@ALRX The narrow wings and the wide space between the wings and the tail, and the tapered points where the wings connect all scream swing wing. I also suspect that if t he wing sung the opposite way about 15 degrees or so the plane might actually be a bit faster and more maneuverable. Many similar design are, up to a point, where they CoL gets ahead of the CoM.
BTW, this plane is actually a bit faster than it looks. It is so graceful and smooth in flight that it seems like it is moving at about half the speed that it is actually travelling. Just how slow can you get it to fly straight and level without needing to pitch back?
It's messing with the airfoils a bit, but if you add a -0.60 degree tilt (X-axis) to the canards it will eliminate most of the pitch down tenancy.Also turning on the Trim for the canards helps.
I made a successor with those changes that you can look at and fine tune to get the performance you want.
0-120 mph in 2.5 seconds is only an average acceleration of 70.4 ft/sec or about 2Gs. That's well within the limits that a human can withstand, even humans who aren't in the best of shape.
But you're right about it being unrealistic for a 427. A real 427 would have a 0-120 closer to 5.5 seconds.
@UnguidedCylinder Oh, it makes a great jet too. I replaced the props with a BFE150 engine and it performs well. With trim it can fly around a fairly low speeds (170 mph or so, low for a jet)
@Planeacceleration The value you want to change is on the third page in Overlord, the one titled "Joint Rotator" and is under "range" which tells you how many degrees you want the rotatory to turn.
You might also wish to scale the propeller blades (wings) to increase the thrust and speed of the engine.
Yes you can make the prop go faster by increasing the rotator speed, but be careful. If you set it too fast for a given plane it will break apart.
Also, you will probably need two engines, one on each side of the plane, rotating in opposite directions so that the torque will cancel out, otherwise one engine will end up rotating the aircraft around the second engine.
Oh, and the Min/Max input sets how long the rotator will spin for, but when you slide VTOL in the opposite direction the engine will spin the other way, so you don't have to set the numbers more that 10,000 or so apart. In fact, a huge number can work against you as the only way to stop the engine is to match the slider to the amount spun. Throttle is a little nicer for this as it lets you set things to a 1% increment.
Here is a 50% faster one, with a counter rotating one in the back. https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/mmB5H5/Electric-Prop-Help
Thanks I'll get it a try. The trick is to lower it while still being able to keep the plane airborne. I've been trying to reverse engineer BaconAircraft's E-Fan Engine to figure out why it is so stable.
Okay, I slowed down the rotors (to get rid of the"pogo jump"), made the wings larger (to get more thrust) and then scaled the wings down to the right visual size, and it seems to work. Thanks.
@lancelot3340 It's a nice plane. I'm not sure if I could make it fly any better. I might tinker with it a bit, but I'm probably going to make it worse.
@lancelot3340 Well the original "flying pancake" had twice the wing area for about 1/7th the weight, so it could take off with very little wind, and could nearly hover, and it's said that it behaved a bit like a helicopter.But I bet such a design in SP would be a bit more sensitive to control, and not quite as stable
It'a a very nice airplane. Ironically I think the (apparently) less than desired maneuverability might be the result of the designs great stability. I think this design probably flies better than the real aircraft did.
This insn't a bad design it just has a couple of things that need to be adjusted. First off the major problem is that the center of lift (blue sphere)is ahead of the center of mass (red shpere). TO fix that you just need to add more weight forward, mostly by adding fuel near the front of the airplane. Replace the dead weight with fuel as well since you'll get extra range for the weight.
You might want to consider adding a bit more wing behind the engine, moving and/or sweeping the forward wings further back, using lighter rear landing gear in, or increasing the diameter and thickness of the propeller.
With just a little work I got it to fly, so the design is really close. And once it flies it only take a little more work to make it fly better. So stick with it.
I uploaded a successor to your design to show you what I mean. It is 99% the same as your original design and it flies and floats. Most of the changes were in shifting the wings further back, adding fuel tot he front, upping the propeller slighting, and adding buoyancy so ti would float. Less than five minutes work. You did the hard part, and built a sound design.
Your first major problem is that you center of lift is ahead of your center of mass, which makes the plane unstable and problem to going into a uncontrolled climb.
To fix: Put more weight upfront (say by adding fuel) to shift the center of weight ahead of the center of lift, and or move/add more wing further back to shift the center of lift.
