@randomusername Relativity is real. It has been studied and measured. Perhaps we humans don't understand it entirely, I do not know. What I do know is that if satellites did not account for time dilation, many things we use would not work. Right now, we live in an age where people look at science, decide they don't like what they see and make up their own story. Don't fall into that trap, challenge yourself to learn.
Relativity prevents objects with mass from approaching the speed of light. Through a phenomenon called time dilation, time begins to move slower a d slower for fast-moving objects.
This all might sound like sci-fi hocus pocus, but it is actually part of the GPS technology we take for granted every day. Distant satellites have to compensate for time dilation in order for GPS to work.
@Akali If you want to see your country as always righteously defending itself, that's ok. There are plenty of people here that view the USA in that way.
China has benefitted from prudent leadership, I hope that continues. Not only for China, but for the world. America and Russia tried to divide the planet, and many lives were wasted. As China emerges as the predominant empire, I hope for something better than the 20th century.
@Mattangi2 Well, they're very nice cars. Never owned a sports car myself, probably for the best because I am not a very good driver. But hey, at least I can drive stick.
@Akali "Since the War of Resistance Against Japan, China has been invaded and has never aggressed other countries on its own initiative."
Since 1945, China has invaded South Korea, Tibet and repeatedly invaded Vietnam and India. It is perfectly understandable to view one's own nation with pride, but it is also important to carefully study history.
Personally, I see China as a rising force. Not good, not bad, but growing into a leadership role and coming to terms with it. Your empire is on the rise as mine is in decline.
Many experienced builders rarely use the forums because most of the posts here aren't aircraft related. You can only put up with so many "L0lz dESpAC1t0" posts.
@jamesPLANESii The power vacuum left by the collapse of the aristocracy, the rise of extremist ideology and the failure of global markets had a stronger impact than the treaty. But yes, the treaty was awful.
@GINGER01 And she was good, in the late 30's. I totally agree with you, people had to work with what they had and you can't just call a "time out" to war for a few years to develop a better method of levelling enemy cities. B-17 was on hand, and it got the job done.
In an overly confrontational way, I'm just trying to get people to consider some of the more effective planes and strategies used back then.
The B-17 is among the most overrated designs of World War II. Built around the outrageously misguided idea that bombers could protect themselves in daylight raids, thousands of airmen were needlessly sacrificed in these machines. As a result of the aging technology and inept USAAF decision making, not only did the Flying Fortress carry tons of extra weight, but also extra men. The result was a plane that required more people than any other heavy bomber and delivered less bombs. Had its original designers been aware of later breakthroughs in wing design (as per the B-24) or US leadership simply changed the attack profile to nighttime raids (as per the Brits) the lackluster performance of the B-17 could've been improved. But the generals doubled-down and sold their gamble to the public as a "noble sacrifice."
There were numerous bombers that were safer and more effective even in the early months of the war. The de Havilland Mosquito, the Lancaster, even the (also poorly conceived) B-24 were better suited to the task. But the propaganda machine chose the B-17, and now, so do the movies.
@BlackhattAircraft Naw, I just read a lot. There are kids on here that know way more than I do. The main takeaway is the more you can control the shape of the wing, the more things your plane can do.
@BlackhattAircraft It is possible, but only for a specific circumstance. Wings turn speed into lift, so its a matter of the right amount of wing for the right speed. But wings are more than just lift, their shape determines how much speed you lose when you turn, how fast you can roll, all sorts of things. Besides, you don't want a plane that can only fly at one speed.
That's why planes have so many devices to change the wings. Flaps, slats, root extensions, boundary layer blowers, swing wings, air fences. The list goes on.
The way I handle it is I design the plane around its cruising speed, and try to balance the lift for that, then I use the trim tabs to adjust the lift from there. And of course flaps for takeoffs and landings
Do your parents know this is how you use the computer they bought for you?
@randomusername Relativity is real. It has been studied and measured. Perhaps we humans don't understand it entirely, I do not know. What I do know is that if satellites did not account for time dilation, many things we use would not work. Right now, we live in an age where people look at science, decide they don't like what they see and make up their own story. Don't fall into that trap, challenge yourself to learn.
Here
Relativity prevents objects with mass from approaching the speed of light. Through a phenomenon called time dilation, time begins to move slower a d slower for fast-moving objects.
Read about it here.
This all might sound like sci-fi hocus pocus, but it is actually part of the GPS technology we take for granted every day. Distant satellites have to compensate for time dilation in order for GPS to work.
+1I seem to recall someone using a sphere as the contact point for the wheel. I could be wrong.
MACHO MAN RANDY SAVAGE
+1@F4f879 You'd better find a replacement. How are we gonna smash dem nazis if we let Mustang production slow down?
+1A sports car that only turns left.
+2I am guilty of this. I apologize to everyone. I'm sorry.
+1@klm747klm747 Good luck
+1I don't trick or treat, but I do commune with my dark lord, Satan. Happy Halloween!
