Smooth surfaces without unnecessary bumps and/or depressions, no flat surfaces pointing into the wind, generally teardrop/cigar-shaped outlines, and cover any non-smooth part with smooth fairings wherever possible.
Just remember the target drag value should be somewhere around 0.02 * [wing area] / 0.0010145 and you should be all set.
area rule?
This.
A transonic aircraft should have a near-constant cross-sectional area excluding the nose and the tail. Or, basically, make sure your wingtips are located where your fuselage is the thinnest, or conversely "tuck in" your fuselage near the wingtips.
For super/hypersonic aircraft, it's "make sure all your parts are tucked behind the shockwave cone created by your nose".
Look at, say, the F-15. Are the curves over the engines important?
As in...? If you meant the LERX then it's for maneuverability at high AOA.
Are flat surfaces on the sides of an aircraft bad?
I'd say.... not necessarily, but likely to be yes. Granted, I'm a mechie undergrad so my understanding about aerodynamics is still rather limited, but IIRC it's more about the part where flat surfaces don't tend to transition smoothly into and out of other shapes so more chance for influence drag.
@GalaxiesDontSlleep
.... no wonder why you tend to describe what would normally be considered "horror" and/or "tragedy" as "Lovecraftian".....
For me most of those are called somewhere between "Tuesday" and "it's more efficient to just [insert a realistic solution] for [insert a plot-specific problem], y'know....".
Removed by Mod. Looks like they can't handle the heat...
I just hope it wasn't my comment that caused the mods' attention.... (in case anyone's wondering the historical nosearts I presented were decidedly NOT PG-13 because there's nothing really PG-13 in WWII).
.... That said, reporting someone else's comment without a good reason might also anger the mods... unless that guy was lying and his comment was taken down for something else, ofc.
His pals from the Jolly Wrenches might feel differently though... Granted, they're built and raised for war, regardless if they were Corsairs or Rhinos; Dusty, decidedly, is NOT.
... if I recall, going by Hisotenku spellcards, would the "Shanghai" variant be an early "proof of concept" model with a massive TLS pod, and the "Hourai" variant a newer model that carried a medium-sized TLS pod but better autonomous capabilities? Also, I'll just assume the "Holland" variant carries miniaturized microwave APS domes, and Alicebird is probably providing her drones energy via microwave transmission either way... (If Seeker Wire and Seeker Dolls skill/spell cards are of any indication all of her dolls/drones carry TLS pods but require external power, on land her dolls are probably controlled via wire guidance)
.
..
... and if Chireiden taught me anything, the drones she lends to Marisa use chemical lasers instead of solid-state ones due to the lack of wireless transmission.
....
.....
...... and preemptive apologies for the word vomit.
@Solent19
First thing first: it's not my first time doing mass-upvoting some random strangers 'ere, nor would it be my last.
Second: please, for the love of all that's sacred and cherished please try to sketch how the plane would look like before you start the construction process - your construction style is good, but your aesthetics is really hit-and-miss.
... and preemptive apologies for nitpicking.
@USAMustang
Didn't even think that far when I first made it (was aiming for a mix between a Bf-109 and a La-7)... then I rechecked my saved technical drawings for the Wildcat. Yup, that's a Grumman canopy alright!
And, yeah, the rear fuselage (sans the fin) is also closer to a Wildcat than a Jug.
Fighting the Bettys? Would it be correct to assume that she's one of the 5th Air Force gals?
.
Also, Tom's Ungrateful Nitpicking Time™: No P-47 in history ever had a 23351 serial number. 41-23351 was a Lockheed A-29-LO Hudson, 42-23351 was a C-47A-5DL Skytrain, 43-23351 was a P-40N-20-CU Warhawk, 44-23351 was a P-38J-20-LO Lightning, while 45-23351 was an OQ-14 target drone.
.
Source: Aircraft Serial Number Search, Joe Baugher Aircraft Serial Numbers Website, 368th FG.
@Carsonkiddy2 If you're following someone, when they upload something or spotlight something you'll see the aforementioned something in the Jet Stream.
@Panzerwaifu69
... on a second thought.... early WWI biplane bombers also used hand grenades and mortar bombs as their payload not unlike modern drones, so...
Airburst munitions (which causes damage through shockwave, shrapnel, or fragmentation) don't quite work against armored targets so I doubt thats's the case.
it would be best if you had a target before you fire the cannons because the fuse input will not work properly and explode in the barrel of the turrets (all the guns have Fuse Input)
@WritersCrusadersAirCo2
+1Something something DeviantArt? IIRC your first account also had a post or two about her.
Amy strawberry express w h e n
+1@Graingy
Smooth surfaces without unnecessary bumps and/or depressions, no flat surfaces pointing into the wind, generally teardrop/cigar-shaped outlines, and cover any non-smooth part with smooth fairings wherever possible.
+1@Graingy
Just remember the target drag value should be somewhere around
0.02 * [wing area] / 0.0010145and you should be all set.This.
A transonic aircraft should have a near-constant cross-sectional area excluding the nose and the tail. Or, basically, make sure your wingtips are located where your fuselage is the thinnest, or conversely "tuck in" your fuselage near the wingtips.
For super/hypersonic aircraft, it's "make sure all your parts are tucked behind the shockwave cone created by your nose".
As in...? If you meant the LERX then it's for maneuverability at high AOA.
I'd say.... not necessarily, but likely to be yes. Granted, I'm a mechie undergrad so my understanding about aerodynamics is still rather limited, but IIRC it's more about the part where flat surfaces don't tend to transition smoothly into and out of other shapes so more chance for influence drag.
