All the people who picked on me for being a plane nerd changed their tune when I started making money fixing planes.
Now it's all congratulations and respect.
You gotta show those people your hobby actually means something.
@AchuTMM Nah. I don't really play anymore. I just pop in every once in a while because the site sends notifications to my email.
Just fly north past the tall rocks. You'll see them. A diagonal formation of two destroyers, and one small carrier.
Stability is the biggest factor.
the more stable an aircraft is, the less maneuverable it will be as a result.
Consider airliners and fighter jets.
Airliners have a lot of stability, and as a result, they aren't very agile.
Fighter jets on the other hand are incredibly unstable. Some to the point where they need constant computer correction to keep them controllable. this instability allows the plane to perform extremely tight maneuvers.
So for something agile, get that CoM as close to the CoL you can get it without losing control, and for something you want more stable, but less maneuverable, increase the distance between the points.
Adjusting the angle of incidence on the tail surfaces can also help get the perfect pitching force for balancing an aircraft's nosing tendencies. As for pitch speed, think of ways the exert more force on the arm to give yourself a greater moment. Spacing and strength of the pitching surfaces is important. If you need more force, consider thrust vectoring as well. It's the key to supermaneuverability.
@F104Deathtrap You can also counter some of the forward-pitching moment by angling the engines upward slightly. You lose some cruise efficiency and top-speed, but improve low-speed handling and takeoff run.
You have to use a happinometer.
Measurements must be taken 3 times and averaged to smooth out deviation.
Don't forget to calibrate the instrument using a basic happy.
@trumpetguy You're right. Some engine builders often only design the engines, leaving the aircraft designers to design their own cowls. I often forget the unique design of the cowl was entirely a CFM solution. The failure IS their fault after all (or possibly the fault of whoever was providing maintenance for these engines). Also, I was more concerned about the cowl than the actual engine. The fatally-poor ability of it to provide projectile-containment is rather serious.
Still, it would be smart for Boeing to work on a safety solution as well. The shrapnel did penetrate parts of the airframe after all.
Good on you for knowing where the APU exhaust actually is.
However, the placement of the actual engine is off.
The APU (the Garrett GTC85) is mounted horizontally across the keel beam in the rear of the wheel well. It pokes right through the dividing wall between the two wheel wells, and can be seen on either side.
Interestingly, the reason for this bizarre placement was due to the fact Boeing originally did not intend for the 727 to have an APU, but after potential buyers complaining about this, Boeing had to find a place to put one very late in production. And that empty space in the wheel well was the best candidate.
Had a good chance to really give it a good look and test flight.
My favorite part of it is the articulation on the fowler flaps. It's a feature I always wanted to add to mine, but never got around to designing.
If I ever make a 4.0 version of mine, it will probably be the central new feature.
I also like how you modeled the elevator's unique shape that keeps it out of the swing of the rudders. The intakes also get an A+ from me. Fun real-life fact about those: The center division is the intercooler intake, and the two outside divisions are for the oil coolers.
Additional intake facts: The pods under the wings are the turbo-supercharger ram intakes, and the ones on the tail booms are the coolant radiators.
@Mostly Thanks. But I gotta give it to you, man. This is some serious effort right here. It looks amazing! I've never been one to do historic paintjobs, or modeled interiors. This P-38 is something special!
Serious failure of the engine cowl.
They are supposed to be engineered to prevent high-velocity projectiles from escaping in the event of a blade-off. They contain many layers of Kevlar to prevent fan blades from punching through.
The fact something was left with enough energy to penetrate the fuselage and kill a passenger is indicative of a potential design flaw in other 737 engine cowls.
Boeing's engineering department is probably abuzz right about now. No doubt some sort of new safety design will be implemented because of this.
@Kaos Thanks. I was originally going to go for more impressive visuals for this one, but I got too frustrated working with tiny parts in tight spaces, and just settled for it how it is. Still happy how it turned out.
@Bluerobot11 Actually, top speed in level flight at optimal altitude, and maximum power and RPM for a lightly-loaded P-38L was listed as 414 mph. It was capable of slightly more if all the paint was stripped off, external drag points like pitots, lights, gun muzzles, etc were smoothed over, and it was running super light on fuel, but such a plane wasn't very useful for actual combat. And of course, external loads like bombs, fuel tanks, and rockets added to the drag, making the top speed much less than 414. Outside of level flight, the P-38 could safely exceed speeds of 500 mph in combat dives.
@t8erh8er This is true. I've made several designs utilizing this. Detachers can supply enough force to kick something out of the missile bay before any forward momentum builds up.
Step 1: line up your approach
Step 2: reduce throttle and find your final slope
Step 3: lower landing gear and flaps once below the prescribed speeds
Step 4: level out and reduce descent rate
Step 5: IMPACT RUNWAY AND USE EARTH'S GRAVITY TO SLINGSHOT YOU INTO ORBIT
I'm pretty good at it. IMAGE IMAGE
It's all about understanding your aircraft's minimum sustainable level flight throttle, Low-speed characteristics, and braking distances.