Your second problem is that the plane doesn't have enough lift for the tail section, which causes the airplane to keep bouncing up and down like a roller coaster.
To fix: Increase the lift for the tail section. You can do this by angling the tail/adjusting it's dihedral to make it more horizontal, or by adding a horizontal tail secotion with stabilizers, or by moving or reshaping the the wings further back.
Fix those two things and it should fly.
Now there are some other things that you might want to adjust. For example ailerons (roll) are more effective near the out edge of the wing,but you don't have to change that.
I don't know what the rotators on the aircraft are supposed to do for it.
Here is a version with more fuel up front, and flatter tail to show you one way to make this fly.
Just what is considered a "modern" aircraft. Anything still flying? Any jet aircraft? 6th generation, 5th generation? I just like to be on the same page here?
@shahram15 I'm not all that kind. Fixing problems with other peoples designs is a great way to learn and improve your own skills, because it gives you challenges that are different from the ones you might run into with your own designs. So it is a win-win situation.
@Othawne Unrealistic, yeah probably., but fun. Besides it's a fictional plane so so don't have to worry about it. It's not like you were making a 1:1 replica.
@ALRX The narrow wings and the wide space between the wings and the tail, and the tapered points where the wings connect all scream swing wing. I also suspect that if t he wing sung the opposite way about 15 degrees or so the plane might actually be a bit faster and more maneuverable. Many similar design are, up to a point, where they CoL gets ahead of the CoM.
BTW, this plane is actually a bit faster than it looks. It is so graceful and smooth in flight that it seems like it is moving at about half the speed that it is actually travelling. Just how slow can you get it to fly straight and level without needing to pitch back?
Nice airplane. For a suggestion on your next project how about a swing wing version of this one?
This is a very well behaved airplane!
It's messing with the airfoils a bit, but if you add a -0.60 degree tilt (X-axis) to the canards it will eliminate most of the pitch down tenancy.Also turning on the Trim for the canards helps.
I made a successor with those changes that you can look at and fine tune to get the performance you want.
Fun ground attacker, even if I flew into my own bomb. ;)
+1A good ornithoper that is easy to take off.
+1@SledDriver You're welcome. It's a nice plane.
Nice. Your SR-71's keep getting better and better.
Nice design. Really good detail on the engine and the cowling. I love the synchronized rudder - it does seem to make it very easy to control.
+10-120 mph in 2.5 seconds is only an average acceleration of 70.4 ft/sec or about 2Gs. That's well within the limits that a human can withstand, even humans who aren't in the best of shape.
But you're right about it being unrealistic for a 427. A real 427 would have a 0-120 closer to 5.5 seconds.
@UnguidedCylinder Oh, it makes a great jet too. I replaced the props with a BFE150 engine and it performs well. With trim it can fly around a fairly low speeds (170 mph or so, low for a jet)
+1Decent "flapper" design.
Nice design
+1Nice. I think I'll reconfigure my controller so I can look out the sides.
@Planeacceleration The value you want to change is on the third page in Overlord, the one titled "Joint Rotator" and is under "range" which tells you how many degrees you want the rotatory to turn.
You might also wish to scale the propeller blades (wings) to increase the thrust and speed of the engine.
Yes you can make the prop go faster by increasing the rotator speed, but be careful. If you set it too fast for a given plane it will break apart.
Also, you will probably need two engines, one on each side of the plane, rotating in opposite directions so that the torque will cancel out, otherwise one engine will end up rotating the aircraft around the second engine.
Oh, and the Min/Max input sets how long the rotator will spin for, but when you slide VTOL in the opposite direction the engine will spin the other way, so you don't have to set the numbers more that 10,000 or so apart. In fact, a huge number can work against you as the only way to stop the engine is to match the slider to the amount spun. Throttle is a little nicer for this as it lets you set things to a 1% increment.
Here is a 50% faster one, with a counter rotating one in the back. https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/mmB5H5/Electric-Prop-Help
Thanks I'll get it a try. The trick is to lower it while still being able to keep the plane airborne. I've been trying to reverse engineer BaconAircraft's E-Fan Engine to figure out why it is so stable.
Okay, I slowed down the rotors (to get rid of the"pogo jump"), made the wings larger (to get more thrust) and then scaled the wings down to the right visual size, and it seems to work. Thanks.
Fantastic!
Very nice. I love how it is fast but flies very well at slow speed - that makes it great for ground attack.
