@Badplanesdotnet
Smack talk already? Nice to be confident.
KIDDING.
.
I'm not worried about how well it does, I have another possible contender waiting in the wings.
It is all about the challenge of making a plane that can dogfight and not have it's wings ripped of without using XML at all, not even on the wings.
@TyDillon13GEICO
Odd.
Propellers don't tend to snap unless they are too close to something else.
If you are 'stacking' engines try moving them a little further apart, because contra-rotating engines propellers sometimes collide when they change pitch.
.
As for the wings, it is the biggest problem non-xml wings have, they tend to snap off under high stress, which is why I have built a aircraft with a conventional wing instead of one of my weird creations.
If I can work out how to fix that problem or make it go away, you may see one of those here yet, if we are allowed more than one entry.
@TyDillon13GEICO
What sort of issues?
I know that multi section wings don't work very well with non XML wings, they have a tendency to fold up under any kind of stress.
Was looking at a YouTube clip on the SR-71.
Turns out the 'Peace Maker' is just a few mph faster at altitude than the Black Bird.
.
Another useless piece of information, brought to you by me!
There is still room to add Cleaver missiles, but I have no idea how they would go firing downward at speed and placing them would mean another set of doors.
.
Cleavers work OK from a stationary or slow moving launch platform, but they are rather big things, even if you shrink them a bit.
.
Maybe a 'elevator' system like the Interceptors have, but instead of vertical mounting, mount them in the normal fashion.
The 'elevator' would bring them level with the hull of the aircraft for conventional firing.
.
NOTE! I do not recommend launching weapons with the Ramjet running, it could be messy. lol
A LOT of effort put into this.
I have one problem. The engines don't want to work for me in it's original state.
They work fine on land (I was working on something and that is where it spawned in) and everything else works nicely.
Going to get those engines working and go for a ride. ;)
.
Edit: forgot that my PC does not really like high part count models.
Loading it takes some time and it looks like saving the model is going to be somewhat problematic, otherwise, impressive model.
As for the engines, I kind of remember there being a setting for how much air the engine needs to run. If that was xml'd on the engines, they would work underwater. I think we need the advice of an XML wizard. lol
You do know you can only post 3 planes a day right?
.
Happy that someone has made a variation on one of my planes, NOT happy that it has been made ugly. :F
As far as I know, there are only two places where you can target the Fleet from, Wright Airport and Wright Isles North Runway, but from the North Runway you will have to add more height to be able to get a target.
@Viper3000ad
Custom flaps as in separated flaps for the wings like on my Torpedo Bomber?
.
Doable, probably look pretty good too with a bit of effort.
.
Yeah, the wings were a bit of a pain to do, mostly the curves on the end.
Had to do a lot of nudging and tweaking to close up the gaps, but it came out really nice in the end.
Time for a little bragging I think.
This one turned out rather well and IMO, it is a pretty looking aircraft.
I have managed to land it a few times, but it was pretty close each time.
It is easy to come in a little too steep and 'bounce' it back into the air.
I should have fitted air brakes maybe.
.
.
Who wants a weaponized version?
I've had few ideas on how to add weapons and keep it looking pretty-ish.
Horizontal Rain is what you get when the wind is blowing like it is trying blow your house away AND it is raining very heavily at the same time.
When it is like that, the rain seems to fly horizontally and can hit things that usually never get wet.
Most people have seen or experienced it at one time or another.
.
.
I think it is time for me to make something BIG, I have been doing fighter sized stuff a lot recently.
It took me ages to think of a name for this Aussie fighter.
I was going to call it 'Drop Bear' and load it up with air to ground instead of air to air stuff, but a lot of non-Aussies would not get the joke.
So I went with the name of a deadly Australian snake instead, the Dugite.
Apparently out of the 11 top most venomous snakes, Australia has FIVE of them, with the Dugite being number 3 on the list (wikipedia).
Come to Australia and meet the sheep. They are not dangerous. Promise!
Wondering why no red centers on the roundels?
Apparently during WWII, some Aussie planes were mistaken for Japanese aircraft due to the red centers and were fired on.
The red centers were removed to prevent the same mistake from happening again.
So , as noted in the edit to the description, I goofed. D'oh! /homer off.
I also discovered that during WWII an Australian aircraft was mistaken for a Japanese aircraft due to the RED center of the Australian Roundel, so the red bit was removed, leaving a blue roundel with a white center.
When I make my next fictional WWII aircraft, it will probably have that on it instead.
@Ownedpilot Agreed!
I am extremely impressed with this.
It takes a bit of getting used to to get it to fly and it is noisy, but it works!
A 'steampunk' creation without the steam.
Very nice.
The separated flaps/ailerons from the wings for instance. I've done this ONCE before.
I think it looks good and it is one less thing that needs to be done by adding strips that pushes the part count up needlessly, well not as much as it could.