I typically use aircraft with low wing loading, and high maximum sustainable angle-of-attack. Having the plane equipped with flaps also helps. I carefully vary the throttle as I approach to keep me as slow as I can be without sinking or stalling, then I cut the throttle just shy of the carrier to let the plane stall onto the deck. Brakes are applied immediately, and I use the rudders and wheels to zig-zag, which greatly increases the rate of speed loss. If I'm going too fast, I'll kick the rudder hard to induce a ground loop on the deck, since the spin will slow the plane down very quickly.
General Tips:
-Approach from the rear
-Stall onto the deck
-Brake early
-Retract any flaps the moment you land
-Retracting the landing gear can help if your belly is smooth
-Parachutes are extremely useful
-Car wheels can brake much harder
-Bouncy suspension can cause you to kangaroo off the deck
And of course
-Know your plane!
@ColonelStriker A lot of my other original planes have obvious real-world inspiration as well. Mostly, I like to build replicas without calling them replicas. Slap them together from memory, and give them a unique twist. That's generally my building style.
@Jacobdaniel I posted a link to an archive containing the original unaltered screenshots.
Just scroll down, and find it in the comments. Then you can fix them yourself.
All the people who picked on me for being a plane nerd changed their tune when I started making money fixing planes.
+12Now it's all congratulations and respect.
You gotta show those people your hobby actually means something.
Upvotes:
I sleep
Positive Comments:
ASCENDED
+5Bruh, this looks just like an F-22.
+4Posting a P-38 is the easiest way to get an upvote from me.
+4@AchuTMM Nah. I don't really play anymore. I just pop in every once in a while because the site sends notifications to my email.
+3Just fly north past the tall rocks. You'll see them. A diagonal formation of two destroyers, and one small carrier.
Stability is the biggest factor.
the more stable an aircraft is, the less maneuverable it will be as a result.
Consider airliners and fighter jets.
Airliners have a lot of stability, and as a result, they aren't very agile.
Fighter jets on the other hand are incredibly unstable. Some to the point where they need constant computer correction to keep them controllable. this instability allows the plane to perform extremely tight maneuvers.
So for something agile, get that CoM as close to the CoL you can get it without losing control, and for something you want more stable, but less maneuverable, increase the distance between the points.
Adjusting the angle of incidence on the tail surfaces can also help get the perfect pitching force for balancing an aircraft's nosing tendencies. As for pitch speed, think of ways the exert more force on the arm to give yourself a greater moment. Spacing and strength of the pitching surfaces is important. If you need more force, consider thrust vectoring as well. It's the key to supermaneuverability.
@F104Deathtrap You can also counter some of the forward-pitching moment by angling the engines upward slightly. You lose some cruise efficiency and top-speed, but improve low-speed handling and takeoff run.
+3You have to use a happinometer.
+3Measurements must be taken 3 times and averaged to smooth out deviation.
Don't forget to calibrate the instrument using a basic happy.
Quite a few 727s getting made recently.
+3Liking this uptick in popularity.
@trumpetguy You're right. Some engine builders often only design the engines, leaving the aircraft designers to design their own cowls. I often forget the unique design of the cowl was entirely a CFM solution. The failure IS their fault after all (or possibly the fault of whoever was providing maintenance for these engines). Also, I was more concerned about the cowl than the actual engine. The fatally-poor ability of it to provide projectile-containment is rather serious.
Still, it would be smart for Boeing to work on a safety solution as well. The shrapnel did penetrate parts of the airframe after all.
+3Looks a lot like a 727.
+3Very nice nose. I wish I knew how to make front ends look that nice.
Good on you for knowing where the APU exhaust actually is.
+3However, the placement of the actual engine is off.
The APU (the Garrett GTC85) is mounted horizontally across the keel beam in the rear of the wheel well. It pokes right through the dividing wall between the two wheel wells, and can be seen on either side.
Interestingly, the reason for this bizarre placement was due to the fact Boeing originally did not intend for the 727 to have an APU, but after potential buyers complaining about this, Boeing had to find a place to put one very late in production. And that empty space in the wheel well was the best candidate.
@CenturiVonKikie Nah. I'm just entering for style. I don't feel like fine-tuning a hyper-efficient monstrosity this time around.
+2@BaconRoll LOL probably doesn't help I gave up on trying to catalog them all!
+2There's just too many!
@FastDan Thanks.
+2@MI And thank you for the nightmares to come.
@Gameboy21 Yeah, it's like a C-5A, but with CF6s instead of TF39s.
+1@N124Hawk Thanks! I wish I could have made it more stable though. It doesn't like aggressive turning.
+1Remember kids!
+1sharp angles = stress concentration points.
Actually, this is only a fan.
+1It ain't a turbofan until it's hooked up to its turbine.
Make an F-15 next.
+1Had a good chance to really give it a good look and test flight.
+1My favorite part of it is the articulation on the fowler flaps. It's a feature I always wanted to add to mine, but never got around to designing.
If I ever make a 4.0 version of mine, it will probably be the central new feature.
I also like how you modeled the elevator's unique shape that keeps it out of the swing of the rudders. The intakes also get an A+ from me. Fun real-life fact about those: The center division is the intercooler intake, and the two outside divisions are for the oil coolers.
