@RamboJutter The Yak have a better intake - notice how its intake is exactly the same height as the other part of the fuselage, and how the cross section is pretty much a circle; the problem with the fins is not that they are too short, but that they are too narrow and too swept back to look nice - a flat tip might look slightly nicer than that, and... (well I stopped here as I'm starting to realize I'm pretty much describing the designs of those twin-tailed American birds)
Although I'm someone who serious lacks creativity myself, I do think that this particular craft is MUCH less aesthetically appealing than pretty much any of your builds since your first bi-plane (except the Nimrod) - many of your previous builds have the special appeal of WWII British designs, with their elegant curves, distinctive paintjobs, and what I can only describe as a sense of "goofiness" thanks to their stubby airframe and streamlined fuselage. And then a special appeal of diesel-punk, granted by the over-sized engines, ducted fans, and Y-shaped tail fins, are added on top of them.
The problem with this plane? It have NONE of those appeals, and in general looks quite out of character for a design of yours. The airframe does not look streamlined, the nose is too small, the vertical stabilizers are WAY too long and narrow for a twin-tailed plane (and that's on top of them being too close together and that the angle between them is too small), the intakes are placed in a VERY awkward position (if it was as tall as the fuselage, the plane looks fine, if it was around 2/3 of the height, it will also be fine, but...), and that the cross-section of this jet looks WAY too blocky.
TL;DR: You tried too hard on combining every feature into this plane, without thinking about whether any of them will fit each other. I'm still curious how you continued on this design without realizing this, especially given your past record for making so many astounding planes.
@TheEpicMOONHAWK The truck is fine (although the crane is normally right behind the cab for stability reason IRL), but the paint scheme and the description is... a bit... unusual, to say at least. Also, "This truck also features stuff in the beta version of sp" isn't quite necessary, as 1. the website highlights that for you, and 2. neither the reel nor the magnet exists before 1.8
@Tang0five Just did some quick research, yup, those Russians have a different design philosophy than pretty much everyone else on cockpit layout. At least according to a page on Quora about a similar design on Il-76, the glass nose was built for navigation and map-reading.
Did the Russians just forgot to remove the glass nose of their bombers when converting them to jetliners? I mean the Tu-104 have a glass nose, the Tu-114 (based on the Tu-95 airframe) have a glass nose, and the Tu-116 also have a glass nose (also based on the Tu-95)...
@Minecraftpoweer Sorry, It's just me thinking about why the show decided to use the Schwerer Gustav as the basis for their railway artillery... If I accidentally sounds accusative then sorry. Perhaps I should have worded it better, or simple not have posted that comment at all.
@nadvgia They have a relatively low thrust, I think perhaps adding 4 or more of them for each booster is a good idea. Those things start as fairly small rockets.
@nadvgia RATO Boosters, grab by the detachers (gray parts); if you have an Overload XML editor, change the value behind "burnTimer" on those rockets into whatever you need. My default is 30 seconds. Activate by firing rockets.
@nadvgia How many seconds of boost do you need? Although if you have Overload XML editor just change the value behind the "burnTimer" to your needed value.
@nadvgia I mean from the original drawing those things do look like booster rockets... With the Overload XML Editor I think you can make actual boosters. I have made a few experimental boosters a while ago, although I haven't uploaded any. Also, to make your builds more flyable, you can stack multiple layers of the same wing (by mirroring the part, moving the mirrored part up/down by a few nudges, mirror back, mirror the craft, repeat). `
@SledDriver I know it's not a replica, I'm just commenting on how the wings/panels resembles that of a TIE Advanced, while the cannons kinda looks like that of the TIE Interceptor. Anyways, I have to say that your designs looks cooler than the original...
@otayahiromo8211 Well I re-did some researches, and found that those things are not bazookas but M8 rockets, the same as the one used on the Sherman "Calliope", and that the designation "M10" refers to the triple-tube launcher. However, the fact that the M8 rocket have a smaller warhead (2 kg) compared to the HVAR (3.5 kg), and that a plane could carry more HVAR rockets as they do not require launch tubes, made the M8 far less successful than the HVAR.
