much more slowly than the missile, so your turn radius is much smaller than the missile's and you're presenting the sharpest turn possible to the missile right prior to impact. The missile is traveling so fast, it just can't turn that sharply to hit you. The second method is to fly >20,000' and 1,000 mph. But in the SAM evasion mission, I've yet had the time to even zoom climb that high and accelerate before I have to start maneuvering. By the way, these are the same two basic tactics taught fighter pilots to evade missiles...
@AerodynamicallyConfused hmmm...interesting. I'll have to go back and look again. Much of the flying footage was taken during actual combat missions over Germany by the combat camera crews and the film also uses Luftwaffe footage. The B-17 crash landing was flown by Paul Mantz, a famous Hollywood stunt flyer...later died filming an attempted landing in the "Phoenix" in "Flight of the Phoenix". Could be FW-190s, which look a lot like P-47s...heck, could even be P-47s, as you say, not sure. Sure doesn't detract from the movie for me, at least not so much. The flying scenes are good enough that they are impactful, are interesting, drive the story forward. I was most drawn to the stresses of WWII bomber combat, command problems and team-building the movie spends most of its time on and are very true to life. But I will look out of P-47s the next time I watch the movie!
@WalrusAircraft that's good. I've only collaborated with Kevinairlines in the past, but I think he's still in school because I am sure my slowness aggravates him...I have responsibilities and cannot spend every hour I have on the PC. I do have an idea for a little done theme--Golden Age racers. The only problem is that they're rather small, probably no more than 40' wingspan. I've also been considering the F-105, Su-9 or F-104. Do you have any ideas?
I like it...it's an alternative with the problems and compromises of conventional shapes (can't do convex, can't adjust the third side, etc., etc.). Anyone can make a perfectly shaped airplane by using more polygons, which is what Sauce is doing here. If he used two or three the number of parts, some of that "bumpiness" would be gone, but as it is right now, I think this is no worse and probably more accurate a shape than just about any other Viper on the site.
Juuuust a little too fast and high-performing...the real thing flies like a pig! I worked with an RAF WSO/RIO who had flown on these and was subsequently out of a flying job when her squadron transitioned to Typhoon and she was not laudatory about its ability to turn or burn!
Beautiful build
Wow, nice Hunter, looks great!
Nice companion build!
There's only one HF-24 on the site that I can find, so it would be a unique build. I was thinking about building one myself, as I think the platform can handle it--just a few tricky spots, such as the exhausts, but I think it could be done.
@AviownCorp yes, the HAL HF-24 Marut.
This thing is on hyperspeed...all the time, from takeoff, to missile launching, to landing! Have you considered building a Marut?
Oooohhhh...it's soooo cuuuute!
The attach point is at the back of the intake, the other side from the open end. You have to attach them to a fuse block, then stick that assembly where you want it on your build.
Very beautiful!
@grizzlitn you're welcome, nice build, very fun to fly.
@BogdanX thanks! I guess all the agonizing over the shape was worth it, though I now wish I had made the canards very slightly larger!
@BogdanX I'm curious as to how accurately this build came out...might you do the comparison with the 3 view drawing for this one?
Be sure to check out the successor post armed with a torpedo...perfect combo here with the airplane and weapon!
You also need to build some aliens as well!
Yeah...this should be called a P-84 Thunderjet, because this is exactly what Alexander Seversky had in mind when he created the P-84, a jet-powered Thunderbolt.
@vonhubert I'm working on an Su-11 now, if/when I encounter problems with the landing gear, I will post it unlisted and tag you. I am sure to have problems.
@vonhubert I fixed this one, it was my JA37. I fixed it by using the stock double tire wheel instead of 2 resizeable wheels for the nose gear, which instantly solved my veering problems. However, I might need help on my current build, will let you know. BTW, do you know what causes the resizeable wheels to veer at high speeds when used for custom built landing gear? Also, how do you avoid this problem?