Additional intake facts: The pods under the wings are the turbo-supercharger ram intakes, and the ones on the tail booms are the coolant radiators.
@Mostly Thanks. But I gotta give it to you, man. This is some serious effort right here. It looks amazing! I've never been one to do historic paintjobs, or modeled interiors. This P-38 is something special!
+1Y'all already know I'd show up.
+1Ka-chow!
+1...
Wait, wrong movie.
Serious failure of the engine cowl.
+1They are supposed to be engineered to prevent high-velocity projectiles from escaping in the event of a blade-off. They contain many layers of Kevlar to prevent fan blades from punching through.
The fact something was left with enough energy to penetrate the fuselage and kill a passenger is indicative of a potential design flaw in other 737 engine cowls.
Boeing's engineering department is probably abuzz right about now. No doubt some sort of new safety design will be implemented because of this.
Reminds me more of a P-61, but hey.
+1@Thebossrevolution101 Thanks
@Kaos Thanks. I was originally going to go for more impressive visuals for this one, but I got too frustrated working with tiny parts in tight spaces, and just settled for it how it is. Still happy how it turned out.
+1The most objectively perfect creation.
+1Platinum-quality work.
+1Simply amazing.
@SHCow Oh! Looks nice!
+1@Mostly @FastDan Thanks!
@Liensis I've stopped updating this list about 4 months ago on account of a very busy schedule. My apologies.
+1@Bluerobot11 Actually, top speed in level flight at optimal altitude, and maximum power and RPM for a lightly-loaded P-38L was listed as 414 mph. It was capable of slightly more if all the paint was stripped off, external drag points like pitots, lights, gun muzzles, etc were smoothed over, and it was running super light on fuel, but such a plane wasn't very useful for actual combat. And of course, external loads like bombs, fuel tanks, and rockets added to the drag, making the top speed much less than 414. Outside of level flight, the P-38 could safely exceed speeds of 500 mph in combat dives.
+1@t8erh8er This is true. I've made several designs utilizing this. Detachers can supply enough force to kick something out of the missile bay before any forward momentum builds up.
+1@EnderWiggin This is the VTOL attack aircraft from Neon Genesis Evangelion. I recognized it immediately.
+1Has science gone too far?
+1Step 1: line up your approach
+1Step 2: reduce throttle and find your final slope
Step 3: lower landing gear and flaps once below the prescribed speeds
Step 4: level out and reduce descent rate
Step 5: IMPACT RUNWAY AND USE EARTH'S GRAVITY TO SLINGSHOT YOU INTO ORBIT
@Engineer I'll stop that missile like that F-15 pilot who saved president Harrison Ford in that one movie.
+1You make a wing.
+1Then you make it fly.
I'm pretty good at it.
+1IMAGE
IMAGE
It's all about understanding your aircraft's minimum sustainable level flight throttle, Low-speed characteristics, and braking distances.
I typically use aircraft with low wing loading, and high maximum sustainable angle-of-attack. Having the plane equipped with flaps also helps. I carefully vary the throttle as I approach to keep me as slow as I can be without sinking or stalling, then I cut the throttle just shy of the carrier to let the plane stall onto the deck. Brakes are applied immediately, and I use the rudders and wheels to zig-zag, which greatly increases the rate of speed loss. If I'm going too fast, I'll kick the rudder hard to induce a ground loop on the deck, since the spin will slow the plane down very quickly.
General Tips:
-Approach from the rear
-Stall onto the deck
-Brake early
-Retract any flaps the moment you land
-Retracting the landing gear can help if your belly is smooth
-Parachutes are extremely useful
-Car wheels can brake much harder
-Bouncy suspension can cause you to kangaroo off the deck
And of course
-Know your plane!
Pretty sure I found the oldest P-38 on the site.
+1Not bad. A little bit of a stretch to call it a replica, but it's close. I could tell by the dimensions you were shooting for actual size.
+1@thesimpleone Feel free.
I don't mind people using my parts.
Take anything you like.
Check out the wheels on my C-5 if you want some inspiration on how to get them to work.
I got a job with the regional airline that flies these exact jets.
PIC
I help fix them while they are grounded overnight for heavy maintenance.
@ForeverPie
Feel free.
Here are the original screenshots if you want them without the marks.
@AchuTMM WWII destroyer is North of point 4 on the map of Krakabloa. I made these before that update.
@ChallengerHellcat The Dragon, I believe is unlocked by flying close to the largest pyramid on Maywar.
@ColonelStriker A lot of my other original planes have obvious real-world inspiration as well. Mostly, I like to build replicas without calling them replicas. Slap them together from memory, and give them a unique twist. That's generally my building style.
@ColonelStriker Yes, of course. I even mentioned the inspiration in the description.
Looks good!
@Jacobdaniel I posted a link to an archive containing the original unaltered screenshots.
Just scroll down, and find it in the comments. Then you can fix them yourself.
@Beastbob Actually, it's just Lockheed. The merger with Martin Marietta occurred in 1995.