Why are so many of your builds feature those triple bazookas? I mean HVARs are much more common for American fighters historically, and those aircraft-mounted bazookas are pretty rare and were only featured on a few aerial liaison units with their lighter, less powerful planes, if I remembered correctly. That said, those things are indeed cool...
@randomusername Presumably there is an in-universe justification to it, I mean it is basically a plasma blow torch, so I think it is more jarring of it is actually longer-ranged.
@WarHawk95 "Alouette" means "Lark" in French, I assume that this player is not fluent in English, and might be using translation softwares - which does sometimes cause awkward syntaxes and grammatical mistakes, as well as names that makes no sense - translating one language into another and then translate it back is not efficient or accurate by any means.
It's... beautiful... Also, it's always good to see another one of your fantastic builds.
Can't read a thing... Great plane though!
Yup my first thought on this thing is "Well this looks like a ram's head!"
That dragon on the rudder/fin looks cool! Also, am I the only one who is thinking about World of Warcraft Series?
Sweet beans
Nice details, but... can you please turn on the aircraft reflection?
A T-17E with six wheels IRL is a T-17 Deerhound...
Anyways, keep up the good work!
@RamboJutter The Yak have a better intake - notice how its intake is exactly the same height as the other part of the fuselage, and how the cross section is pretty much a circle; the problem with the fins is not that they are too short, but that they are too narrow and too swept back to look nice - a flat tip might look slightly nicer than that, and... (well I stopped here as I'm starting to realize I'm pretty much describing the designs of those twin-tailed American birds)
Although I'm someone who serious lacks creativity myself, I do think that this particular craft is MUCH less aesthetically appealing than pretty much any of your builds since your first bi-plane (except the Nimrod) - many of your previous builds have the special appeal of WWII British designs, with their elegant curves, distinctive paintjobs, and what I can only describe as a sense of "goofiness" thanks to their stubby airframe and streamlined fuselage. And then a special appeal of diesel-punk, granted by the over-sized engines, ducted fans, and Y-shaped tail fins, are added on top of them.
The problem with this plane? It have NONE of those appeals, and in general looks quite out of character for a design of yours. The airframe does not look streamlined, the nose is too small, the vertical stabilizers are WAY too long and narrow for a twin-tailed plane (and that's on top of them being too close together and that the angle between them is too small), the intakes are placed in a VERY awkward position (if it was as tall as the fuselage, the plane looks fine, if it was around 2/3 of the height, it will also be fine, but...), and that the cross-section of this jet looks WAY too blocky.
TL;DR: You tried too hard on combining every feature into this plane, without thinking about whether any of them will fit each other. I'm still curious how you continued on this design without realizing this, especially given your past record for making so many astounding planes.
@WNP78 Thanks.
The steam workshop version seems to not work with the Mod Settings mod, I mean it does not show up on the Mod Settings menu at all.
Cool Beans!
@costr Make sense, most translator programs will have problem with languages that have little in common with each other.
@costr Where are you from then? And even if I ignore the grammar, the description still looks too poetic to be a proper intro...
Cool plane! Although... How many shots did you drink before writing the intro?
@TheEpicMOONHAWK The truck is fine (although the crane is normally right behind the cab for stability reason IRL), but the paint scheme and the description is... a bit... unusual, to say at least. Also, "This truck also features stuff in the beta version of sp" isn't quite necessary, as 1. the website highlights that for you, and 2. neither the reel nor the magnet exists before 1.8
Just... what...
@LordSatan np
Beautiful plane!
Welcome Back!
@uniunikunn Cool!
@Tang0five Just did some quick research, yup, those Russians have a different design philosophy than pretty much everyone else on cockpit layout. At least according to a page on Quora about a similar design on Il-76, the glass nose was built for navigation and map-reading.