Some builders are big on details, me, not so much, but I'm getting better at it.
Constructive criticism and advice is welcome.
@SGANicocchi
I know, I know, don't rub it in.
I owned them back when they were cheap to get, wrote off the sedan in an accident and the coupe ended up needing parts for it that I couldn't afford to get.
When I tried to sell it back then, I was lucky to $600 (Australian) for it.
These days even just a rolling shell is worth an unreasonable amount of money and lets not mention how much a roadworthy one is worth, even in bad condition.
I had two versions of the old 1974 Datsun 240k GT, the 4 door sedan and the 2 door coupe.
The coupe was better speed wise, because the sedan's front end used to start to 'float' a bit at about 180 kmh.
The coupe on the other hand was steady as a rock at that speed.
I miss that car the most out of all the cars I have owned I think.
The least power I have managed to get stable flight on is around 30% on auto pilot.
It flies a little nose up doing that but it does not seem to go down or up too fast at all and using so little power fuel use is minimal.
Had a rough day at work today, so I tried to make something that reflected my mood, in other words, something rough and ugly.
For some reason none of them flew well at all.
Then this happened, sort of popped out of my head.
There are a LOT of different aircraft that influenced this build, some of them are even real.
Turns out what someone once said is true, "If it looks good, it will probably fly well".
Pretty nice, super fast too.
Autopilot hates it when the afterburners are active tho.
Without autopilot, solid as a rock all the way to max speed, which I don't think I've gotten to.....yet.
Maybe tomorrow after work.
The tiny jets near the tail are there pretending to be exhausts.
They do not actually do anything except look good and add a little detail to the plane that I have never done before.
Anyone know if there is a way to 'switch off' the sound on those?
My Father, a former model aircraft enthusiast, has told me that he had a control model called the 'Shrike' I think it was, that had a similar wing structure to this and flew pretty much the same.
I am going to try and find a plan on the interwebs.
Interesting fact.
Australia does have a small handful of Fighter aircraft it has designed and built.
I'm thinking I might make one of those, being a good Aussie bloke.
Seriously, thanks for the info, but I bet there are more people here that work in Imperial than Metric and while I do like the idea of being able to work in Metric, I reckon running too many mods might put more strain on my ancient PC than it can handle.
I'm currently running a 1st Gen i5 750 CPU.
Lynnfield I think the codename is.
Kinda tells how old my system is. lol
More info I just worked out. In panel size edit mode, 1 'click' (the noise the game makes when it reshapes the panel/wing) = 1.2 feet.
Before the question is asked, I'm using imperial measurements because that is what the game uses.
I'm in Australia and we use the metric systems here.
I sometimes get confused working out sizes because of it. lol
Ask and ye shall receive.
Not as pretty as a real one, the part count would have skyrocketed just doing the wing ends alone, but it's pretty sweet to fly.
EDIT: looked at plans again. Front wings are a whole TWO FEET TOO WIDE (front to back)! Oops!
@BlackhattAircraft
As in Sopwith Pup?
Something to think about I guess.
This plane was built using info from two plans, one showing an odd tricycle gear setup for both sides, so I suspect they are two different models of the same aircraft.
I like the way this turned out.
I may make another one, but stick closer to the plans I have, as in actually work out how wide the wings are and so on.
I'm very impressed.
Mum says it's very nice looking and reminds her of a friends control line Lancaster.
This is high praise from my Mum if you haven't already guessed.
@Badplanesdotnet
Smack talk already? Nice to be confident.
KIDDING.
.
I'm not worried about how well it does, I have another possible contender waiting in the wings.
It is all about the challenge of making a plane that can dogfight and not have it's wings ripped of without using XML at all, not even on the wings.
@TyDillon13GEICO
Odd.
Propellers don't tend to snap unless they are too close to something else.
If you are 'stacking' engines try moving them a little further apart, because contra-rotating engines propellers sometimes collide when they change pitch.
.
As for the wings, it is the biggest problem non-xml wings have, they tend to snap off under high stress, which is why I have built a aircraft with a conventional wing instead of one of my weird creations.
If I can work out how to fix that problem or make it go away, you may see one of those here yet, if we are allowed more than one entry.
@TyDillon13GEICO
What sort of issues?
I know that multi section wings don't work very well with non XML wings, they have a tendency to fold up under any kind of stress.
@EchoWhiskey11
Next question.
No XML Mods means no structural wings XML edited for control surfaces, yes or no?
If no, that will make things interesting for wing structures and limit speed due to wing wobble.
.
EDIT: Never mind I got it sorted.
@EchoWhiskey11
Quote: 'No more than 6 guns of any type'.
Does that mean only six guns total or 6 guns of each type?
I think it means 6 guns total, just want to make sure.
Was looking at a YouTube clip on the SR-71.
