Request Aircraft Here!
- Thread starter LosiRacer
- Start date
hvnfun1969
New member
Sportsman Aviation Waco
I wish someone would make a Sportsman Aviation Waco. I'm building one and want to practice with it before I crash it. What program is used to create the planes and color schemes?
I would love to see a Goldberg Decathalon also.
Thanks
I wish someone would make a Sportsman Aviation Waco. I'm building one and want to practice with it before I crash it. What program is used to create the planes and color schemes?
I would love to see a Goldberg Decathalon also.
Thanks
acmarshall
New member
Super Zoom and Flash
This is a great foamie and a good 3D practice ship. The Flash is the same designer and is his newest one. It will be out probably in a month or so.
We can get good pictures of the Flash since Neil Morse is doing the production prototype.
-Alan
This is a great foamie and a good 3D practice ship. The Flash is the same designer and is his newest one. It will be out probably in a month or so.
We can get good pictures of the Flash since Neil Morse is doing the production prototype.
-Alan
Jollyroger
New member
(I don't have the program or the know how, or I would!)
You must be russian! LOL WELCOMEdestroyer said:a soviet tupolev bearcat bomber with the counter rotating turbo props.
a ch-46 chinook tandem heli on the larger side
a b52 bomber
and more migs-15,17,19,21,25,29 etc...
oh yeah and dont forget the su series 27,37,41 etc....
I agree on all those, especially the Chinook and b-52. Not to mention I would love to have thew bear. It's funny. With G3.5.044 supporting conter roating blades and the hundreds of requests for the Chinook, you would think that someone make it!
(I don't have the program or the know how, or I would! )
rjmanzuk
Active member
There IS a difference ...
http://www.kulikovair.com/Biaxial.htm shows some biaxials, with the tandem-rotor CHINOOK being but one example.
The flight physics are distinctly different, and modeling one does not automatically enable modeling the other.
These machines are AMAZING, and no small task to design, build or fly.
http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/kamen_k225.htm provides a look at a helo with counter-rotating rotors.Jollyroger said:
http://www.kulikovair.com/Biaxial.htm shows some biaxials, with the tandem-rotor CHINOOK being but one example.
The flight physics are distinctly different, and modeling one does not automatically enable modeling the other.
These machines are AMAZING, and no small task to design, build or fly.
I have not read all the requests in this thread for planes/helis, however, I do see requests for models that already exist somewhere on the internet. So, I was wondering about the magic of a forum with a specific thread for requests and how that information could be added to other information available to end of up with some "value added" to this forum in a new way.
First off, some of the visitors requesting planes or helicopters here may well have experience flying the real thing, or, the model that is being emulated in RealFlight. For sure, specifics such as paint schemes, etc. resonate with requestors...many of whom have no experience with the model they are requesting...but in conversations with others or research, they have stumbled onto info of value about the performance of the real thing, or, particular ticks of the model, or particular nuances of the original "factory" paint scheme. That info could be electronically "raked" into sorted piles, eventually adding dimension to the RealFlight model. Added "dimension", of course, means more realistic emulation, better understanding of the aerodynamics and much more about the "essence" of the model.
Wouldn't it be great to be having a debate over the subtleties of the E-Flite Blade CP and CP Pro, and their behaviors? That would mean that through a forum such as this, that model had been "hashed over", all the widely known false facts combed out, and we would be debating the fine points of the model's behavior and looks, and how well RealFlight emulated them. Fantastic!
Further, imagine a matrix chart that would act as an information repository to record such things as which base model (if any) was used, why the servo throws suggested depart from the "stock" throws (which would also be listed in the matrix for the model), the actual, agreed upon specifications for the plane or heli, and much more. The beauty of a matrix is to bring information together in such a fashion that in a "single frame viewpoint" we can quickly see relationships and connections, in order to make more informed decisions. For instance, we may quickly observe all the modified models out there that use the specific xyz model as their base or root model. We would see all the planks that had left and right aileron servos, on separate channels, equipping them for more exotic flaperon operations...with just one sort of the matrix.
Anyone who has a lot of first-hand experience with either the real full-size machine, or a widely known model of it, with one visit, could add or subtract from the accumulating data on the model's behavior and looks.
Eventually, someone looking for a RealFlight model could quickly find it and most variations on it, by stopping by the matrix first. Also, they would find the accurate specs on the model...and perhaps on the real full-size machine, for those scale lovers...and most information they would need to begin modifying it, or creating a spin-off from it.
