Didn't you make the code? It won't work on watercraft because of the clamp01(Altitude-50) part, which turns it completely off below 50m.
Using something like clamp01(Altitude>1) should work just fine
@zwen smooth(RESET ? RESET_VALUE : sign(INPUT) * 999999, RESET ? 9999999 : abs(INPUT))
RESET is the condition in which it resets, in this case Activate1. RESET_VALUE would be 0, and INPUT would be what you put inside sum()
You just made a PID without the P and D. Using the pid function and setting those two parameters to 0 would do the same thing. Also, You should use a smooth function that can be reset to zero instead of sum, as the sum function will keep its last value until it's reactivated
@ChrisPy There's no way this thing could go supersonic with that engine nacelle. Not only would the drag be extremely high, but the engine would suffer a lot of damage or a huge performance loss due to the shock waves
@AN2Felllla Both explanations are correct though. The AoA of a wing with (positive) dihedral will increase by AoS*sin(Dihedral_angle), thus the wing inside a non-coordinated turn will produce more lift than the other (unless you use the ailerons of course)
Reason for not using the ailerons at high alpha is that not only will it produce the opposite effect due to drag, but this same asymmetric drag may induce a spin, something you really don't want.
.
Flight model is not perfect but it's certainly better than most phantoms on the site, good job
@ChiChiWerx
Setting calculateDrag to false or dragScale to 0 on a wing part eliminates both induced drag and parasite drag.
.
For simulating induced drag I convert to Funky Trees the fomula for induced drag, which is Drag(Newtons) = Drag_coefficient * 0.5 * EAS^2 * wing_area, where EAS is the equivalent of IAS in SimplePlanes and in m/s, and wing area is in m^2. Converted to FT the base code would be Drag_coefficient_code * 0.5 * pow(IAS,2) * Area, where Dragcoefficientcode would be a function of AoA, which can be either simple like a quadratic function or a more complex polynomial (so that it matches a specific real airfoil/wing).
This engine would have a very low max value, to make its fuel consumption practically null, and a powerMultiplier adjusted so that when the input is 1 the output will be 1 newton, as well as IAS>5 as its activation group since the AngleOfAttack variable tends to freak out when the speed is near 0.
This engine would be attached to a rotator with AoA as input to keep the induced drag force vector where it should be, and it would also have the same activation group code as the engine.
.
This method, while being very complex, especially for people with reduced aerodynamics and funky trees knowledge, allows to recreate induced drag very realistically
.
I personally believe the stall AoA / stall characteristics tradeoff is definitely worth it, as the high angle of attack is a distinctive characteristic of highly swept wings and delta wings (for example, the F2Y Sea Dart would land/take-off at nearly 30 degrees AoA to produce enough lift)
.
Regarding the fuel consumption, though I believe efficiency would be a more appropriate word, you are correct, with drag enabled the symmetric airfoil is by far the most efficient at higher speeds due its low parasite drag. However, by disabling drag the wings parts will no longer create any kind of drag so the plane's fuel efficiency will be higher with flat bottom (more lift, less thrust/speed needed to fly).
.
While you're mostly right about pilots not often using the entire AoA capacity of their aircraft, as energy retention is an important aspect of air to air combat, it is certainly useful, since, as you have seen in the image I linked above, the high AoA is necessary to generate as much lift as a straight wing.
.
I'd
@ChiChiWerx I personally prefer to get rid of the drag of the stock wings and simulate it with an engine on a rotator. This allows for much easier induced drag modelling without affecting the parasite drag of the wing part
Furthermore, the symmetric airfoil stalls at 13.5 degrees (compared to the 27.5 of the flat bottom), which is too low in comparison with the stall angle of most delta wing jets with canards (30° - 50° range)
Excellent flight model (very good airfoil choices, next time try angling the flat bottom wings ~1.4 degrees down to achieve a symmetrical-ish behaviour).
The FBW is a bit rough but it usually gets its job done. I also like the overall aesthetic design a lot, great build!
Didn't you make the code? It won't work on watercraft because of the clamp01(Altitude-50) part, which turns it completely off below 50m.
Using something like clamp01(Altitude>1) should work just fine
planes > ships
reduce the angle of the elevator
+1You would use funky trees so that each blade moves differently based on Pitch/Roll input and its position
@zwen
smooth(RESET ? RESET_VALUE : sign(INPUT) * 999999, RESET ? 9999999 : abs(INPUT))RESET is the condition in which it resets, in this case Activate1. RESET_VALUE would be 0, and INPUT would be what you put inside sum()
You just made a PID without the P and D. Using the pid function and setting those two parameters to 0 would do the same thing. Also, You should use a smooth function that can be reset to zero instead of sum, as the sum function will keep its last value until it's reactivated
Same ToS, so yes
@Rakoval500k you have the weapon on an activation group
@BlunderBirb That's the thing, the real one has much more travel
Why is the suspension compressed midair
ceil(1.75-sum(clamp01(ammo(“MunitionName”)<x)))
+1@Sergio666 Thanks!
