Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 15 of 17  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page « 113 14 15 16 17 »
Author Message
eswube
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 9th, 2012, 9:35 pm
Offline
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
APDAF
It has to look like a pencil in a top view - and in real life it would.
Handley Page HP.0/400 which is roughly a real-life contemporary of Your design had a fuselage wide for just about 1,5 metre (or 5 feet - meaning 10 pixels in SB scale) in the widest place - and all of it with two pilots sitting side-by side.

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
APDAF
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 9th, 2012, 9:41 pm
Offline
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am
It is based more on the Zeppelin-Staaken R.VI which was a lot larger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeppelin-S ... .VI.2C_.29


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 9th, 2012, 9:44 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/downlo ... vi_lK8.jpg

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
eswube
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 9th, 2012, 10:13 pm
Offline
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Zeppelin-Staaken R.VI - wingspan 42,2m, length 22,10m.
Handley-Page HP.0/400 - wingspan 30,48m, length 19,16m.
Kriegskraft VK-3 Valkyrie - wingspan 29,11m, length 20,27m.

Lot larger?... R.VI had larger wingspan but it's length wasn't much different and proportions of fuselage wasn't much different either.
And width of it's fuselage was below 2m either - slightly larger than HP.0/400, but that would be still 12-13 pixels maximum - but Yours VK-3 has (or rather should have) proportions of 0/400 not Zeppelin.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
APDAF
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 10th, 2012, 7:28 pm
Offline
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am
The Vickers-Kriegskraft VK-3 Valkyrie will not be a flying pencil, due to it having a rather heavy bomb capacity (for it's size and vintage although it would sill be built today due to it's cost) and other capabilities like there will be a flying boat version as well.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 10th, 2012, 8:46 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
so she will be flying like an brick?
air resistance, ever heard of it?

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 10th, 2012, 9:12 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
APDAF wrote:
The Vickers-Kriegskraft VK-3 Valkyrie will not be a flying pencil, due to it having a rather heavy bomb capacity
That's just another reason why you don't want a thick tail structure. It'll take up weight that you could otherwise use for bombs.
You're going to run out of lift long before you run out of space, even in a pencil shaped hull.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
APDAF
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 11th, 2012, 10:06 pm
Offline
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am
Fine she has now a width of 7.5 feet and a wingspan on 101.5 feet.

I have also made the cockpit more aerodynamic and have changed the roundels.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
eswube
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 12th, 2012, 9:50 am
Offline
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Still not perfect, but better. Btw. - increase the area of the horizontal tail.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
APDAF
Post subject: Re: Britannian AircraftPosted: December 12th, 2012, 6:21 pm
Offline
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am
Done.

I wonder how hard a carrier conversion would be?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 15 of 17  [ 165 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page « 113 14 15 16 17 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]