Personally, I'm new to RC flying, coming from a background of flying the real thing, both planes and helis. I'm pretty much retired, and haven't flown the real thing for a couple of decades, but one never really forgets. RC flying is certainly different from the real thing. However, so far, as in-experienced as I am, I can "feel" the physics (if there) on a RealFlight model that represents the real machines I've flown. (NOTE: as with most things in life, this could all be in my head, too!)
In my embryonic learning, I've "hacked" my research and reasoning into three machines to play with, none of which I am accomplished at. I have the real models for the E-Flite Blade CP, E-Flite Blade CX and the ParkZone Typhoon 3D. (In fact, the Typhoon 3D has only had basic mechanical adjustments and some taxiing, as snow has played a big part in our Colorado winter this year, and I have zero RC plank flying time to date.) I started by wanting to play with helis. So, after a long amount of research on the internet, I settled on the Blade CP, with some training gear. This is more than a handful for the lay person at RC flying. Using the RADD School of Rotary Flight ( http://www.dream-models.com/eco/flying-index.html ), I began. earnestly...and quickly, however, with all the research I was doing, my time and energies fragmented, as I ate, slept and continually thought about RC helicopters. Today, nearly a year later, I'm still stuck on about Battery 10 of RADD.
The truth be known, I don't mind it at all. The RADD method is so solid, so real, you can bank on it. Those Batteries and their sequence are like a very accurate measuring stick of something. That 'something' is interpreted differently by each of us. For me, that 'something' being measured is my clear confidence in the now at what it is I'm doing, and enjoying those "nows" one after the next for many moments across the time horizon. And, I'm clearly and confidently stuck on the front side of Battery 10, knowing I'll be doing some Battery 1-9 drills before I get that clear, tight, tail-in hover in view in front of me. That's kind of a "Zen" way of looking at it. But, I digress and apologize for doing so.
With a year's worth of dreaming, research, limited budget and a strong desire to have fun learning new stuff, I'm still developing that "Zen" relationship with those three birds...and, of course, myself and my own internal confidence and conviction. It's all been fun and rewarding to understanding. The way I look at it, as a student of life, if you can fly a an RC helicopter (or the real thing) really, really...REALLY well, with respect to helicopter physics, your chances of "flying" a relationship with other human beings is also improved. This must all happen, somehow, at some magical level, though I do think it is all related and connected. Check it out for yourself.
Since I've taken so very much time with getting these three birds doing what they were created to do, I also find myself playing (during those nasty weather days) with flight simulators on the computer. Actually, I've researched and checked out a bunch (from the freebies to the Rolls-Royce like models) and played with FMS and RealFlight G3 (which I currently own, with no expansions or addons). In the 'request for aircraft' department, I surely wish to emulate the three birds I have the models for. And, since, in my travels over the past year, I've also acquired a Futaba 9CHP Super, and love the programming aspects, I would also like to be able to modify/tweak these models to learn from and to more closely...in my individual perspective...emulate my machines.
Before landing on this thread the first time, I had already researched and discovered the various Blade CP-like models and played with them, with an eye towards learning how to modify them, as well as improve my stick and feedback monitoring skills. The same for playing with the one Blade CX-like model I discovered (already on the G3.5 version when I bought it). I have yet to discover a model...hopefully not rooted in a model from one of the Addons or Expansion Packs...that emulates the physics of my ParkZone Typhoon 3D. And, even after the physics are satisfied, there are the Schemes, or "skins". How does one get that ParkZone Typhoon 3D look by modifying some existing model?
For the future matrix idea, hopefully, that kind of information, etc. would come from those who have actual, hands on, flying experience and have worked extensively with the Ty 3D (for instance). Eventually, such a matrix would "flesh in" historically, with lots of very good information for the RC Community as a whole.
For my own requests and selfishly for me, I'd like for someone to assist me with selecting an existing model that is Ty 3D-like in its physics and behavior...from real experience, and real aircraft dimensions, etc.. And, then, after looking at existing machines in the editor, I'd certainly like to find some hints and aids with working with the terminology and parameters within the editor, especially in the development of "mixes" to accomplish various things like flaperons (specifically separate ailerons, on separate servos and separate channels, with no Y-cable), being manipulated as Flaps by knob or switch).