Turns out the 'Peace Maker' is just a few mph faster at altitude than the Black Bird.
.
Another useless piece of information, brought to you by me!
There is still room to add Cleaver missiles, but I have no idea how they would go firing downward at speed and placing them would mean another set of doors.
.
Cleavers work OK from a stationary or slow moving launch platform, but they are rather big things, even if you shrink them a bit.
.
Maybe a 'elevator' system like the Interceptors have, but instead of vertical mounting, mount them in the normal fashion.
The 'elevator' would bring them level with the hull of the aircraft for conventional firing.
.
NOTE! I do not recommend launching weapons with the Ramjet running, it could be messy. lol
@YL Thanks for the information, I'll try that when I crawl out of my cave in the morning.
A LOT of effort put into this.
I have one problem. The engines don't want to work for me in it's original state.
They work fine on land (I was working on something and that is where it spawned in) and everything else works nicely.
Going to get those engines working and go for a ride. ;)
.
Edit: forgot that my PC does not really like high part count models.
Loading it takes some time and it looks like saving the model is going to be somewhat problematic, otherwise, impressive model.
As for the engines, I kind of remember there being a setting for how much air the engine needs to run. If that was xml'd on the engines, they would work underwater. I think we need the advice of an XML wizard. lol
You do know you can only post 3 planes a day right?
.
Happy that someone has made a variation on one of my planes, NOT happy that it has been made ugly. :F
Updated version coming soon.
.
The next one will be a sort of sister ship to this one, but with a few changes/additions. ;)
As far as I know, there are only two places where you can target the Fleet from, Wright Airport and Wright Isles North Runway, but from the North Runway you will have to add more height to be able to get a target.
+1@Viper3000ad
Custom flaps as in separated flaps for the wings like on my Torpedo Bomber?
.
Doable, probably look pretty good too with a bit of effort.
.
Yeah, the wings were a bit of a pain to do, mostly the curves on the end.
Had to do a lot of nudging and tweaking to close up the gaps, but it came out really nice in the end.
Time for a little bragging I think.
This one turned out rather well and IMO, it is a pretty looking aircraft.
I have managed to land it a few times, but it was pretty close each time.
It is easy to come in a little too steep and 'bounce' it back into the air.
I should have fitted air brakes maybe.
.
.
Who wants a weaponized version?
I've had few ideas on how to add weapons and keep it looking pretty-ish.
Horizontal Rain is what you get when the wind is blowing like it is trying blow your house away AND it is raining very heavily at the same time.
When it is like that, the rain seems to fly horizontally and can hit things that usually never get wet.
Most people have seen or experienced it at one time or another.
.
.
I think it is time for me to make something BIG, I have been doing fighter sized stuff a lot recently.
It took me ages to think of a name for this Aussie fighter.
I was going to call it 'Drop Bear' and load it up with air to ground instead of air to air stuff, but a lot of non-Aussies would not get the joke.
So I went with the name of a deadly Australian snake instead, the Dugite.
Apparently out of the 11 top most venomous snakes, Australia has FIVE of them, with the Dugite being number 3 on the list (wikipedia).
Come to Australia and meet the sheep. They are not dangerous. Promise!
Rebuilt plane almost from scratch.
Stripped fuselage of everything and made an assembly of it.
The new one flies MUCH better.
I made the flaps on the tail smaller.
This seems to have fixed it.
For now.
Wondering why no red centers on the roundels?
Apparently during WWII, some Aussie planes were mistaken for Japanese aircraft due to the red centers and were fired on.
The red centers were removed to prevent the same mistake from happening again.
@WarHawk95
LOL!
No, I'm Australian. I goofed on the markings, as I mentioned in a previous comment here.
So , as noted in the edit to the description, I goofed. D'oh! /homer off.
I also discovered that during WWII an Australian aircraft was mistaken for a Japanese aircraft due to the RED center of the Australian Roundel, so the red bit was removed, leaving a blue roundel with a white center.
When I make my next fictional WWII aircraft, it will probably have that on it instead.
@Ownedpilot Agreed!
I am extremely impressed with this.
It takes a bit of getting used to to get it to fly and it is noisy, but it works!
A 'steampunk' creation without the steam.
Very nice.
Upvoted because being vaccinated is important.
+1So, I'm trying 'new' things, new for me that is.
The separated flaps/ailerons from the wings for instance. I've done this ONCE before.
I think it looks good and it is one less thing that needs to be done by adding strips that pushes the part count up needlessly, well not as much as it could.
Some builders are big on details, me, not so much, but I'm getting better at it.
Constructive criticism and advice is welcome.
@SGANicocchi
No worries, who knew they would be worth so much 15-20 years after I had mine?
@SGANicocchi
I know, I know, don't rub it in.
I owned them back when they were cheap to get, wrote off the sedan in an accident and the coupe ended up needing parts for it that I couldn't afford to get.
