Azimech Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 6 minutes ago, MiffedStarfish said: That looks great! Is there a craft file? I wonder how it would perform in space.... Soon :-) 5 minutes ago, klond said: AA flak gun! Yes, that did cross my mind :-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiffedStarfish Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Just started work on a F/A-18 Hornet replica, but stuck on the wings and intakes. Any suggestions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qzgy Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 55 minutes ago, MiffedStarfish said: Just started work on a F/A-18 Hornet replica, but stuck on the wings and intakes. Any suggestions? A thing I do wor wings sometimes is use the smallest wings and build to lines of them then rotate into the appropriate angle and adjust to fit the look. Intakes... I'm not sure. I've used the circular intakes for a rough replica. Also, the whole thing looks a little short and I think the intakes should come down more. NCS adapters are your friend for making a smooth-ish transition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiffedStarfish Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Quick update on my F-18: (in a slightly newer version i have shortened the LERX and moved the intake forward) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pTrevTrevs Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 Look, I swear I wasn't TRYING to make an F-4 Phantom... it... just sort of came out that way. Okay, maybe the napalm canisters were intentional... and the anhedral elevators... But that's it! The missiles are't working very well, one of them always seems to fly off course (in this case it was the top one). Fortunately the wings keep this from being a solid F-4 replica and make it more of an unlicensed knock-off. It's not the best dogfighter, but it's fast enough that I guess it would make sense to use it as an interceptor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seiryu Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 The world famous kerbal jet(powered)coaster! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiffedStarfish Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 1 hour ago, pTrevTrevs said: Look, I swear I wasn't TRYING to make an F-4 Phantom... it... just sort of came out that way. Okay, maybe the napalm canisters were intentional... and the anhedral elevators... But that's it! The missiles are't working very well, one of them always seems to fly off course (in this case it was the top one). Fortunately the wings keep this from being a solid F-4 replica and make it more of an unlicensed knock-off. It's not the best dogfighter, but it's fast enough that I guess it would make sense to use it as an interceptor. That looks great! Theres a few things you can do to troubleshoot the missiles. If you haven't already, roatationally offset the seperatrons so the missiles spins, the balances out minors aiming problems and makes the missiles more stable. If you have offset them from the decoupler, they will sadly be inaccurate, which I found out the hard way. Another thing it might be is the missile may be hitting a part of the wing on release, to fix that you have to mov the hardpoint. And finally, the way symmetry handle subassemblies of parts is strange, and occasionally get rotation wrong. To check this isn't the case, turn of symmetry, make a copy of the working missile, then rotate it 180 and attach it to the other hardpoint. This also has the benefit of allowing you to single-fire the missiles. If none of that helps, I'm stumped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majorjim! Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 18 hours ago, Azimech said: Stock shotgun. What is the rear engine nozzle for? 18 minutes ago, seiryu said: The world famous kerbal jet(powered)coaster! That's more like it! Awesome build mate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimech Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 43 minutes ago, Majorjim! said: What is the rear engine nozzle for? Sugar and spice Saturday Day's Dawnin' ain't it sir? :-P Why ... ter cancel aahhht the bleedin' backfire of course ;-) Tested wif Bo-le Of Glue firin' from the wings of wahn of me choppers. Slightly forgot ter set the stagin' properly, nearly flipped it upside daahhhn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majorjim! Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 49 minutes ago, Azimech said: Sugar and spice Saturday Day's Dawnin' ain't it sir? :-P Why ... ter cancel aahhht the bleedin' backfire of course ;-) Tested wif Bo-le Of Glue firin' from the wings of wahn of me choppers. Slightly forgot ter set the stagin' properly, nearly flipped it upside daahhhn! You are as incomprehensible as the fine 'east end of London' chaps I work with. :-) Having grown up with folk who speak elequent English the 'other' English accents cut through me like a knife so enough of that thank you. ;-) considering your weapon is a single shot, fired by motor thrust and mounted on an aircraft I can say with certainty it is far too big. Must make smaller. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimech Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Majorjim! said: You are as incomprehensible as the fine 'east end of London' chaps I work with. :-) Having grown up with folk who speak elequent English the 'other' English accents cut through me like a knife so enough of that thank you. ;-) considering your weapon is a single shot, fired by motor thrust and mounted on an aircraft I can say with certainty it is far too big. Must make smaller. ;-) True, it's large and way too heavy. Plus it's ineffective, usually the objects just phase through the colliders of other craft at high speed. We'd need far more precise physics calculations. The reason the BDA team have chosen to create armor with a special Unity gameobject and custom module to handle these collisions. But it was a fun exercise, to see what we can do with these pretty little balls RCS balls with 50m/s impact rating. Apparently a whole lot. I'm sure @klond and @Bubbadevlin can build a machine gun with this ammo, being the mechanical experts on this forum (and I'm sorry if I missed someone, there are lots of experts here). The good thing about this, for a single shot, you wouldn't need the heavy engines I used, two afterburning Panthers is probably enough. Edited July 1, 2017 by Azimech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castille7 Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 4 hours ago, Azimech said: True, it's large and way too heavy. Plus it's ineffective, usually the objects just phase through the colliders of other craft at high speed. We'd need far more precise physics calculations. The reason the BDA team have chosen to create armor with a special Unity gameobject and custom module to handle these collisions. But it was a fun exercise, to see what we can do with these pretty little balls RCS balls with 50m/s impact rating. Apparently a whole lot. I'm sure @klond and @Bubbadevlin can build a machine gun with this ammo, being the mechanical experts on this forum (and I'm sorry if I missed someone, there are lots of experts here). The good thing about this, for a single shot, you wouldn't need the heavy engines I used, two afterburning Panthers is probably enough. Klond made this awhile back, it's awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimech Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 1 minute ago, Castille7 said: Klond made this awhile back, it's awesome! See, that's what I mean. Great video! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScriptKitt3h Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 Got a lot of potential new releases coming soon, from further fighter designs... to UCAVs... to SSTOs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majorjim! Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 11 hours ago, Azimech said: True, it's large and way too heavy. Plus it's ineffective, usually the objects just phase through the colliders of other craft at high speed. We'd need far more precise physics calculations. The reason the BDA team have chosen to create armor with a special Unity gameobject and custom module to handle these collisions. But it was a fun exercise, to see what we can do with these pretty little balls RCS balls with 50m/s impact rating. Apparently a whole lot. I'm sure @klond and @Bubbadevlin can build a machine gun with this ammo, being the mechanical experts on this forum (and I'm sorry if I missed someone, there are lots of experts here). The good thing about this, for a single shot, you wouldn't need the heavy engines I used, two afterburning Panthers is probably enough. LOL, @klond, yes. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XLjedi Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 Flight testing continues on the first craft in the Untied Technologies Exolifter line of heavy SSTO... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbadevlin Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 17 hours ago, Azimech said: True, it's large and way too heavy. Plus it's ineffective, usually the objects just phase through the colliders of other craft at high speed. We'd need far more precise physics calculations. The reason the BDA team have chosen to create armor with a special Unity gameobject and custom module to handle these collisions. But it was a fun exercise, to see what we can do with these pretty little balls RCS balls with 50m/s impact rating. Apparently a whole lot. I'm sure @klond and @Bubbadevlin can build a machine gun with this ammo, being the mechanical experts on this forum (and I'm sorry if I missed someone, there are lots of experts here). The good thing about this, for a single shot, you wouldn't need the heavy engines I used, two afterburning Panthers is probably enough. Just noticed this and I feel honored lol. The RCS balls could definitely be used for ammo, TBH i have been trying to make a gun with a similar idea, with not much luck though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunsWithScissors Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 On 6/30/2017 at 0:20 PM, MiffedStarfish said: Quick update on my F-18: (in a slightly newer version i have shortened the LERX and moved the intake forward) Are you trying to build a baby hornet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He_162 Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 19 minutes ago, RunsWithScissors said: Are you trying to build a baby hornet? I don't think it's tiny at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qzgy Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 2 hours ago, RunsWithScissors said: Are you trying to build a baby hornet? On 6/30/2017 at 3:20 PM, MiffedStarfish said: Quick update on my F-18: [snip] Proportions to me look slightly off as well... The razor back looks like its too high, nose maybe short, and the intakes too far forward. The rear half (bit with engines) is about the same as the front half (part before the intakes). In the picture, seems its more of a 1:2 ration of parts infront of the intake as opposed to parts in the back. Then again, could be camera angle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiffedStarfish Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 I was basing it off this picture: (Nope, mobile is not cooperating with me. If you look up the Wikipedia page on hornets, the first picture there) I think the problem is the LERX are too short, and I've built the fuselage around them. Though the intakes start just behind the LERX, and I've used the intakes as a sort of halfway point. I'll definitely look at it again when I get back from holiday. I'm thinking extending the cockpit with gravioli detectors, possibly try and add more landing gear to extend the razor back and lengthening the back fuselage with half a mk1 fuel tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qzgy Posted July 2, 2017 Share Posted July 2, 2017 10 hours ago, MiffedStarfish said: I was basing it off this picture: (Nope, mobile is not cooperating with me. If you look up the Wikipedia page on hornets, the first picture there) I think the problem is the LERX are too short, and I've built the fuselage around them. Though the intakes start just behind the LERX, and I've used the intakes as a sort of halfway point. I'll definitely look at it again when I get back from holiday. I'm thinking extending the cockpit with gravioli detectors, possibly try and add more landing gear to extend the razor back and lengthening the back fuselage with half a mk1 fuel tank. Ah, ok. You could also try using solar panels to extend the cockpit. Personally, easier since you don't have to do minor adjustment. That being said, I did use the gravioli detectors on my vertijet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor Wotansen Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 Working on some jetliners for a challenge. I was going for a Twin Otter look and got a thing that would easily break the sound barrier at sea level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunsWithScissors Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 19 hours ago, He_162 said: I don't think it's tiny at all? No no no, that's not what I mean by "baby" hornet. (I'm not sure how much the civilian world uses the term "baby" when talking about the old hornet. I grew up with a dad in the navy who always pointed out the differences between the 2, and always used the phrase "baby". I was just using a term I was used to using and was familiar to me.) The are 2 different "flavors" of hornet- the so called baby hornet, and the super hornet. The main visible difference on the surface between the "baby" hornet are the shape of the intakes, the super hornet having rectangular intakes and the baby hornet having circular intakes. The super hornet is also newer than the baby hornet. (And the Super hornet is also slightly larger.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qzgy Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, RunsWithScissors said: (I'm not sure how much the civilian world uses the term "baby" when talking about the old hornet. The answer to this, AFAIK, is "not much, if at all" Also, I can't remember, but are all flavors of the Super Hornet twin seaters? Edit: Should have just looked it up. F/A-18E is not, F/A-18F is (a twin seater). Edited July 3, 2017 by qzgy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.