Did the Russians just forgot to remove the glass nose of their bombers when converting them to jetliners? I mean the Tu-104 have a glass nose, the Tu-114 (based on the Tu-95 airframe) have a glass nose, and the Tu-116 also have a glass nose (also based on the Tu-95)...
@Minecraftpoweer Sorry, It's just me thinking about why the show decided to use the Schwerer Gustav as the basis for their railway artillery... If I accidentally sounds accusative then sorry. Perhaps I should have worded it better, or simple not have posted that comment at all.
@nadvgia They have a relatively low thrust, I think perhaps adding 4 or more of them for each booster is a good idea. Those things start as fairly small rockets.
@nadvgia RATO Boosters, grab by the detachers (gray parts); if you have an Overload XML editor, change the value behind "burnTimer" on those rockets into whatever you need. My default is 30 seconds. Activate by firing rockets.
@nadvgia How many seconds of boost do you need? Although if you have Overload XML editor just change the value behind the "burnTimer" to your needed value.
Give me a shout if you need booster rockets, although I'm more than sure their thrust cannot be modified through conventional means.
@nadvgia I mean from the original drawing those things do look like booster rockets... With the Overload XML Editor I think you can make actual boosters. I have made a few experimental boosters a while ago, although I haven't uploaded any. Also, to make your builds more flyable, you can stack multiple layers of the same wing (by mirroring the part, moving the mirrored part up/down by a few nudges, mirror back, mirror the craft, repeat). `
Are those rockets at the rear used for take-off assists?
This thing looks quite sci-fi, if you ask me...
@spefyjerbf Say, from the side?
Well, actually it should be designated as the AH-47 Chinook - the "C" in "CH" stands for Cargo, and "A" in "AH" stands for Attack.
@SledDriver I know it's not a replica, I'm just commenting on how the wings/panels resembles that of a TIE Advanced, while the cannons kinda looks like that of the TIE Interceptor. Anyways, I have to say that your designs looks cooler than the original...
TIE Advanced?
Twin mustang only with a permanent gun/radar pod in the nose, and a bunch of jet engines?
Why the US emblem?
@otayahiromo8211 Well I re-did some researches, and found that those things are not bazookas but M8 rockets, the same as the one used on the Sherman "Calliope", and that the designation "M10" refers to the triple-tube launcher. However, the fact that the M8 rocket have a smaller warhead (2 kg) compared to the HVAR (3.5 kg), and that a plane could carry more HVAR rockets as they do not require launch tubes, made the M8 far less successful than the HVAR.
Why are so many of your builds feature those triple bazookas? I mean HVARs are much more common for American fighters historically, and those aircraft-mounted bazookas are pretty rare and were only featured on a few aerial liaison units with their lighter, less powerful planes, if I remembered correctly. That said, those things are indeed cool...
Wait, that tomato roundel? Am I the only one who is thinking about the Irresponsible Captain Tylor anime?
Hi welcome back!
@RamboJutter THX for the information!
Soooo... The cockpit is shared with the Vagabond, and is the side-window used for celestial navigation?
Where the hell does the extra cockpit come from?
@otayahiromo8211 Thanks.
@spefyjerbf So what are the guns shown in the intro? The new Intercipias Prime? 'Cause the one shown in the intro is more Mara than Intercipias.
@randomusername Presumably there is an in-universe justification to it, I mean it is basically a plasma blow torch, so I think it is more jarring of it is actually longer-ranged.
Is this a pre-dreadnought?
@WarHawk95 "Alouette" means "Lark" in French, I assume that this player is not fluent in English, and might be using translation softwares - which does sometimes cause awkward syntaxes and grammatical mistakes, as well as names that makes no sense - translating one language into another and then translate it back is not efficient or accurate by any means.
@LotterCrafts Thanks! This would help shaping my basics on what to and what not to include in the craft.