Official FAR Craft Repository

[MightyDarkStar]

Spitfire LF. IX - Bang on identical top speed to the real thing, though at a lower altitude.

Spoiler

 

 

Spitfire F VII - Outperforms the real thing ever so slightly (~3mph)

Spoiler

 

[Surefoot]

Impressive models here, i can see a lot of attention to details, what mod did you use to get the fuselage so perfect ?

[MightyDarkStar]

2 hours ago, Surefoot said:

Impressive models here, i can see a lot of attention to details, what mod did you use to get the fuselage so perfect ?

B9 Procedural wings, works a charm :).

[MightyDarkStar]

Some more, with little refinements here and there they're starting to look (and are performing) quite genuine. I can't wait to move onto other plane types though, like Bf 109s or P-51s.

Spitfire F XIV

Overperforming a little bit (~10mph)

Spoiler

 

 

Spitfire F 21
 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

[SVS]

My SU-27 

Can anyone help me on how to improve the maneuverability on this, not the most experience with FAR. Id also like to know how to set AOA properly on the front slats.

Edited February 7, 2018 by SVS

[Surefoot]

First make sure your control surfaces, and wing shape/surface are similar to the real thing:

Also make sure you try and keep the proportions right (and thus the CoL vs CoM) because that's a key element. Also note how the wing root extensions are done and merging with the fuselage, and how they cover the intakes (which are not too far behind the cockpit actually).

I know first hand it's a lot of hours of work doing all that fine detail, but Sukhoi are into fine details that are kinda important to aerodynamics...

Once you have a really close model, you'll find out it's completely unstable and will flip over immediately. You need the AtmosphereAutopilot mod that simulates the fly by wire system of modern jets. Just set the limits in AA to decent realistic values, and you'll have an SU 27 that flies almost like the real thing

(edit) from what i see in DCS (and i suppose it's like the real one) the edge slats are working in counter-AoA mode.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Surefoot

[Hodo]

On 2/7/2018 at 1:54 PM, SVS said:

My SU-27 

Can anyone help me on how to improve the maneuverability on this, not the most experience with FAR. Id also like to know how to set AOA properly on the front slats.

 

I found for leading edge slats your settings should be between 3-6 deg no more than 7.  I have them set to AoA not to roll, pitch, or yaw.

This craft is an older design of mine using AJE+FAR and BDA.   You can actually see them deflected slightly in this pic.  

 

I started toying with the idea of slats a while ago, here is one of my early test fighters.

 

It had its drawbacks but did a good job of being a test platform for me, and actually lead to designs like this...

That is the same two craft, it has IR to move its wings forward into that position.

 

[MightyDarkStar]

Okay, these are the very last Spitfire's I've made, I'll move onto the P-51 or Hurricane methinks.

Spitfire I - Bang-on top speed.

Spoiler

Spitfire XVIII 

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spitfire F. 22 - Same performance as F. 21

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[tetryds]

Nice airplanes.

Yes, you will want forward surfaces with negative AoA deflection, that creates a sort of artificial stability, which greatly improves turning performance.

@MightyDarkStar nice spits, they look really close to real ones.

Btw, you can use hispanos and brownings 303 on those spits, just get Aviator Arsenal and apply a module manager update pack.

[Guest]

 

[Me1_base]

Super manoeuvre

[Me1_base]

Try cobra

Album UVvhwh5 will appear when post is submitted

Edited February 26, 2018 by Me1_base
Imgur

[SVS]

MiG-29

[Guest]

I just cant break through 333.4m/sec FAR sees it as mach 1.093 but the RSS/RO RP-0/RP-1 contract to break sound barrier is 342m/sec ... so I'm short by 8.6m/sec. Doesnt seem to matter 500 meters, 1km, 5km, 10km, 15km all tested all the same, just over 333m/sec and then zip.

 

As noted this design is in RSS with RO with the RP-1 dev career 

WHAT AM I NOT DOING CORRECTLY? I think I'm area ruled correctly with the correct type of wing geometry, but now i need help lol. here are pics of what i have so far: 

[capi3101]

Nothing about the plane's design jumps out at me, at least nothing related to limitations to the craft's speed (dynamic stability is another story, but it's not what you're going after so I won't go there). You might have a tad too much wing inducing just enough drag. What does it look like when you've got the debug voxels turned on?

Two other things - what are the stats on the engine you're using, and have you tried putting it into a steep dive (you know, climb up to about 20,000, then put her 30-40 degrees towards the ground with the throttle all the way to the stops)?

[Guest]

Here we go, it was the wing mass stopping me. Area ruling could be tweaked more, but it works.

 

Even spalshes down full safely

100 meters mach 1, ceilings, cruise 18.500 meters and zoom lift ceiling 20008 meters (then it spins out)

Even my U2 knock offs cant pass 20,000 meters, so I'm pretty happy

stats here: its a Derwent V 

Performance

• Maximum thrust: 2,000 lbf (8.90 kN) at 16,000 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 4,000 lbf (17.79 kN) at 15,000 rpm at sea level
• Overall pressure ratio: 3.9:1
• Turbine inlet temperature: 1,560 °F (849 °C)
• Specific fuel consumption: 1.17 lb/(lbf h) (119.25 kg/(kN h)), Derwent V 1.02 1.28 lb/(lbf h) (103.97 kg/(kN h))
• Thrust-to-weight ratio: 2.04 lbf/lb (0.0199 kN/kg), Derwent V 3.226 1.724 lbf/lb (0.0316 kN/kg)
• Military, static: 2,000 lbf (8.90 kN) at 16,600 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 3,500 lbf (15.57 kN) at 14,600 rpm at sea level
• Cruising, static: 1,550 lbf (6.89 kN) at 15,400 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 3,000 lbf (13.34 kN) at 14,000 rpm at sea level
• Idling, static: 120 lbf (0.53 kN) at 5,500 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 120 lbf (0.53 kN) at 5,500 rpm at sea level

Edited March 26, 2018 by Guest

[SVS]

TU-95 Bear

[Guest]

Just now, SVS said:

TU-95 Bear

ceiling?

[SVS]

Around 13,000 meters

[SVS]

 

Su-30 of the Russian Knights

[Van Disaster]

On 26/03/2018 at 4:30 PM, Aazard said:

Here we go, it was the wing mass stopping me. Area ruling could be tweaked more, but it works.

The second version has more sweep & looks like less span, so also presumably overall less drag - you concentrated on wave drag, but compared to working on absolute overall drag that is a relatively small thing & you didn't give us any other numbers in the hangar. The static panel should tell you what you need to know, it'll have a cD figure for the AoA at altitude.

[Me1_base]

F/A18F

[Me1_base]

pitch axis remains controllable at 60 degree AoA

[Me1_base]

Kulbit manoeuvre without Thrust Vectoring.

[SVS]