Thanks to all parties involved in creating RealFlight and participating in its "evolution" and tuning. What a great community to play with. And, speaking of great communities, Thanks to those who have catalyzed these forums, making them a great place to visit and learn from. And, Thanks to all the readers who honor their urges to Reply..."good" or "bad". It ALL adds value to our local and global understanding and insight...somehow...some way...we become better gods for it...FLY ON!
First off, some of the visitors requesting planes or helicopters here may well have experience flying the real thing, or, the model that is being emulated in RealFlight. For sure, specifics such as paint schemes, etc. resonate with requestors...many of whom have no experience with the model they are requesting...but in conversations with others or research, they have stumbled onto info of value about the performance of the real thing, or, particular ticks of the model, or particular nuances of the original "factory" paint scheme. That info could be electronically "raked" into sorted piles, eventually adding dimension to the RealFlight model. Added "dimension", of course, means more realistic emulation, better understanding of the aerodynamics and much more about the "essence" of the model.
Wouldn't it be great to be having a debate over the subtleties of the E-Flite Blade CP and CP Pro, and their behaviors? That would mean that through a forum such as this, that model had been "hashed over", all the widely known false facts combed out, and we would be debating the fine points of the model's behavior and looks, and how well RealFlight emulated them. Fantastic!
Further, imagine a matrix chart that would act as an information repository to record such things as which base model (if any) was used, why the servo throws suggested depart from the "stock" throws (which would also be listed in the matrix for the model), the actual, agreed upon specifications for the plane or heli, and much more. The beauty of a matrix is to bring information together in such a fashion that in a "single frame viewpoint" we can quickly see relationships and connections, in order to make more informed decisions. For instance, we may quickly observe all the modified models out there that use the specific xyz model as their base or root model. We would see all the planks that had left and right aileron servos, on separate channels, equipping them for more exotic flaperon operations...with just one sort of the matrix.
Anyone who has a lot of first-hand experience with either the real full-size machine, or a widely known model of it, with one visit, could add or subtract from the accumulating data on the model's behavior and looks.
Eventually, someone looking for a RealFlight model could quickly find it and most variations on it, by stopping by the matrix first. Also, they would find the accurate specs on the model...and perhaps on the real full-size machine, for those scale lovers...and most information they would need to begin modifying it, or creating a spin-off from it.
Personally, I'm new to RC flying, coming from a background of flying the real thing, both planes and helis. I'm pretty much retired, and haven't flown the real thing for a couple of decades, but one never really forgets. RC flying is certainly different from the real thing. However, so far, as in-experienced as I am, I can "feel" the physics (if there) on a RealFlight model that represents the real machines I've flown. (NOTE: as with most things in life, this could all be in my head, too!)
In my embryonic learning, I've "hacked" my research and reasoning into three machines to play with, none of which I am accomplished at. I have the real models for the E-Flite Blade CP, E-Flite Blade CX and the ParkZone Typhoon 3D. (In fact, the Typhoon 3D has only had basic mechanical adjustments and some taxiing, as snow has played a big part in our Colorado winter this year, and I have zero RC plank flying time to date.) I started by wanting to play with helis. So, after a long amount of research on the internet, I settled on the Blade CP, with some training gear. This is more than a handful for the lay person at RC flying. Using the RADD School of Rotary Flight ( http://www.dream-models.com/eco/flying-index.html ), I began. earnestly...and quickly, however, with all the research I was doing, my time and energies fragmented, as I ate, slept and continually thought about RC helicopters. Today, nearly a year later, I'm still stuck on about Battery 10 of RADD.
The truth be known, I don't mind it at all. The RADD method is so solid, so real, you can bank on it. Those Batteries and their sequence are like a very accurate measuring stick of something. That 'something' is interpreted differently by each of us. For me, that 'something' being measured is my clear confidence in the now at what it is I'm doing, and enjoying those "nows" one after the next for many moments across the time horizon. And, I'm clearly and confidently stuck on the front side of Battery 10, knowing I'll be doing some Battery 1-9 drills before I get that clear, tight, tail-in hover in view in front of me. That's kind of a "Zen" way of looking at it. But, I digress and apologize for doing so.
With a year's worth of dreaming, research, limited budget and a strong desire to have fun learning new stuff, I'm still developing that "Zen" relationship with those three birds...and, of course, myself and my own internal confidence and conviction. It's all been fun and rewarding to understanding. The way I look at it, as a student of life, if you can fly a an RC helicopter (or the real thing) really, really...REALLY well, with respect to helicopter physics, your chances of "flying" a relationship with other human beings is also improved. This must all happen, somehow, at some magical level, though I do think it is all related and connected. Check it out for yourself.