Nice looking aircraft
+1The is a very nice Batwing. The preview pics don't do it justice.
It is a nice concept. It doesn't quite work, but has potential.
@lancelot3340 It's a nice plane. I'm not sure if I could make it fly any better. I might tinker with it a bit, but I'm probably going to make it worse.
@lancelot3340 Well the original "flying pancake" had twice the wing area for about 1/7th the weight, so it could take off with very little wind, and could nearly hover, and it's said that it behaved a bit like a helicopter.But I bet such a design in SP would be a bit more sensitive to control, and not quite as stable
+1It'a a very nice airplane. Ironically I think the (apparently) less than desired maneuverability might be the result of the designs great stability. I think this design probably flies better than the real aircraft did.
+1This is a really nice looking replica.
+1@SkyHunter Glad to help. One of the reasons why I like to help with other's designs is that I get to learn stuff through problem solving.
The basic plane was pretty good, it just had a few bugs to iron out. I hope to see your next design.
This is a fun little Mig
+1This insn't a bad design it just has a couple of things that need to be adjusted. First off the major problem is that the center of lift (blue sphere)is ahead of the center of mass (red shpere). TO fix that you just need to add more weight forward, mostly by adding fuel near the front of the airplane. Replace the dead weight with fuel as well since you'll get extra range for the weight.
You might want to consider adding a bit more wing behind the engine, moving and/or sweeping the forward wings further back, using lighter rear landing gear in, or increasing the diameter and thickness of the propeller.
With just a little work I got it to fly, so the design is really close. And once it flies it only take a little more work to make it fly better. So stick with it.
I uploaded a successor to your design to show you what I mean. It is 99% the same as your original design and it flies and floats. Most of the changes were in shifting the wings further back, adding fuel tot he front, upping the propeller slighting, and adding buoyancy so ti would float. Less than five minutes work. You did the hard part, and built a sound design.
How are you defining smallest for this competition. Length? LengthxWidth? Wing Area? Number of Parts?
Yea, another Eagle!
This is kinda nice.
Nice, but it needs an air freshener
+1Nice paint job
Or you could just look at the autocredit.
@yellow8041
+1Don't be sorry, I just wanted to know what criteria to use.
I see two major problems:
Your first major problem is that you center of lift is ahead of your center of mass, which makes the plane unstable and problem to going into a uncontrolled climb.
To fix: Put more weight upfront (say by adding fuel) to shift the center of weight ahead of the center of lift, and or move/add more wing further back to shift the center of lift.
Your second problem is that the plane doesn't have enough lift for the tail section, which causes the airplane to keep bouncing up and down like a roller coaster.
To fix: Increase the lift for the tail section. You can do this by angling the tail/adjusting it's dihedral to make it more horizontal, or by adding a horizontal tail secotion with stabilizers, or by moving or reshaping the the wings further back.
Fix those two things and it should fly.
Now there are some other things that you might want to adjust. For example ailerons (roll) are more effective near the out edge of the wing,but you don't have to change that.
I don't know what the rotators on the aircraft are supposed to do for it.
Here is a version with more fuel up front, and flatter tail to show you one way to make this fly.
http://www.simpleplanes.com/a/iSVqLW/Smiliingtrios-aircraft
Just what is considered a "modern" aircraft. Anything still flying? Any jet aircraft? 6th generation, 5th generation? I just like to be on the same page here?
+1@Seungseung22 tricky.
Does it have to be able to take off? Or can it start in air?
@shahram15 I'm not exactly a beast either. But overall helping other people has benefits.
@shahram15 I'm not all that kind. Fixing problems with other peoples designs is a great way to learn and improve your own skills, because it gives you challenges that are different from the ones you might run into with your own designs. So it is a win-win situation.
@Planeacceleration You're welcome.
I missed this little gem last month. Very nice.
The bodywork in amazing. All the surfaces are so rounded and smooth.
@shahram15 Thanks for the instructions. I'll give it a try. I figured there had to be a way to get it off the ground, but I couldn't figure it out.
Nice
Sorry if I sound like an idiot here, but just how does this take off and fly? All I can get it to do is hop a bit? What am I missing?
Fun!!
@Othawne Unrealistic, yeah probably., but fun. Besides it's a fictional plane so so don't have to worry about it. It's not like you were making a 1:1 replica.