The simplest I can do for you is this: CLICK ME
Its actually two "doors" and each one requires 3 rotators. One goes up and is hidden within the plane while the other extends outward and is seen.
Actually, it's dress like Hotline Miami for me.
@MisterT You can only tag 3 at a time
At first, I thiught that screenshot was a photo!
+4Off Topic
I'm sorry you feel that way. I know lots of people on here that go out of their way to make new players feel welcome, especially the mods.
@TheDepressedPig I'm too tall for Miata. :(
I do like Mazda, though.
@Mattangi2 Gross. XD
@Akali If you want to see your country as always righteously defending itself, that's ok. There are plenty of people here that view the USA in that way.
China has benefitted from prudent leadership, I hope that continues. Not only for China, but for the world. America and Russia tried to divide the planet, and many lives were wasted. As China emerges as the predominant empire, I hope for something better than the 20th century.
@Mattangi2 Well, they're very nice cars. Never owned a sports car myself, probably for the best because I am not a very good driver. But hey, at least I can drive stick.
@Mattangi2 I take breaks.
@Mattangi2 Personally, I prefer the GTO. Any of the General Motors A-body muscle cars appeal more to me than the Mustang or Camaro. Anyway, I did specify "P-51"
@jamesPLANESii Indeed.
@Akali "Since the War of Resistance Against Japan, China has been invaded and has never aggressed other countries on its own initiative."
Since 1945, China has invaded South Korea, Tibet and repeatedly invaded Vietnam and India. It is perfectly understandable to view one's own nation with pride, but it is also important to carefully study history.
Personally, I see China as a rising force. Not good, not bad, but growing into a leadership role and coming to terms with it. Your empire is on the rise as mine is in decline.
Upvoting becuz 666
Jesus Tapdancing Christ
+1Gotcha covered. Next time, try the search tool.
Sweet ride
How does it land without landing gear?
War Thunder > World of Whatever
+5Many experienced builders rarely use the forums because most of the posts here aren't aircraft related. You can only put up with so many "L0lz dESpAC1t0" posts.
+1CLICK HERE
@jamesPLANESii The power vacuum left by the collapse of the aristocracy, the rise of extremist ideology and the failure of global markets had a stronger impact than the treaty. But yes, the treaty was awful.
Fallout New Vegas
+4@RamboJutter lololol
@GINGER01 Thanks. I was scrolling through youtube and came across an old Army training film you might find interesting.
@GINGER01 And she was good, in the late 30's. I totally agree with you, people had to work with what they had and you can't just call a "time out" to war for a few years to develop a better method of levelling enemy cities. B-17 was on hand, and it got the job done.
In an overly confrontational way, I'm just trying to get people to consider some of the more effective planes and strategies used back then.
The B-17 is among the most overrated designs of World War II. Built around the outrageously misguided idea that bombers could protect themselves in daylight raids, thousands of airmen were needlessly sacrificed in these machines. As a result of the aging technology and inept USAAF decision making, not only did the Flying Fortress carry tons of extra weight, but also extra men. The result was a plane that required more people than any other heavy bomber and delivered less bombs. Had its original designers been aware of later breakthroughs in wing design (as per the B-24) or US leadership simply changed the attack profile to nighttime raids (as per the Brits) the lackluster performance of the B-17 could've been improved. But the generals doubled-down and sold their gamble to the public as a "noble sacrifice."
There were numerous bombers that were safer and more effective even in the early months of the war. The de Havilland Mosquito, the Lancaster, even the (also poorly conceived) B-24 were better suited to the task. But the propaganda machine chose the B-17, and now, so do the movies.
+1@MAHADI Hey, thanks
Aw yisssssss
SEXY AIRPLANES CAN'T RESIST THIS ONE WEIRD TRICK
+2MEMES AREN'T COOL
@HistoricBirds I know some versions had split flaps. Can't confirm if all had them.
This is a cool post, but wikipedia had you covered from the beginning.
I would've spotlighted this, but you're higher than me.
+1@BlackhattAircraft Naw, I just read a lot. There are kids on here that know way more than I do. The main takeaway is the more you can control the shape of the wing, the more things your plane can do.
+1@BlackhattAircraft It is possible, but only for a specific circumstance. Wings turn speed into lift, so its a matter of the right amount of wing for the right speed. But wings are more than just lift, their shape determines how much speed you lose when you turn, how fast you can roll, all sorts of things. Besides, you don't want a plane that can only fly at one speed.
That's why planes have so many devices to change the wings. Flaps, slats, root extensions, boundary layer blowers, swing wings, air fences. The list goes on.
The way I handle it is I design the plane around its cruising speed, and try to balance the lift for that, then I use the trim tabs to adjust the lift from there. And of course flaps for takeoffs and landings
+1@SledDriver Thanks for making his day
@Jim1the1Squid If the legend is true, he created a cannon that could destroy the defenses of Snowstone Ice Base all the way from Wright Airport.