+1++DISCIPLINE ENFORCED BY TANK++
+1Quick question though: how does the depth charge work?
+1ZOGGIN' BOOTIFUL, BOSS!
+1Armored Core?
+1@GalaxiesDontSlleep
+1.... no wonder why you tend to describe what would normally be considered "horror" and/or "tragedy" as "Lovecraftian".....
For me most of those are called somewhere between "Tuesday" and "it's more efficient to just [insert a realistic solution] for [insert a plot-specific problem], y'know....".
WITNESSED ! ! !
+1@USAMustang
+1.... how come are those X-rated? No full nudity, no intimate parts, no substance abuse nor strong language either.
NO STEP ON SNEK !
+1Ah, the greatest, handsomest mix between the P-51 and the Me-262. Great job!
+1.... and here I thought it was because it revolutionized air combat and brought forth the jet age.....
+1@WritersCrusadersAirCo2
I just hope it wasn't my comment that caused the mods' attention.... (in case anyone's wondering the historical nosearts I presented were decidedly NOT PG-13 because there's nothing really PG-13 in WWII).
+1.... That said, reporting someone else's comment without a good reason might also anger the mods... unless that guy was lying and his comment was taken down for something else, ofc.
@Graingy Yeah. Bonus point for a turbojet is nought but a ramjet with a compressor powered by its own exhaust gasses.
+1His pals from the Jolly Wrenches might feel differently though... Granted, they're built and raised for war, regardless if they were Corsairs or Rhinos; Dusty, decidedly, is NOT.
+1@Mosquitowithagun Oh. Apologies for not remembering your name then! Also.... here's my most recent Skylance, so... enjoy!
+1@Mosquitowithagun Yeah, thanks for all those upvotes and thanks again for pushing me to 10k! But... how did you even find me?
+1... if I recall, going by Hisotenku spellcards, would the "Shanghai" variant be an early "proof of concept" model with a massive TLS pod, and the "Hourai" variant a newer model that carried a medium-sized TLS pod but better autonomous capabilities? Also, I'll just assume the "Holland" variant carries miniaturized microwave APS domes, and Alicebird is probably providing her drones energy via microwave transmission either way... (If Seeker Wire and Seeker Dolls skill/spell cards are of any indication all of her dolls/drones carry TLS pods but require external power, on land her dolls are probably controlled via wire guidance)
+1.
..
... and if Chireiden taught me anything, the drones she lends to Marisa use chemical lasers instead of solid-state ones due to the lack of wireless transmission.
....
.....
...... and preemptive apologies for the word vomit.
@Solent19
+1First thing first: it's not my first time doing mass-upvoting some random strangers 'ere, nor would it be my last.
Second: please, for the love of all that's sacred and cherished please try to sketch how the plane would look like before you start the construction process - your construction style is good, but your aesthetics is really hit-and-miss.
... and preemptive apologies for nitpicking.
++ ATTENTION TO THE MAP ! ++
+1@ChaseRacliot
+1Thanks.Cursed fishbed
+1@USAMustang
+1Didn't even think that far when I first made it (was aiming for a mix between a Bf-109 and a La-7)... then I rechecked my saved technical drawings for the Wildcat. Yup, that's a Grumman canopy alright!
And, yeah, the rear fuselage (sans the fin) is also closer to a Wildcat than a Jug.
Kek. I'm a simple man: I see good build, I upvote; I see good builder, I mass-upvote. Probably why I never host challenges on a second thought....
+1@Kerbango
+1Random, I see... Thanks anyways.
Is it built around an F-104 fuselage?
+1Fighting the Bettys? Would it be correct to assume that she's one of the 5th Air Force gals?
+1.
Also, Tom's Ungrateful Nitpicking Time™: No P-47 in history ever had a 23351 serial number. 41-23351 was a Lockheed A-29-LO Hudson, 42-23351 was a C-47A-5DL Skytrain, 43-23351 was a P-40N-20-CU Warhawk, 44-23351 was a P-38J-20-LO Lightning, while 45-23351 was an OQ-14 target drone.
.
Source: Aircraft Serial Number Search, Joe Baugher Aircraft Serial Numbers Website, 368th FG.
As they say, cats are magical creatures...
+1Nobody expected the S p a n i s h Inquisition!
+1My, my.... welcome back!
+1@Carsonkiddy2 If you're following someone, when they upload something or spotlight something you'll see the aforementioned something in the Jet Stream.
+1I'Z 'ERE FIRST ! !
+1T
+1@ChaseplaneKLWith1MG Thanks!
+1++ATTENTION TO THE DESIGNATED GRIDSQUARE ! ++
+1HOW?!
+1Aurora, from Airborn by Kenneth Oppel.
+1.
..
... where's Lionsgate again?
MOAR DAKKA! DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA! ! NEVAR 'NUFF DAKKA! ! ! EVAR! ! ! !
+1First non-plat here!
+1What, exactly, is this again?
+1@Panzerwaifu69
+1... on a second thought.... early WWI biplane bombers also used hand grenades and mortar bombs as their payload not unlike modern drones, so...
Airburst munitions (which causes damage through shockwave, shrapnel, or fragmentation) don't quite work against armored targets so I doubt thats's the case.
Anybody explain why does a WWI tank require anti-drone cages again?
+1@Kerbango Thanks!
+1@DISHWASHER2005
+1The " clamp(a, b, c) " FT operator limits the output of "a" between "b" and "c".
clamp([fuse timer code], [minimum fuse-arming time], [self-destruct time])
+1@Monarchii
+1Ahh, as they say, when you run out of ammo you become the ammo...
+1Right, quick question: who's your pfp? Looks cute either way.
+1