@swope This plane is about as General Aviation as it gets other than retractable tricycle gear configuration.
Top speed is still ~100 m/s independent of whether it is turning a 7 G or not.
Turning:
https://i.imgur.com/Z9LN8B1.jpg
Landed. The gear works surprisingly well:
[img]https://i.imgur.com/wgO6UYc.jpg[/img]
Result of flying it over to a mountain at like 5x physics warp and doing stunts.
[img]https://i.imgur.com/K3V5DCY.jpg[/img]
@KraZIvan I mean, with the Wasp 2.0, you can do Mach 2 pretty quickly in the lower atmosphere. That should be more than enough to make LID from a sharp turn slow you down.
@swope Even planes that are definitely in the general aviation aircraft category have this issue. I will try making an electric Cessna 172 or something later but on-spec WWII fighters have no detectable lift-induced drag.
@LiamW But it applies regardless of weather it's the stock Space Shuttle, the stock Wasp 2.0, a replica F-16 from Steam, or a 1.5-tonne prop plane that makes a Zero look obese in comparison.
I.E. The stock Wasp 2.0 can do 26-G, 590 m/s flat sustained turns without even engaging afterburners, which means it doesn't even lose 1 m/s from its normal supercruise speed by turning at 260 m/s^2. IRL a fighter like this would very rapidly be forced back to subsonic speeds from doing that.
Hmmmmmm. It does appear helicopters achieve reasonably good performance with shrunken rockets at the bladetip. I managed to make a monstrous "helicopter" with mile-long blades lift over a kiloton on around 60 tonnes of thrust (albeit at absurd effective torque) exploding the hub has the rather comical effect of throwing the rotor blades out of the solar system due to their momentum.
Sadly as far as I can tell wheel-like 3600 RPM insanity doesn't seem to apply to rotors. The rev limit is lower/more reasonable.
SimpleRockets 3
+1 5.5 years agoNav Hypersphere.
@swope This plane is about as General Aviation as it gets other than retractable tricycle gear configuration.
Top speed is still ~100 m/s independent of whether it is turning a 7 G or not.
Turning:
https://i.imgur.com/Z9LN8B1.jpg
Landed. The gear works surprisingly well:
[img]https://i.imgur.com/wgO6UYc.jpg[/img]
Result of flying it over to a mountain at like 5x physics warp and doing stunts.
5.0 years ago[img]https://i.imgur.com/K3V5DCY.jpg[/img]
@KraZIvan I mean, with the Wasp 2.0, you can do Mach 2 pretty quickly in the lower atmosphere. That should be more than enough to make LID from a sharp turn slow you down.
5.0 years ago@swope Even planes that are definitely in the general aviation aircraft category have this issue. I will try making an electric Cessna 172 or something later but on-spec WWII fighters have no detectable lift-induced drag.
5.0 years ago@LiamW But it applies regardless of weather it's the stock Space Shuttle, the stock Wasp 2.0, a replica F-16 from Steam, or a 1.5-tonne prop plane that makes a Zero look obese in comparison.
I.E. The stock Wasp 2.0 can do 26-G, 590 m/s flat sustained turns without even engaging afterburners, which means it doesn't even lose 1 m/s from its normal supercruise speed by turning at 260 m/s^2. IRL a fighter like this would very rapidly be forced back to subsonic speeds from doing that.
5.0 years agoHmmmmmm. It does appear helicopters achieve reasonably good performance with shrunken rockets at the bladetip. I managed to make a monstrous "helicopter" with mile-long blades lift over a kiloton on around 60 tonnes of thrust (albeit at absurd effective torque) exploding the hub has the rather comical effect of throwing the rotor blades out of the solar system due to their momentum.
Sadly as far as I can tell wheel-like 3600 RPM insanity doesn't seem to apply to rotors. The rev limit is lower/more reasonable.
5.5 years ago