@Diloph im curious, what are you using as the basis of that statement? I have read quite a bit into flying wings and I cant put my finger on anything that says they are very maneuverable (I have seen a B2 flying and that thing istn going to be rolling or looping any time soon)
@Diloph yes and no, I've flown an rc flying wing before and they are really sensitive to CofG, the roll is slower than you would think as its a wide wing, pitch can be silly (the rc one could loop in its own length v nearly) but this wouldn't be realistic for an actual real life jet hence I toned it down a lot.
@MufazzalPasha The easiest thing to do is to download it and then take the wing to bits, you can see the parts i have used and how it works. Hope this helps.
@Diloph the landing gear was based loosely from a few ww2 fighters, to be fair I actually shrunk it and the wing to get a better overall relationship with the fus. There are arguments both ways, t38/f5 wheels are small like the hawk as well. In relation to the suspension etc I just kept it simple :)
@Diloph yes and no, my understanding is that large wheels are needed where the ground is uneven to stop the aircraft from tripping up on undulations etc. when you are landing on a smooth even surface that isnt an issue so then you need to consider impact stress from the landing but most of that is taken up by the suspension rather than the wheel itself. Have a look at something like a Hawk (or Goshawk if you want the naval version) the wheels are smaller than you would think. Most airliners have small wheels as well for similar reasons i would suspect. Dont forget the larger the wheels the larger the bays needed and thus more space needed.
@rexzion you may still, i dont win many competitions, i just build for fun, Mahadi just keeps me building different fresh things with these contests =)
@Diloph Thanks =) Yeah I know what you mean about the wheels, it all depends what im building though, if its a ww2 aircraft designed for grass fields i will make them bigger but if its for tarmac / carriers the wheels do tend to be smaller (im not arguing, i agree with your sentiments). I will consider this more closely in future.
@SteadfastContracting yeah its designed that way, the twin engine fighters of the period where sluggish to manoeuvre, fast in a straight line though :) if you move the hidden wing panels in board a bit you can get it to roll faster.
@MintLynx ah that explains how you did it. I ended up attaching them to a piston from your torpedo raising device and put them above the coning tower. I will detach them now though. Should have it ready to post soon hopefully. The jerkiness isn't related to the control surfaces or buoyancy as far as I can work out, it seems to relate to the interaction of individual parts with the waters surface, I will keep playing with it.
@MintLynx I was, the problem was that everytime the VTOL engines hit the water they turned off the nozzles. I have used your piston that keeps things above water to reattach the VTOL engines to fix that. Now I have a sub that works but the thing is jerky as anything when submerging, any ideas?
@MintLynx So im playing with a sub, but im getting massively frustrated with the control nozzles, they just randomly turn off or stop responding... they have plenty of intakes etc. any ideas?
@Lazer22 I do half and half to make most use of the space but thats a bit besides the point, the challenge required a stand or my entry would have been void :)
@REDLIGHTNINGBOLT thanks, if you want more fuel just add another block in the middle somewhere with fuel in it (if you make the block massive then scale it down to 0.1 you can put loads of fuel in.)
@Potkuri the challenge said it didn't have to, add some nose weight and change the aileron directions and I'm sure it will be fine. I'll have a play tomorrow and let you know what is needed (challenge penalises for added weight etc hence none added.)
@Falkenwut im having a play with it at present, i just have to remember to re-add the mass value on any sub-assembly parts, no biggy really, are you bothered about drag? I doubt mine will be anywhere near 1000parts so 7 or so for wings shouldnt matter =)
@Tang0five lol, now there's an idea. I still have 2 (very poor condition) 1/72 scale airfix buffalos from when I was a kid, I always liked it for some reason. I think I have a couple of boxed ones ready to build as well.
@EternalDarkness thanks, i was going to but then i realised i hadnt built it from his download and i couldnt be fussed with all the re-tweaking of colours etc... theres always next time =)
@jamesPLANESii any objections if i utilise a few of these on my latest build? credited of course. lol, just bothered to read the text... mby should have done that first =)
@Type2volkswagen this is what really p*es me off about this game, there is no reason for that missile part to have disappeared, i wouldnt have intentionally deleted it or moved it, the missiles where pretty much the last this I did and they caused so much grief (blowing the plane up randomly, launching in random orders etc). I have fixed it here. Thanks for the heads up.
