It;'s an interesting design. I like the engine glow. Maybe canards could help with the stability? Especially if they had a touch of dihedral to counterbalance the main wing. But it is a fun plane.
You don't have to make replicates to "be famous", nor do you have to make replicas to get upvotes. It's just that the for designs to grab peoples interest, and gain you notice (and maybe upvotes) they have to have something interesting about them.
Now as people get more experienced with SP, and their skills improve, they will probably not find the same sort of designs interesting, and so won't be as impressed by the designs from a beginner or intermediate player. Just putting some wings and an engine on a design and getting it to fly doesn't impress them the say way it does to people who are new to SP.
Now replicas tend to be more detailed designs and just how accurate they are can make them more interesting.
Shouldn't but it did. I am running under sream as the admin, and it was the firewall that caused the problem. I got a pop up from my Firewall/Antivirus that detected a change in simpleplanes.exe and then SP locked up.
I had to disconnect from the internet, disable the web monitoring part of the firewall, start SP offline, exist SP, then turn everything back on and restart SP. At that point the exe files matched and everything's okay.
@humangrenade I thought that too, for a time. I went to a site that checks to see if other sites were down, and at first it said SP was up, probably because the site was intermittent for awhile. A hour later, it said the site was indeed down, and I knew the problem wasn't on my end.
@mikethemark Good luck. Oh, you might want to try using fuselage blocks instead of the "Blocks" you used, as with Fuselage blocks you can not only customize the shape but add fuel and dead weight, which can help you to control where the center of balance ends up. The make sure the center of lift is slightly behind that.
@mikethemark Yeah that's a common problem with VTOL and vectored thrust aircraft, let alone something without wings. What you need to do is balance the craft out perfectly, and position the thrusters equidistantly from the center of mass. It's easier said than done. I've got a vehicle I'm trying to use thrusters just for vertical take off and it's tough because I have to move the thruster every time I change something.
@Lyra You might want to try the 2B. ttps://www.simpleplanes.com/a/w2e8N9/VTOL-Travel-Pod-Mk-2B
It;'s a modest improvement until I get the Mk 3 ready.
BTW, just how slow are you trying to go? I've probably flown this thing as much as anybody and know a few things about handling it at low speeds. A couple of them are counter intuitive, and contrary to what I intended when I designed it. For instance, it's easier to land horizontally than vertically, or that's it best to come in a little on the fast side and then pull up to bleed off speed and trust to the landing gear to absorb the shock.
@OwenFPV I decided to add canards to this to see how it handles. It actually has some pitch now, and enough trim to let the autopilot take over. It's almost fall proof.
Link to Updated Model B: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/w2e8N9/VTOL-Travel-Pod-Mk-2B
@OwenFPV It would handle better if I put some actual wings on the thing, but a lot of the credit for how it looks should go to SalmASaberhage. I just saw his aircraft and thought that the cockpit would be ideal for this.
I've got a newer version with smaller (they fold flat against the fuselage) in the works, maybe I'll try adding some canards to it.
I tried to help by moving the Ailerons closer to he tips of the wings where they will be more effective. Then I added in some flaps that can be adjusted with the trim controls to increase the lift.
I posted it here: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/tHqve8/WW2-Plane-bomb
If it still is troublesome I suggest editing out the drag on the wing coverings since they are really supposed to be part of the wings.
@SalemASaberhagen Have a look: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/04mXu0/VTOL-Travel-Pod-Mk-2
For the record, I've been trying to do a version of this without your design for the pod but for some reason none of the replacements fly as well. For some reasopn why design acts like a parachute when I cut power and go into landing mode.
BTW, it should\have auto credited your design. It did when I first posted it, but not when I reuploaded it.
1)First off I strongly suggest changing the front cockpit to the primary-it's probably a major contributor to the control problems and crashes, as the plane isn't centered on the spot you'd expect it to be, and your camera angles are off.
2) Increase the range of motion of the rotators for the engines. I'd say at least 45 degrees, as that's the angle where you get the best trajectory, which should help with takeoffs and reduce runway distance needed.
Other than that:
3) Adding some Pitch, Roll or Yaw ability to one or more of the gyroscopes , and/or adjusting their stability can give you better control and stability. Or, more commonly, better control or stability.
4) Adding some dihedral,and antihedral to the wings, front and back, will make the plane more stable.
@Mickk Do you mind if I try something really odd with it? I got the idea for a variable geometry ring wing.
Oh, and the ring wing works great with a prop engine, especially with a pair of them.
I think it needs some form of vertical stabilization. Either by adding a vertical stabilizer or by adding a bit of angle and/or dihedral to the wings.
After that it depends on what you want this to be. If it is a land based drone, then some sort of landing gear, maybe detachable if this is supposed to be a one use drone (like a flying bomb). Some buoyancy if this is supposed to be a water drone. Maybe a camera pointed down below the drone so you can spy on stuff?
While you designed it as a fighter, I think this plane excels as a Strike aircraft. I took off the Air to Air missiles and put in SIX Cleavers and this plane took off and flew with no problem. Easy to sink the Beast and it's escorts.