+1If "half" hollow fuselage blocks are added, an opacity setting would be very useful aesthetically for creating canopies
+59@WarThunderPlayer it only affects the location of the CoL and wing area
The posts are getting less and less interesting, I rarely find anything that catches my eye
@ChrisPy There's no way this thing could go supersonic with that engine nacelle. Not only would the drag be extremely high, but the engine would suffer a lot of damage or a huge performance loss due to the shock waves
You can't change the input for the brakes, but you could set the rotor pitch to neutral instead
Please make the spoilers-deflectors system correctly
+2Remove the "just like the real thing" lol, you know very well there are multiple more flap settings
+1blåsa
another legacy hornet with super hornet wings
+1first one can be simplified to
+3clamp01(Activate1)your last ship had an extremely dark thumbnail
my eyes
+1A rotator with the input clamp01(Altitude/10000), where 10000 is the altitude in meters at which the rotator will reach its maximum angle
looks tail heavy, but nice build
not enough pitch authority, and your CoM is too far in front of the CoL
+2You need to have a very good understanding and knowledge of funky trees first, it isn't simple if you want it to work well
false is the default value
you should use chaff for smoke
The G-limiter seems to be very ineffective lol
+4you spawned it on approach and can't lock missiles onto it
+1@VibingSovietCat that's turboprop
+1it's 9.814453 m/s², which is correct
+1wow so much skill
+2there should be this button, called "uninstall"
+1I've heard it makes people very happy
isn't there a mechanical tag or something. Besides, you can ask a moderator for the tag
@AN2Felllla Both explanations are correct though. The AoA of a wing with (positive) dihedral will increase by AoS*sin(Dihedral_angle), thus the wing inside a non-coordinated turn will produce more lift than the other (unless you use the ailerons of course)
@DRpotato pretty much
nope
it was a joke, someone took it seriously, etc etc, now it's ending, so feel free to remove this post
+1Tomcats!
@CharlesDeGaulle The B-52 can carry more than 1.6 times it's own weight, so say fighter jet instead of plane next time lol
Reason for not using the ailerons at high alpha is that not only will it produce the opposite effect due to drag, but this same asymmetric drag may induce a spin, something you really don't want.
+1.
Flight model is not perfect but it's certainly better than most phantoms on the site, good job
reduce the deflection of the pitch surfaces, you're stalling the airplane
@ChiChiWerx
Setting calculateDrag to false or dragScale to 0 on a wing part eliminates both induced drag and parasite drag.
.
For simulating induced drag I convert to Funky Trees the fomula for induced drag, which is
Drag(Newtons) = Drag_coefficient * 0.5 * EAS^2 * wing_area, where EAS is the equivalent of IAS in SimplePlanes and in m/s, and wing area is in m^2. Converted to FT the base code would beDrag_coefficient_code * 0.5 * pow(IAS,2) * Area, where Dragcoefficientcode would be a function of AoA, which can be either simple like a quadratic function or a more complex polynomial (so that it matches a specific real airfoil/wing).This engine would have a very low
maxvalue, to make its fuel consumption practically null, and apowerMultiplieradjusted so that when the input is 1 the output will be 1 newton, as well asIAS>5as its activation group since the AngleOfAttack variable tends to freak out when the speed is near 0.This engine would be attached to a rotator with AoA as input to keep the induced drag force vector where it should be, and it would also have the same activation group code as the engine.
.
This method, while being very complex, especially for people with reduced aerodynamics and funky trees knowledge, allows to recreate induced drag very realistically
.
I personally believe the stall AoA / stall characteristics tradeoff is definitely worth it, as the high angle of attack is a distinctive characteristic of highly swept wings and delta wings (for example, the F2Y Sea Dart would land/take-off at nearly 30 degrees AoA to produce enough lift)
.
Regarding the fuel consumption, though I believe efficiency would be a more appropriate word, you are correct, with drag enabled the symmetric airfoil is by far the most efficient at higher speeds due its low parasite drag. However, by disabling drag the wings parts will no longer create any kind of drag so the plane's fuel efficiency will be higher with flat bottom (more lift, less thrust/speed needed to fly).
.
While you're mostly right about pilots not often using the entire AoA capacity of their aircraft, as energy retention is an important aspect of air to air combat, it is certainly useful, since, as you have seen in the image I linked above, the high AoA is necessary to generate as much lift as a straight wing.
.
I'd
You should at least specify the variants and sources
@ChiChiWerx I personally prefer to get rid of the drag of the stock wings and simulate it with an engine on a rotator. This allows for much easier induced drag modelling without affecting the parasite drag of the wing part
Furthermore, the symmetric airfoil stalls at 13.5 degrees (compared to the 27.5 of the flat bottom), which is too low in comparison with the stall angle of most delta wing jets with canards (30° - 50° range)
Excellent flight model (very good airfoil choices, next time try angling the flat bottom wings ~1.4 degrees down to achieve a symmetrical-ish behaviour).
+1The FBW is a bit rough but it usually gets its job done. I also like the overall aesthetic design a lot, great build!
where does the middle engine get its air from?