@vcharng well I know I have lots of points but that's mainly because I have lots of builds which are upvoted by the same people (thanks peeps) but even I struggle for votes, look at my Canberra, it took ages was a scale replica and dodnt get much in the way of votes. People upvote what they see and what they like, I agree American builds tend to get more votes (probably due to large American player base) and I agree that votes dont reflect the effort put into a build but I also agree with James, if you dont maximise your planes 1st picture (the one everyone sees) then you arnt going to get the clicks (look at all the click bait on the web, if it looks pretty people click regardless of the content). I have had similar discussions in the past, one person on here was publishing about the same as me when we where gold but he was limited by using an iPad which penalised presentation and thus upvotes regardless of how epic the build was, unfair - yes. We quickly came to the conclusion, build what you enjoy, if it gets updoots great, if not so what. Ps james always gets double my upvote points but hey ho. (Pesky newzealander :) )
@Diloph im curious, what are you using as the basis of that statement? I have read quite a bit into flying wings and I cant put my finger on anything that says they are very maneuverable (I have seen a B2 flying and that thing istn going to be rolling or looping any time soon)
@Diloph yes and no, I've flown an rc flying wing before and they are really sensitive to CofG, the roll is slower than you would think as its a wide wing, pitch can be silly (the rc one could loop in its own length v nearly) but this wouldn't be realistic for an actual real life jet hence I toned it down a lot.
@BogdanX thanks Bogdan, I didn't really appreciate the complexity of a flying wing till I started this. It was a fun build in the end.
@Blue0Bull thanks, I'm glad you like them and I really appreciate the comment.
@jamesPLANESii lol isn't this a post complaining about a post I.e. you broke your own number 2 rule :)
I so just wanted to leave it at that, but I suppose I should be mature. There is a mod that removes the circle.
Yes.
@MufazzalPasha The easiest thing to do is to download it and then take the wing to bits, you can see the parts i have used and how it works. Hope this helps.
@BLOODIUS i use discord instead of imgur though
@Diloph the landing gear was based loosely from a few ww2 fighters, to be fair I actually shrunk it and the wing to get a better overall relationship with the fus. There are arguments both ways, t38/f5 wheels are small like the hawk as well. In relation to the suspension etc I just kept it simple :)
@rexzion did you download it then?
@asteroidbook345 Im sure you wil rise to the challenge =)
@Diloph yes and no, my understanding is that large wheels are needed where the ground is uneven to stop the aircraft from tripping up on undulations etc. when you are landing on a smooth even surface that isnt an issue so then you need to consider impact stress from the landing but most of that is taken up by the suspension rather than the wheel itself. Have a look at something like a Hawk (or Goshawk if you want the naval version) the wheels are smaller than you would think. Most airliners have small wheels as well for similar reasons i would suspect. Dont forget the larger the wheels the larger the bays needed and thus more space needed.
@rexzion you may still, i dont win many competitions, i just build for fun, Mahadi just keeps me building different fresh things with these contests =)
@Diloph Thanks =) Yeah I know what you mean about the wheels, it all depends what im building though, if its a ww2 aircraft designed for grass fields i will make them bigger but if its for tarmac / carriers the wheels do tend to be smaller (im not arguing, i agree with your sentiments). I will consider this more closely in future.
@SteadfastContracting yeah its designed that way, the twin engine fighters of the period where sluggish to manoeuvre, fast in a straight line though :) if you move the hidden wing panels in board a bit you can get it to roll faster.
@SteadfastContracting thanks, what do you mean by fly better though?
@TheKraken3 most of it, think the engine nacelles clip a bit.
@MintLynx ah that explains how you did it. I ended up attaching them to a piston from your torpedo raising device and put them above the coning tower. I will detach them now though. Should have it ready to post soon hopefully. The jerkiness isn't related to the control surfaces or buoyancy as far as I can work out, it seems to relate to the interaction of individual parts with the waters surface, I will keep playing with it.
