@ThomasRoderick I understand your logic and I can appreciate how you could find this out of place without many allied features (the fin is an enlarged mustang fin and the tail plane is I think from a typhoon or similar - I built this so long ago I can't remember now). However, if you imagine that Germany has been overthrown, all its existing surviving airframes were divided out and tested by the allies (Eric Winkle Brown flew a lot of them back to England) it didn't seem that big a stretch of the imagination to think that some of the more promising parts of the planes could be adopted / replicated by British aircraft companies into new designs for the continued war in the Pacific. That was my logic anyway :)
@HariTheSnakk thanks 😊 glad you liked it. I played for ages with a ram jet feature but couldn't get it to work to my satisfaction, may be a later version with it 😀
@Mousewithamachinegun123 Thanks =) It works on my Samsung S10, just tried it. As soon as i add a camo scheme and a detailed cockpit the part count always spirals upwards.
@EternalDarkness @SomeSPGuyWhoLikesLore @5cmPak38aufPzKpfwIISfl901 thanks for the upvotes and comments guys. I had fun with this build, still not got much time for SP but I'm still building :)
@Tridentgamer This build is over 5years old, im onto my third computer since i made this, i have no idea why the armed varients have disappeared and unfortunately due to the age of the build i have no way of getting them back.
@growthstarboard You are not incorrect but if you are clever and use the triangle method for the tapering wing section you can end up with the trailing edge at a constant depth and then this method still works (its what i do on 99% of my builds)
@StockPlanesRemastered thanks for the comment. I can appreciate that seaplanes of the era were fast (sneider trophy etc) but I can't help but think that the floats with all their drag and weight probably ended up being the limiting factor in top speeds. Glad you liked this one though.
@Tang0five cool, I look forward to seeing it. Im suffering from all the panelling pain with these wing shapes and now have the dreaded panelling camo to start...
@ThomasRoderick I dont think you need to worry about me stealing your code, i cant even find it... =) All it says in the input for the vtol unit is AGRV so i cant even work out how to edit the variables. This is why i avoid complicated funkycrap and stick with what i know. Thanks anyway.
@ThomasRoderick I tried the amended code and it still doesnt appear to work. I use a VTOL engine for the uplift mechanism, i input this code and rather than kick in after X amount of speed it just stays off.
@ThomasRoderick its the old way of identifying velocity / speed, i use it as; a) i used it before funky trees so im used to it, b) its simple and c) i dont know what else to do =)
@ThomasRoderick thanks for the reply, I have taken a few days to mull it over. It all boils down to what anti grav actually is. In its basic form I would imagine it is a system that increases the opposing force put upon an object by the force of gravity when an object is stationary. In this case it reduces the force of gravity somewhere in the region of 50-75% Now this is solely for static purposes. When an aircraft is moving the anti gravity device would have a hard time deciphering which force acting upon it is from gravity or centrifugal / centripetal or similar, thus the device when acting in a vehicle in motion acts to reduce the applied force but for simplicity it's called anti gravity.
As for your second message, my head hurts, no idea what that means / does.
@BogdanX Thanks Bogdan, yeah i agree with the wings, i need to build a better WW2 fighter wing - this one felt a bit bodged for the trailing edge especially and as you say I have used it before so its getting a bit old. The prop is scale - believe it or not, the initial Typhoon iib had a 3 bladed prop which they changed to 4 blades later on to reduce diameter (or so i understand) but i based this on a drawing of the iib. Flaps are linked to an airbrake inside which increases drag above the CofG thus adding a bit of pitch up and slowing the aircraft down as well - I agree though that on this build its not as noticable as maybe it should have been. I was struggling with the takeoff speed, as i wanted the vtol units to kick in at 90mph ish for landing i couldnt have it taking off at a lower speed, the pesky vtols dont like being set lower than this as it makes the plane "float" around on the ground and it ends up being impossible to land - essentially its a compromise but again, i could have spend a lot more time trying to tweak this a bit. THanks again for your feedback, nice to hear from you again.
@SilverStar Thanks for the comment, are you using full flaps on landing (i also use 1/2 trim down and around 10% throttle) and it lands at around 160mph / 130kts.
@WinsWings Thanks =) first time i've won a competition for a long time. Thanks also for posting the results promptly. I look forward to the next competition.