When I tried to sell it back then, I was lucky to $600 (Australian) for it.
These days even just a rolling shell is worth an unreasonable amount of money and lets not mention how much a roadworthy one is worth, even in bad condition.
I had two versions of the old 1974 Datsun 240k GT, the 4 door sedan and the 2 door coupe.
The coupe was better speed wise, because the sedan's front end used to start to 'float' a bit at about 180 kmh.
The coupe on the other hand was steady as a rock at that speed.
I miss that car the most out of all the cars I have owned I think.
The least power I have managed to get stable flight on is around 30% on auto pilot.
It flies a little nose up doing that but it does not seem to go down or up too fast at all and using so little power fuel use is minimal.
Had a rough day at work today, so I tried to make something that reflected my mood, in other words, something rough and ugly.
For some reason none of them flew well at all.
Then this happened, sort of popped out of my head.
There are a LOT of different aircraft that influenced this build, some of them are even real.
Turns out what someone once said is true, "If it looks good, it will probably fly well".
Pretty nice, super fast too.
Autopilot hates it when the afterburners are active tho.
Without autopilot, solid as a rock all the way to max speed, which I don't think I've gotten to.....yet.
Maybe tomorrow after work.
@Randomdoggo
@CRJ900Pilot
@Notaleopard
@belugasub
Thanks for the upvotes.
Has anyone managed to get one of the motors to blow up yet?
I've done it once, darned if I know how.
I was doing some pretty harsh things and it went 'boom'.
Suprized the heck out of me when it happened :))
@Randomdoggo
Thanks!
Guess I'm going to have to try and make something a little special for hitting Silver. ;)
5 engines running propellers, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 back to front.
Makes for an unexpectedly nice sound.
The tiny jets near the tail are there pretending to be exhausts.
They do not actually do anything except look good and add a little detail to the plane that I have never done before.
Anyone know if there is a way to 'switch off' the sound on those?
@Mumpsy
Very nice.
Looks great and is very stable and nice to fly.
Nice.
Reminds me a lot of one of the fighter aircraft in an Anime called 'Sky Crawlers'.
*downloads.
@USSR
Thanks :)
My Father, a former model aircraft enthusiast, has told me that he had a control model called the 'Shrike' I think it was, that had a similar wing structure to this and flew pretty much the same.
I am going to try and find a plan on the interwebs.
I've been wondering, what is it with the WeasleZone (?) and other youtube tags?
Should I tag a plane like this with one of them?
Info anyone?
EDIT: meh, tagged weaslezone :P
Interesting fact.
Australia does have a small handful of Fighter aircraft it has designed and built.
I'm thinking I might make one of those, being a good Aussie bloke.
Much better than the one I made.
Nice work.
EDIT: Flies OK, but you really need to have the outer engines working to get it off the ground.
Looks great in the air too.
@WarHawk95
@JamesBoa
Seriously, thanks for the info, but I bet there are more people here that work in Imperial than Metric and while I do like the idea of being able to work in Metric, I reckon running too many mods might put more strain on my ancient PC than it can handle.
I'm currently running a 1st Gen i5 750 CPU.
Lynnfield I think the codename is.
Kinda tells how old my system is. lol
@WarHawk95 Yay for metric. Thanks.
More info I just worked out. In panel size edit mode, 1 'click' (the noise the game makes when it reshapes the panel/wing) = 1.2 feet.
Before the question is asked, I'm using imperial measurements because that is what the game uses.
I'm in Australia and we use the metric systems here.
I sometimes get confused working out sizes because of it. lol
Heh. Upvoted because Star Wars.
@BlackhattAircraft
Ask and ye shall receive.
Not as pretty as a real one, the part count would have skyrocketed just doing the wing ends alone, but it's pretty sweet to fly.
EDIT: looked at plans again. Front wings are a whole TWO FEET TOO WIDE (front to back)! Oops!
@BlackhattAircraft
As in Sopwith Pup?
Something to think about I guess.
This plane was built using info from two plans, one showing an odd tricycle gear setup for both sides, so I suspect they are two different models of the same aircraft.
I like the way this turned out.
I may make another one, but stick closer to the plans I have, as in actually work out how wide the wings are and so on.
@JediWolf Not worried about that, people don't normally post planes that explode unless they really need help. lol
Far too many parts for my rather old PC to handle. Not going to be downloading this. Be interesting to see if you get that 'world record' though.
@JediWolf Went and had a look.
Nice work, I may download one when I am actually awake.
Pretty recent too, so I will not bother making one myself.
@MegaFox
@JediWolf
I know the plane you are talking about and I guess it does look a little bit like one of those.
I'm very impressed.
Mum says it's very nice looking and reminds her of a friends control line Lancaster.
This is high praise from my Mum if you haven't already guessed.