@XYL 这可能是一个问题，但飞机从未实际建成
I have to ask you to clarify how you build your gear doors. I see you use two rotators, stacked, I think, but not sure how one rotator moves before the other.
PC version
I just downloaded it, it works great!
Great!
Sorry, should have asked this first: Are you trying to post pic in a forum post? Or are you trying to make a logo?
Well, type in "imgur.com" and register for an account.
I've done it. You need to employ the right tactics...visually sight the missile early, fly straight at the smoke trail, right before it's going to hit you (3-5 seconds prior), execute a break turn to put your aircraft's flight path 90 degrees to the missile's flight path. Your advantage is that you are flying much more slowly than the missile, so your turn radius is much smaller than the missile's and you're presenting the sharpest turn possible to the missile right prior to impact. The missile is traveling so fast, it just can't turn that sharply to hit you. The second method is to fly >20,000' and 1,000 mph. But in the SAM evasion mission, I've yet had the time to even zoom climb that high and accelerate before I have to start maneuvering. By the way, these are the same two basic tactics taught fighter pilots to evade missiles...
OK, I understand...first step, do you have an imgur account? If not, get one, that's how I do it.
What problem are you having?
Easy to land provided you use full aft trim and full flaps, touchdown below 150 and keep the stick aft...nothin' to it! Nice!
I've built--but never posted a G.91 myself--this one is better...simply elegant!
Molto bene!
@WalrusAircraft I'm partial for the Airship Battleship, if you are.
Don't see many of these on the site...nice!
@Synthex4060 thanks!
Cool, thanks. So you're using extra VTOL engines to get the power boost and the XML modded exhaust nozzles to get the large plumes, thanks!
Quick question: How do you do the "afterburner" setting? Well, not how do you activate it...how do you build it?
I'm partial for US aircraft, but this one looks awesome!
Love the Steampunk vibe!
@AerodynamicallyConfused hmmm...interesting. I'll have to go back and look again. Much of the flying footage was taken during actual combat missions over Germany by the combat camera crews and the film also uses Luftwaffe footage. The B-17 crash landing was flown by Paul Mantz, a famous Hollywood stunt flyer...later died filming an attempted landing in the "Phoenix" in "Flight of the Phoenix". Could be FW-190s, which look a lot like P-47s...heck, could even be P-47s, as you say, not sure. Sure doesn't detract from the movie for me, at least not so much. The flying scenes are good enough that they are impactful, are interesting, drive the story forward. I was most drawn to the stresses of WWII bomber combat, command problems and team-building the movie spends most of its time on and are very true to life. But I will look out of P-47s the next time I watch the movie!
Impressive.
Flies nice, looks good and the wing fold mechanism is fantastic!
@WalrusAircraft I like the idea of something creative, haven't done anything like that yet...Steampunk airship sounds fun. Any specific ideas?
A little difficult to tell from the screenshots, but the general shape looks spot on, really like what you did with the cowling.
@WalrusAircraft that's good. I've only collaborated with Kevinairlines in the past, but I think he's still in school because I am sure my slowness aggravates him...I have responsibilities and cannot spend every hour I have on the PC. I do have an idea for a little done theme--Golden Age racers. The only problem is that they're rather small, probably no more than 40' wingspan. I've also been considering the F-105, Su-9 or F-104. Do you have any ideas?
@WalrusAircraft not sure...I have a long list and not enough time!
Just be nice, spend time with her and she'll eventually come around...worked for me!
I have to agree with @Zandgard , the landing gear needs to be longer and beefier
It looks good when flying! Though you might have saved a few parts, it's a learning process and I commend you for trying it out
Nice, both look very good.
I like it...it's an alternative with the problems and compromises of conventional shapes (can't do convex, can't adjust the third side, etc., etc.). Anyone can make a perfectly shaped airplane by using more polygons, which is what Sauce is doing here. If he used two or three the number of parts, some of that "bumpiness" would be gone, but as it is right now, I think this is no worse and probably more accurate a shape than just about any other Viper on the site.