@ThomasRoderick @WinsWings Thanks guys, i appreciate the comments and upvotes, glad you liked the build, it was really fun to put together for a change. In relation to the whole pusher concept, that was mainly a reflection of the SBD Type 300 layout which i was using as the basis of the design ( i assume that by moving the prop, hub etc rearward it can compensate for the long nose and allows the CofG to move further rearward), i appreciate that bailing out would be hazardous but in those days i think the concept of leaving the aircraft came second to everything else.
@HololiveFan @Kangy @KingOfTypos All the hard work to make the build and people are getting hung up on a symbol used on the fin... The colour scheme is based on authentic WWII BF109/FW190 schemes, this includes the swastika, hence it was included here for some authentic realism. I dont get the whole generational thing of having to destroy and remove history as it represented "bad things", it happened, the symbols, statues and monuments are a reminder that bad things happen and should not be repeated - this snowflake approach baffles me.
@Tang0five I didnt intentionally relate it to Geology, i named it after a band i have been listening to =) Most of the time a name is the hardest part of the build.
@ThomasRoderick I understand your logic and I can appreciate how you could find this out of place without many allied features (the fin is an enlarged mustang fin and the tail plane is I think from a typhoon or similar - I built this so long ago I can't remember now). However, if you imagine that Germany has been overthrown, all its existing surviving airframes were divided out and tested by the allies (Eric Winkle Brown flew a lot of them back to England) it didn't seem that big a stretch of the imagination to think that some of the more promising parts of the planes could be adopted / replicated by British aircraft companies into new designs for the continued war in the Pacific. That was my logic anyway :)
+1@Tanglednebula19 thanks, it's certainly one of my better builds, enjoy.
@HariTheSnakk thanks 😊 glad you liked it. I played for ages with a ram jet feature but couldn't get it to work to my satisfaction, may be a later version with it 😀
+1@Mousewithamachinegun123 Thanks =) It works on my Samsung S10, just tried it. As soon as i add a camo scheme and a detailed cockpit the part count always spirals upwards.
+1@Ace117 yeah, fun to return the fighter into the bay though :)
@EternalDarkness @SomeSPGuyWhoLikesLore @5cmPak38aufPzKpfwIISfl901 thanks for the upvotes and comments guys. I had fun with this build, still not got much time for SP but I'm still building :)
@Skykid028 Help yourself, im pretty sure this was made prior to hollow fuselage pieces and such like being in the game.
+1@Tridentgamer This build is over 5years old, im onto my third computer since i made this, i have no idea why the armed varients have disappeared and unfortunately due to the age of the build i have no way of getting them back.
@TheTomatoLover thanks, you went way back to find this build though :)
+1@Blueshift thanks :)
@growthstarboard heres an example of what i mentioned about the trailing edge method.
@growthstarboard You are not incorrect but if you are clever and use the triangle method for the tapering wing section you can end up with the trailing edge at a constant depth and then this method still works (its what i do on 99% of my builds)
@WisconsinStatePolice lol, what does that mean?
@StockPlanesRemastered thanks for the comment. I can appreciate that seaplanes of the era were fast (sneider trophy etc) but I can't help but think that the floats with all their drag and weight probably ended up being the limiting factor in top speeds. Glad you liked this one though.
@AshdenpawTG22 cool, must be radioactive paint.
@AshdenpawTG22 ? Have you read the introduction?
@Tang0five Thanks =) I was happy with the way it turned out, that camo caused me some headaches along with the wing shape mind...
@WinsWings I missed this completely, tag me on the next challenge please :)
+1@Brayden1981 not sure which build you wanted tagging on out of the 3 in my forum post so here you go.
@Randomplayer released =) finally got there.
@ReinMcDeer it's amazing the difference in load times etc isn't it. Pity though, I like my sub assemblies...
+1@spectre118 the rear section isn't wide enough for 2 fins, I did look at it though.
+1@Brayden1981 help yourself then, just make sure it's not just a recolour or admins might remove it :)
@Brayden1981 what did you have in mind?
@ThomasRoderick @PriusCat @Tanglednebula19 thanks guys, always nice to get comments and upvotes.
+1@ReinMcDeer it helps, trust me :) only now I have to remake all my stardard bits lol
Looks nice but why only 1 photo (pixelated) and no description?
@WinsWings yeah I liked this challenge, I also sometimes build 1/72 model aircraft (poorly but I enjoy it)
+1@Tang0five cool, I look forward to seeing it. Im suffering from all the panelling pain with these wing shapes and now have the dreaded panelling camo to start...
