19 downloads

based off the F-104. i mean i was bored, the A2 and A3 will prob look better

GENERAL INFO

  • Successors 1 craft(s) +7 bonus
  • Created On: Windows
  • Game Version: 0.9.307.0
  • Price: $13,161k
  • Number of Parts: 62
  • Dimensions: 4 m x 9 m x 20 m

PERFORMANCE

  • Total Delta V: 0m/s
  • Total Thrust: 0N
  • Engines: 1
  • Wet Mass: 13,229kg
  • Dry Mass: 8,180kg

STAGES

Stage Engines Delta V Thrust Burn Mass
1 1 0m/s 0N 0s 13,229kg

15 Comments

  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TopSecret2 the f104 is a sexy beast. But I didnt put anything here to specs. The engine may or may not be more powerful. But I also have been running this on RSS (which I know isnt close to perfect yet) and I'm using realistic overhaul and I dont know if that affects jet engines

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NSRS The F-104’s design wasn’t stupid, but it was certainly not without luck that it was found to be just as suitable as a fighter-bomber. As it was being a pure-blooded interceptor, the first one to achieve mach 2 to boot, it ought to be fast. And fast it is here, exceeding Mach 3 due to the atmospheric differences between Droo and Earth.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TopSecret2 the design of the real f104 seems really bad and dumb but honestly if you want an aircraft that can commit to the type of power the f104 generated you end up with an aircraft that has a far back coM. And I love how it looks. It low drag with slight angled down wings. I mean it's a monster in all categories but this fuck show was me fucking around

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NSRS Again, just quipped suggestions. This was a good looking F-104 model, and with some improvements it’ll be a great one. But considering its a literal flying dart, it’s astonishing it somehow manages to have an eventual CoM that falls behind its CoL. That’s pretty ridiculous.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TopSecret2 look my dude I wouldn't post this craft if it didnt work for me. It does work for me. But also this was just a shitty first model and like most of my crafts I'm going to post better ones once i get to making them.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NSRS

    I checked and it’s right. See, in SimplePlanes the devs intentionally made the structural parts so that not only do fuel tanks provide fuel, but also lift. The struts you use do not provide any lift at all, even with the body lifting setting turned on. I removed the struts you made over top of the actual wings, and it flew exactly as you intended it. See, you need to use fuel tanks, not struts.

    Another thing to note: the fuel tanks also can be set to deplete fuel in order so that when the plane burns half of its fuel, it won’t spin out of control from CoM shifting behind the CoL, but burns the fuel from backwards to forwards. Just suggestions.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TopSecret2 the only thing I can think is wrong Is that you might not have your physics sim settings right.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TopSecret2 I dont have this problem. The elevator works fine among with all other flaps. The wings do cause lift. And the parts I put over the wings do not affect the wings in any way. The flaps deploy perfectly fine

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    @NSRS The horizontal stabilizer is duplicated, preventing lift from occurring.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TopSecret2 I also have the rate which they deploy slower because the aircraft wasn't as stable with full speed flaps

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TopSecret2 I mean honestly idk what your talking about this aircraft works perfectly fine for me and takes off at around 190mps. I've had no problems with the air frame.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    Terrible build. The jet couldn’t get off the ground, primarily because the controls were inverted and embedded within the airframe instead of the control surfaces being directly exposed to drag, where a not-doofus would know they work.

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    489 CapCipher

    @NSRS just saying because I didn’t see what you wrote and immediately noticed the inspiration

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,151 Kepler452B

    @TOMJeb117 are you telling me it's one. Or just saying f104?

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    489 CapCipher

    F-104

    4.0 years ago

1 Upvote

Log in in to upvote this post.