@MintLynx I was, the problem was that everytime the VTOL engines hit the water they turned off the nozzles. I have used your piston that keeps things above water to reattach the VTOL engines to fix that. Now I have a sub that works but the thing is jerky as anything when submerging, any ideas?
@Dude32 if you click the bit that says "built model here" specifically the "here" bit, it links to the built model
@MintLynx So im playing with a sub, but im getting massively frustrated with the control nozzles, they just randomly turn off or stop responding... they have plenty of intakes etc. any ideas?
@Tang0five thanks 😊 would have been even better if I could type...
@Lazer22 I do half and half to make most use of the space but thats a bit besides the point, the challenge required a stand or my entry would have been void :)
@REDLIGHTNINGBOLT thanks, if you want more fuel just add another block in the middle somewhere with fuel in it (if you make the block massive then scale it down to 0.1 you can put loads of fuel in.)
@Falkenwut so is there a limit to numbers of entries?
@Potkuri the challenge said it didn't have to, add some nose weight and change the aileron directions and I'm sure it will be fine. I'll have a play tomorrow and let you know what is needed (challenge penalises for added weight etc hence none added.)
@EternalDarkness no worries, thought it could have been just my phone playing up, thanks though.
@EternalDarkness is it just me or did that not work? It's not showing as a successor still?
@Falkenwut im having a play with it at present, i just have to remember to re-add the mass value on any sub-assembly parts, no biggy really, are you bothered about drag? I doubt mine will be anywhere near 1000parts so 7 or so for wings shouldnt matter =)
@ChamDel7 confused.com.
@BlackhattAircraft if I get a minute I will expand on Ed's little tutorial.
@ChamDel7 ?
@Tang0five lol, now there's an idea. I still have 2 (very poor condition) 1/72 scale airfix buffalos from when I was a kid, I always liked it for some reason. I think I have a couple of boxed ones ready to build as well.
@ArcturusAerospace
@Hellosss38 tag as requested
@asteroidbook345 funny that's what my save is called.
@ChiChiWerx it works fine on my android device :) I'm sure yours will be fine...
@EternalDarkness thanks, didn't know you could do that.
@EternalDarkness thanks, i was going to but then i realised i hadnt built it from his download and i couldnt be fussed with all the re-tweaking of colours etc... theres always next time =)
@TheFantasticTyphoon i might do something at somepoint, cant promise though, to many random ideas of my own =)
@jamesPLANESii any objections if i utilise a few of these on my latest build? credited of course. lol, just bothered to read the text... mby should have done that first =)
@Type2volkswagen this is what really p*es me off about this game, there is no reason for that missile part to have disappeared, i wouldnt have intentionally deleted it or moved it, the missiles where pretty much the last this I did and they caused so much grief (blowing the plane up randomly, launching in random orders etc). I have fixed it here. Thanks for the heads up.
@jamesPLANESii Do you mind if i use your engine start formula please? I really struggle with the funky stuff.
@BogdanX Thanks for the comments, glad you liked it, congrats on getting to number 1.
@Nertiartw I out the photo into DISCORD first then use that link.
@CptJacobson ah, that would explain why I cant see it or remember it.
@CptJacobson it says there are 2 successors but when I click the page is blank. Is it private?
@CptJacobson I didn't see that (or cant remember anyway), will go take a look. I made a light attack plane out of one of James' Cessnas :)
@vcharng well I know I have lots of points but that's mainly because I have lots of builds which are upvoted by the same people (thanks peeps) but even I struggle for votes, look at my Canberra, it took ages was a scale replica and dodnt get much in the way of votes. People upvote what they see and what they like, I agree American builds tend to get more votes (probably due to large American player base) and I agree that votes dont reflect the effort put into a build but I also agree with James, if you dont maximise your planes 1st picture (the one everyone sees) then you arnt going to get the clicks (look at all the click bait on the web, if it looks pretty people click regardless of the content). I have had similar discussions in the past, one person on here was publishing about the same as me when we where gold but he was limited by using an iPad which penalised presentation and thus upvotes regardless of how epic the build was, unfair - yes. We quickly came to the conclusion, build what you enjoy, if it gets updoots great, if not so what. Ps james always gets double my upvote points but hey ho. (Pesky newzealander :) )