@Jaydonjoel ?
@TimsonAviation Thank you =)
@ThomasRoderick nope don't have that button...
+1@ThomasRoderick I dont think you need to worry about me stealing your code, i cant even find it... =) All it says in the input for the vtol unit is AGRV so i cant even work out how to edit the variables. This is why i avoid complicated funkycrap and stick with what i know. Thanks anyway.
@ThomasRoderick I tried the amended code and it still doesnt appear to work. I use a VTOL engine for the uplift mechanism, i input this code and rather than kick in after X amount of speed it just stays off.
@ThomasRoderick its the old way of identifying velocity / speed, i use it as; a) i used it before funky trees so im used to it, b) its simple and c) i dont know what else to do =)
@ThomasRoderick Unfortunately that command doesnt work, nothing happens at all.
@ThomasRoderick thanks for the reply, I have taken a few days to mull it over. It all boils down to what anti grav actually is. In its basic form I would imagine it is a system that increases the opposing force put upon an object by the force of gravity when an object is stationary. In this case it reduces the force of gravity somewhere in the region of 50-75% Now this is solely for static purposes. When an aircraft is moving the anti gravity device would have a hard time deciphering which force acting upon it is from gravity or centrifugal / centripetal or similar, thus the device when acting in a vehicle in motion acts to reduce the applied force but for simplicity it's called anti gravity.
As for your second message, my head hurts, no idea what that means / does.
+1@Mustang51 I don't even know how this ended up working :) Edensk may be the best person to ask?
@BogdanX Thanks Bogdan, yeah i agree with the wings, i need to build a better WW2 fighter wing - this one felt a bit bodged for the trailing edge especially and as you say I have used it before so its getting a bit old. The prop is scale - believe it or not, the initial Typhoon iib had a 3 bladed prop which they changed to 4 blades later on to reduce diameter (or so i understand) but i based this on a drawing of the iib. Flaps are linked to an airbrake inside which increases drag above the CofG thus adding a bit of pitch up and slowing the aircraft down as well - I agree though that on this build its not as noticable as maybe it should have been. I was struggling with the takeoff speed, as i wanted the vtol units to kick in at 90mph ish for landing i couldnt have it taking off at a lower speed, the pesky vtols dont like being set lower than this as it makes the plane "float" around on the ground and it ends up being impossible to land - essentially its a compromise but again, i could have spend a lot more time trying to tweak this a bit. THanks again for your feedback, nice to hear from you again.
+1@asteroidbook345 Im glad someone else thought so, it is an MB5 in nature but once it turned into a jet it definately resembles a thin Attacker =)
+1@Ace117 thanks 😊
@SilverStar Thanks for the comment, are you using full flaps on landing (i also use 1/2 trim down and around 10% throttle) and it lands at around 160mph / 130kts.
@Sergio301 I wasn't hidden :)
@BiliBiliXMBGDS it has two, one on either wing. Putting the pitot on the nose wouldnt work on carriers due to increrased length etc.
+1Hydraulics. Pressure is applied to one ram before the other equalises.
+2@WinsWings Thanks =) first time i've won a competition for a long time. Thanks also for posting the results promptly. I look forward to the next competition.
+1@WinsWings maybe the radial engine drives an electrical generator and this drives the propellor and the antigrav system :)
+2@ThomasRoderick @WinsWings Thanks guys, i appreciate the comments and upvotes, glad you liked the build, it was really fun to put together for a change. In relation to the whole pusher concept, that was mainly a reflection of the SBD Type 300 layout which i was using as the basis of the design ( i assume that by moving the prop, hub etc rearward it can compensate for the long nose and allows the CofG to move further rearward), i appreciate that bailing out would be hazardous but in those days i think the concept of leaving the aircraft came second to everything else.
+1@HololiveFan @Kangy @KingOfTypos All the hard work to make the build and people are getting hung up on a symbol used on the fin... The colour scheme is based on authentic WWII BF109/FW190 schemes, this includes the swastika, hence it was included here for some authentic realism. I dont get the whole generational thing of having to destroy and remove history as it represented "bad things", it happened, the symbols, statues and monuments are a reminder that bad things happen and should not be repeated - this snowflake approach baffles me.
+1@Tang0five I didnt intentionally relate it to Geology, i named it after a band i have been listening to =) Most of the time a name is the hardest part of the build.