AN UPDATE ON MY EXPERIMENT: I have sent out a prototype fighter to search for it, and as I ran out of fuel the message came up. I fast forwarded to it to get there faster. I run on iOS, so I can confirm this is all-encompassing. EDIT: NEW UPDATE: Took it out, too.
I would do as Hedero said, but also make sure to watch the relationship between the Center of Lift (CoL) and Center of Mass (CoM). They can be close together, and it gives a much more maneuverable craft, but it also causes the plane to be unstable. Take my Su-67 for example. I designed it to be a highly maneuverable aircraft capable of insane combat maneuvers, and therefore had the CoM and CoL close together, almost touching even. But in that process, i sacrificed stability for mobility. Making planes is always about sacrifices, it just depends on what you want to sacrifice for what.
One way I counter this is by using fuselage intakes attached to a fuselage block, then adding an engine on it and putting them on a rotator (amount depending on how many axis’ of control you want.) I recommend getting used to fuselage blocks before doing this.
Another trick I learned is using a VTOL engine and setting the nozzles to a certain axis of control. This doesn’t move the engine, but the thrust is so small you don’t even notice it on bigger builds. This you don’t need to know how to use fuselage blocks, but it makes hiding it much easier.
@Irobert55 Correct, I used German for the name of it, much like the rest of the ADF series of aircraft. The “Bavarian Duck” is the Hs-129B, an anti-tank aircraft used during WWII under the Luftwaffe and Bavarian Air Force. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, anyone.
@BlackhattAircraft Nice, and same. Make sure to specify at what altitudes though. Like my prototype fighter I’m working on right now can only go about 915 mph at 1000 ft right now, but can go upwards of 1400 mph at around 35000 ft.
The B-36 is a really cool craft. They even put a nuclear reactor in it once (though it was more of a proof-of-concept idea and wasn’t connected to anything).
Gründer is pleased to have received the deal, but could links be established for the different aircraft? If you don’t know how to, look below. Remove the + to make it work:
.
[text]+(link)
@BlackhattAircraft They are, as they don’t require any crazy technological advancements or even a crazy amount of technique to build. Take the new F-XX programs Northrop and Boeing have, with their tailless empennage and blended wings.
@Jim1the1Squid “To be, or not to be. That is the question”
My prediction is invisible supports and rotators
+6@Jim1the1Squid and why did you comment to your own post?
@Irobert55 Lol
Man-Ordained Defender Service (or MODS for short)
Slogan would probably be something like For Dev and User!
@Axartar lol, even better!
+1*Notices water sheep * Nice
+2*Notices part count * NICE
Vroom.
@Awsomur Thanks.
@Awsomur Bronze. I broke that a week ago.
It makes sense, as you’re not really supposed to be underwater in the base game.
Heh, I’m out of that range now, aren’t I? Lol.
<<Nice skin, Buddy.>>
And a great plane too!
@JamesBoA you noticed, good
T, I love these informational forums
So far so good!
@Megamonster You monster
@Irobert55 Might be Romanian then. I was just going off of the War Thunder meme. I'll fix that. Thanks.
.
As for the livery, it is the common mallard.
@KDS whoops wrong tag
AN UPDATE ON MY EXPERIMENT: I have sent out a prototype fighter to search for it, and as I ran out of fuel the message came up. I fast forwarded to it to get there faster. I run on iOS, so I can confirm this is all-encompassing.
+1EDIT: NEW UPDATE: Took it out, too.
@TheFantasticTyphoon Experimentation will now begin
@KSM
@jetnyan android or iOS? Cuz I might do some experimentation to find out.
@Alta2809 Sounds good! Feel free to @ me on any creations you need help with!
+1@Natedog120705 IMPROVISE, ADAPT, OVERCOME.
I would do as Hedero said, but also make sure to watch the relationship between the Center of Lift (CoL) and Center of Mass (CoM). They can be close together, and it gives a much more maneuverable craft, but it also causes the plane to be unstable. Take my Su-67 for example. I designed it to be a highly maneuverable aircraft capable of insane combat maneuvers, and therefore had the CoM and CoL close together, almost touching even. But in that process, i sacrificed stability for mobility. Making planes is always about sacrifices, it just depends on what you want to sacrifice for what.
+1Me and another user put it back together. It's ok, someone got there first before me, so you probably didn't know.
He only needed the wing fixed.
@asteroidbook345 Ah, ok. I saw it now.
With it being so close, why not combine them? Naval strike UAVs sound like quite the fun option.
Also, when will this challenge be started?
Oh, I meant another naval fighter challenge
And if you can’t put photos in, sometimes a bit of backstory or just a story of the craft is a fine addition.
Another one?
@NidBahn Can confirm. Take my F/A-18E. It’s shorter and smaller than the actual hornet, but it still looks good.
One way I counter this is by using fuselage intakes attached to a fuselage block, then adding an engine on it and putting them on a rotator (amount depending on how many axis’ of control you want.) I recommend getting used to fuselage blocks before doing this.
Another trick I learned is using a VTOL engine and setting the nozzles to a certain axis of control. This doesn’t move the engine, but the thrust is so small you don’t even notice it on bigger builds. This you don’t need to know how to use fuselage blocks, but it makes hiding it much easier.
@Alta2809 I’m flattered. I’ll be away for a few hours, but just tag me and I’ll be sure to look at it!
@Irobert55 Correct, I used German for the name of it, much like the rest of the ADF series of aircraft. The “Bavarian Duck” is the Hs-129B, an anti-tank aircraft used during WWII under the Luftwaffe and Bavarian Air Force. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, anyone.
@BlackhattAircraft Nice, and same. Make sure to specify at what altitudes though. Like my prototype fighter I’m working on right now can only go about 915 mph at 1000 ft right now, but can go upwards of 1400 mph at around 35000 ft.
The B-36 is a really cool craft. They even put a nuclear reactor in it once (though it was more of a proof-of-concept idea and wasn’t connected to anything).
+2@BlackhattAircraft It is! I forgot that sound slows down at higher altitudes, rather than speeds up, so it’s definitely a good tool to calculate it.
Good way to save weight, if you ask me.
@Cvanimation ooo, cool!
Blyatiful
+2@Cvanimation so something like an Artillerie tank?
Hmmmm... Möthman... anyone know where the biggest lämp is?
Gründer is pleased to have received the deal, but could links be established for the different aircraft? If you don’t know how to, look below. Remove the + to make it work:
.
[text]+(link)
Where’s Stonehenge when you need it?
Love this
@BlackhattAircraft They are, as they don’t require any crazy technological advancements or even a crazy amount of technique to build. Take the new F-XX programs Northrop and Boeing have, with their tailless empennage and blended wings.
+1@BlackhattAircraft Same, As they’re the most widely known and understood generations for me.
+1