Since I've taken so very much time with getting these three birds doing what they were created to do, I also find myself playing (during those nasty weather days) with flight simulators on the computer. Actually, I've researched and checked out a bunch (from the freebies to the Rolls-Royce like models) and played with FMS and RealFlight G3 (which I currently own, with no expansions or addons). In the 'request for aircraft' department, I surely wish to emulate the three birds I have the models for. And, since, in my travels over the past year, I've also acquired a Futaba 9CHP Super, and love the programming aspects, I would also like to be able to modify/tweak these models to learn from and to more closely...in my individual perspective...emulate my machines.
Before landing on this thread the first time, I had already researched and discovered the various Blade CP-like models and played with them, with an eye towards learning how to modify them, as well as improve my stick and feedback monitoring skills. The same for playing with the one Blade CX-like model I discovered (already on the G3.5 version when I bought it). I have yet to discover a model...hopefully not rooted in a model from one of the Addons or Expansion Packs...that emulates the physics of my ParkZone Typhoon 3D. And, even after the physics are satisfied, there are the Schemes, or "skins". How does one get that ParkZone Typhoon 3D look by modifying some existing model?
For the future matrix idea, hopefully, that kind of information, etc. would come from those who have actual, hands on, flying experience and have worked extensively with the Ty 3D (for instance). Eventually, such a matrix would "flesh in" historically, with lots of very good information for the RC Community as a whole.
For my own requests and selfishly for me, I'd like for someone to assist me with selecting an existing model that is Ty 3D-like in its physics and behavior...from real experience, and real aircraft dimensions, etc.. And, then, after looking at existing machines in the editor, I'd certainly like to find some hints and aids with working with the terminology and parameters within the editor, especially in the development of "mixes" to accomplish various things like flaperons (specifically separate ailerons, on separate servos and separate channels, with no Y-cable), being manipulated as Flaps by knob or switch).
Thanks to all parties involved in creating RealFlight and participating in its "evolution" and tuning. What a great community to play with. And, speaking of great communities, Thanks to those who have catalyzed these forums, making them a great place to visit and learn from. And, Thanks to all the readers who honor their urges to Reply..."good" or "bad". It ALL adds value to our local and global understanding and insight...somehow...some way...we become better gods for it...FLY ON!
Jollyroger
New member
Marv, no offense, but you must be into poltics, lol. Because your wrote an entire page, what, 16 paraghphs. And didn't say a single word. LOL sorry.
blademaster2444
New member
Jollyroger
New member
i used to love that show! that would be way cool!!
blademaster2444
New member
im going to try and make it my selfJollyroger said:i used to love that show! that would be way cool!!
Jollyroger
New member
Don't forget, it had retracts!blademaster2444 said:
r1derbike
New member
I'd like to see the new Fliton Andrew Jesky Extra 330S modeled for 3.5!
I'm going to be putting one together shortly, with a 12XL and 4S power.
This plane looks to be da' bomb, in a high-end parkflyer.
Link to specs., below:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=FLNAJEXT330
Care to take this one on, opjose?
___________________
Screenshots? You want screenshots?
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v402/r1derbike/RC Aircraft - RealFlight G3 Simulator/?start=all
I'm going to be putting one together shortly, with a 12XL and 4S power.
This plane looks to be da' bomb, in a high-end parkflyer.
Link to specs., below:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=FLNAJEXT330
Care to take this one on, opjose?
___________________
Screenshots? You want screenshots?
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v402/r1derbike/RC Aircraft - RealFlight G3 Simulator/?start=all
Attachments
Last edited:
rjmanzuk
Active member
Severely biplane challenged ....
How very sad ... all those wonderful machines, and NONE of them (but one) have enough wings to make them special in the eyes of us fanatics ... no Ultimates, no Eagles, no Pythons, no .... well you get what I mean. Gosh. What have you been thinking?r1derbike said:
r1derbike
New member
Hmmm...I counted no less than 6 Ultimates in various livery, including an Eagle scheme. The QQ Python is so new, it hasn't made it yet.
There are many other bipes, if one would take the time to actually peruse the screenshots...
A quick tally netted 32 biplane screenshots...
Perhaps one should make sure his house isn't made of glass, before hurling stones?
Screenshots? You want screenshots?
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v402/r1derbike/RC Aircraft - RealFlight G3 Simulator/?start=all
Last edited: