Britannian Aircraft

This is a forum for newbies and beginners to post their first designs. Please note that this forum is only for Shipbucket and FD scale projects.

Moderator: Community Manager

Post Reply
Message
Author
eswube
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#141 Post by eswube »

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.

Image
Top
APDAF
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#142 Post by APDAF »

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
acelanceloet
Posts: 7512
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#143 Post by acelanceloet »

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
eswube
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#144 Post by eswube »

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
APDAF
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#145 Post by APDAF »

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
acelanceloet
Posts: 7512
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#146 Post by acelanceloet »

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
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#147 Post by Thiel »

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
APDAF
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#148 Post by APDAF »

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
eswube
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#149 Post by eswube »

Still not perfect, but better. Btw. - increase the area of the horizontal tail.
Top
APDAF
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am

Re: Britannian Aircraft

#150 Post by APDAF »

Done.

I wonder how hard a carrier conversion would be?
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Beginners Only”