@Zyvx Glad you like it. I did have a couple of variants, trying to expand on the passenger compartment. I was thinking that it could work as a sort of futuristic Sky Ambulance/Life-flight or, with a redesign, as a modular plan that could swap out passenger and cargo sections.
@Mickk I'm on high physics. Typically when a plan flies apart it's at low altitude where the air is densest. I put this thing through it's paces at it holds up and performs nicely. Maybe it's a platform issue? I'm on a PC.
Odd, it doesn't blow up when I fly it. I've tired high speed down low, 1000mph at 65K and even a power dive with a pull up near the water. It's rock solid.
Some questions:
-What altitude does it blow up at?
-Do the wings start flexing wildly before it blows up?
-What Physics settings do you use?,
-Are you using the time warp mod?
@BlackhattAircraft
Yeah it is a cool craze. It's a neat concept and the fighter (of which there are at least two separate designs and several variants) is mostly workable in SP. Landing on the carrier aircraft is the tricky part.
I'm working on a Boeing 985 "Arrow"now, and hope to be ale to use it as a base frame for the Variable Wing, Canard, Delta Wing and Vitac versions.
@BlackhattAircraft
LOL! There is always a Bf-109 craze. It's one of a handful of aircraft that people are always making version of. A6Ms, Bf-109s, P-38s, Spitfires, P-51s. We get then every week. Not that that's a bad thing.
@ShrimpRex Sure, I'll note it as a successor so you can get some points. I've adjusted the engine, reduced the wingspan, reduced the wing area wing area, added leading edge slats, and got rid of the landing gear. I just got see if I can get it to take off with 10000 pounds!
Very nice.
+1Nice.
Very nice.
It's not bad, although I think it rolls a little too quickly .
Nice!
+1It;'s an interesting design. I like the engine glow. Maybe canards could help with the stability? Especially if they had a touch of dihedral to counterbalance the main wing. But it is a fun plane.
Nice first upload. VTOL and props that transition from vertical to horizontal make for an ambitious start.
You don't have to make replicates to "be famous", nor do you have to make replicas to get upvotes. It's just that the for designs to grab peoples interest, and gain you notice (and maybe upvotes) they have to have something interesting about them.
Now as people get more experienced with SP, and their skills improve, they will probably not find the same sort of designs interesting, and so won't be as impressed by the designs from a beginner or intermediate player. Just putting some wings and an engine on a design and getting it to fly doesn't impress them the say way it does to people who are new to SP.
Now replicas tend to be more detailed designs and just how accurate they are can make them more interesting.
+1Shouldn't but it did. I am running under sream as the admin, and it was the firewall that caused the problem. I got a pop up from my Firewall/Antivirus that detected a change in simpleplanes.exe and then SP locked up.
I had to disconnect from the internet, disable the web monitoring part of the firewall, start SP offline, exist SP, then turn everything back on and restart SP. At that point the exe files matched and everything's okay.
@humangrenade I thought that too, for a time. I went to a site that checks to see if other sites were down, and at first it said SP was up, probably because the site was intermittent for awhile. A hour later, it said the site was indeed down, and I knew the problem wasn't on my end.
@mikethemark Good luck. Oh, you might want to try using fuselage blocks instead of the "Blocks" you used, as with Fuselage blocks you can not only customize the shape but add fuel and dead weight, which can help you to control where the center of balance ends up. The make sure the center of lift is slightly behind that.
@mikethemark Yeah that's a common problem with VTOL and vectored thrust aircraft, let alone something without wings. What you need to do is balance the craft out perfectly, and position the thrusters equidistantly from the center of mass. It's easier said than done. I've got a vehicle I'm trying to use thrusters just for vertical take off and it's tough because I have to move the thruster every time I change something.
@Lyra You might want to try the 2B. ttps://www.simpleplanes.com/a/w2e8N9/VTOL-Travel-Pod-Mk-2B
It;'s a modest improvement until I get the Mk 3 ready.
BTW, just how slow are you trying to go? I've probably flown this thing as much as anybody and know a few things about handling it at low speeds. A couple of them are counter intuitive, and contrary to what I intended when I designed it. For instance, it's easier to land horizontally than vertically, or that's it best to come in a little on the fast side and then pull up to bleed off speed and trust to the landing gear to absorb the shock.
Very nice.
Looks good so far.
@ian920911313 LOL! I throttled up expecting to wait while the pale got up to speed for takeoff, and I nearly choked on my coffee!
It's fun to fly.
Wild ride! You should post a warning about the acceleration!
@OwenFPV I decided to add canards to this to see how it handles. It actually has some pitch now, and enough trim to let the autopilot take over. It's almost fall proof.
Link to Updated Model B: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/w2e8N9/VTOL-Travel-Pod-Mk-2B
@OwenFPV It would handle better if I put some actual wings on the thing, but a lot of the credit for how it looks should go to SalmASaberhage. I just saw his aircraft and thought that the cockpit would be ideal for this.
I've got a newer version with smaller (they fold flat against the fuselage) in the works, maybe I'll try adding some canards to it.
I tried to help by moving the Ailerons closer to he tips of the wings where they will be more effective. Then I added in some flaps that can be adjusted with the trim controls to increase the lift.
I posted it here: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/tHqve8/WW2-Plane-bomb
If it still is troublesome I suggest editing out the drag on the wing coverings since they are really supposed to be part of the wings.
+1Could you make two real wheels dummy wheels and turn off collision for them? That way maybe they wouldn't count towards the turn?
@SalemASaberhagen Have a look: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/04mXu0/VTOL-Travel-Pod-Mk-2
For the record, I've been trying to do a version of this without your design for the pod but for some reason none of the replacements fly as well. For some reasopn why design acts like a parachute when I cut power and go into landing mode.
BTW, it should\have auto credited your design. It did when I first posted it, but not when I reuploaded it.
@Apehorse19
Here you got: https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/N20tVh/Long-Bomb
Let me know if it works. It looks like a torpedo.
How small would you like the bomb to be? I'll scale one for you. Give me an appropriate LxWxH compared to the started bomb.
@mikethemark You're welcome.
Let me guess it was #1 that was causing most of your problems, right? It's what caused me to crash.
Nice design.
1)First off I strongly suggest changing the front cockpit to the primary-it's probably a major contributor to the control problems and crashes, as the plane isn't centered on the spot you'd expect it to be, and your camera angles are off.
2) Increase the range of motion of the rotators for the engines. I'd say at least 45 degrees, as that's the angle where you get the best trajectory, which should help with takeoffs and reduce runway distance needed.
Other than that:
3) Adding some Pitch, Roll or Yaw ability to one or more of the gyroscopes , and/or adjusting their stability can give you better control and stability. Or, more commonly, better control or stability.
4) Adding some dihedral,and antihedral to the wings, front and back, will make the plane more stable.
Good Luck.
And amazingly simply to operate. it just works. No worrying about balance, tipping over, getting up to speed. It just works.
@SalemASaberhagen
I did something really terrible to your design too. If you want I'll put it up so you can see it, but it's really radical.
It's a nice design.
Smooth water takeoffs
I liked the look, and that it was a a "push pull" design. But I loved what the landing gear did when I pressed G.
+1@Mickk Do you mind if I try something really odd with it? I got the idea for a variable geometry ring wing.
Oh, and the ring wing works great with a prop engine, especially with a pair of them.
It's a very interesting design.
I think it needs some form of vertical stabilization. Either by adding a vertical stabilizer or by adding a bit of angle and/or dihedral to the wings.
+1After that it depends on what you want this to be. If it is a land based drone, then some sort of landing gear, maybe detachable if this is supposed to be a one use drone (like a flying bomb). Some buoyancy if this is supposed to be a water drone. Maybe a camera pointed down below the drone so you can spy on stuff?
Fantastic!
Nice. Double so for your first.
While you designed it as a fighter, I think this plane excels as a Strike aircraft. I took off the Air to Air missiles and put in SIX Cleavers and this plane took off and flew with no problem. Easy to sink the Beast and it's escorts.
l love the long, thin fuselage. Nice glider.
+1Nice!
+1@Zyvx Do you think you could land this? https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/uFvWzQ/Folding-VTOL-miniplane
@Zyvx Glad you like it. I did have a couple of variants, trying to expand on the passenger compartment. I was thinking that it could work as a sort of futuristic Sky Ambulance/Life-flight or, with a redesign, as a modular plan that could swap out passenger and cargo sections.
@Mickk I'm on high physics. Typically when a plan flies apart it's at low altitude where the air is densest. I put this thing through it's paces at it holds up and performs nicely. Maybe it's a platform issue? I'm on a PC.
Odd, it doesn't blow up when I fly it. I've tired high speed down low, 1000mph at 65K and even a power dive with a pull up near the water. It's rock solid.
Some questions:
-What altitude does it blow up at?
-Do the wings start flexing wildly before it blows up?
-What Physics settings do you use?,
-Are you using the time warp mod?
@BlackhattAircraft
Yeah it is a cool craze. It's a neat concept and the fighter (of which there are at least two separate designs and several variants) is mostly workable in SP. Landing on the carrier aircraft is the tricky part.
I'm working on a Boeing 985 "Arrow"now, and hope to be ale to use it as a base frame for the Variable Wing, Canard, Delta Wing and Vitac versions.
@BlackhattAircraft
LOL! There is always a Bf-109 craze. It's one of a handful of aircraft that people are always making version of. A6Ms, Bf-109s, P-38s, Spitfires, P-51s. We get then every week. Not that that's a bad thing.
At least its not more Bf109s!
I wonder if there will be a craze to make Northrop N353/P900 fighters too.
@ShrimpRex Sure, I'll note it as a successor so you can get some points. I've adjusted the engine, reduced the wingspan, reduced the wing area wing area, added leading edge slats, and got rid of the landing gear. I just got see if I can get it to take off with 10000 pounds!
+1Handles well. Do you mind if I fine tune this to try and match up with the "offical" specs.
Based on the wing area and weight, I'm wondering if the 985 could actually fly.
+1This is a pretty nice acrostar