Trident Redux

Bill Stuntz said:
If that's not perfect, I can't imagine what would be. You have vastly understated your skills!
Click to expand...
Thanks, I'm glad you like it. When I did it before (two or three times) I couldn't visualize how to get the mouth to look like your model, and besides that I kept getting bad areas in the mesh so the cutout looked bad. But this morning I realized I needed to completely rework that area so I started reshaping it, and the more I reshaped it the better it looked. I was definitely pleased with the way it turned out but I wanted you to be the final judge of how it looked.
 
Bill Stuntz said:
I wonder... the air outlets look too close to the nose to me. The actual opening is right at the firewall, not in front of it. Can you slide them back an inch or 2? It doesn't look like there's room for the engine in front of them. And it seems like there isn't enough room in front of them for the sharks mouth. Could that be part of what's bothering you? Here are a couple more photos. Note that the back of the air outlet is pretty close to the leading edge. And you can even see how far forward of that the bottom scooped-out area is.
I'll certainly give you as much leeway as you need.

View attachment 129648View attachment 129649
P.S. :confused: I have no idea how I got myself into that photo! I don't remember using a timer or anything. And I'm SURE I took the photo myself.
Click to expand...
Do you remember placing the camera on the floor right there?
 
space boy said:
Do you remember placing the camera on the floor right there?
Click to expand...
I don't. And if I remember the cell phone I had then, it didn't have a kickstand (Moto-X) so I'm not sure how I'd have set it there to take the photo. I MUST have propped it up with something, but I don't remember doing it. And if it had a timer, I don't remember it. I don't know whether my current cell phone (Moto-Z2F) has a photo timer either, but the case does have a kickstand. If it has a timer, I don't know how to use it. I must be getting senile. I was really surprised to see myself in that photo.

P.S. My Z2F has gone insane - mic doesn't work for calls, so I have to use a BT headset. It came with Android7, upgraded to 8 & stuck there, so I don't think it's worth repairing. My boss has a Samsung S10e he'll let me have for $100 since he just got an S22, so I'm going to do that. Similar speed & screen size, was released 2 years later, but came with Android 9, upgraded to 12. More RAM, more storage.
 
Last edited:
Here's another beta I thought you might like to see it with the latest changes. Of course the recess is hard to see because of the color but after I map and paint it all of them will be black. I also took some time and added head bolts on the engine.

(Beta deleted)

Trident 46.jpg
 
Last edited:
WOW! You've really captured it. Dammit, I crashed into a runway light on my first landing at Flight School. :eek:
When you work on the physics, would it make sense to program in switchable coupled elevator/flaps like C/L Aerobatic planes usually do full-time?

Also, I got odd error messages when I loaded it. Is my RF8 somehow corrupted? Or is it something you haven't set up yet in the beta?
RF.png
 
Bill Stuntz said:
WOW! You've really captured it. Dammit, I crashed into a runway light on my first landing at Flight School. :eek:
When you work on the physics, would it make sense to program in switchable coupled elevator/flaps like C/L Aerobatic planes usually do full-time?

Also, I got odd error messages when I loaded it. Is my RF8 somehow corrupted? Or is it something you haven't set up yet in the beta?
View attachment 129660
Click to expand...
Cool I'm glad you like it. I don't see how those messages come from the Trident they talk about other planes not the Trident. You don't get those messages when you load another plane (something you've imported). I'm not sure I understand the point of coupled elevator/flaps for this RC version, it doesn't loop fast enough for you? Plus wouldn't that affect the aileron travel.
 
I think it's more for tight 5ft radius corners for squares, triangles, hourglasses, etc. than tight loops. Or maybe just to honor its C/L heritage. I don't think it HAS to affect aileron travel. I think you can limit max travel when elevator+aileron inputs are combined to prevent excessive deflection. And of course, it requires 2 aileron servos. Hhhhmmmmmm, that would allow the ailerons to be used as flaps on the flap knob, too.

I did a little testing... I get weird messages like that for pretty much ANY aircraft I select, built-in or custom. And missing .dds files, color schemes, etc. And the messages don't always reference the same planes. They seem to be more-or-less random. Maybe I should reinstall RF8. Or just reset RF to defaults.
 
Last edited:
Bill Stuntz said:
I think it's more for tight 5ft radius corners for squares, triangles, hourglasses, etc. than tight loops. Or maybe just to honor its C/L heritage. I don't think it HAS to affect aileron travel. I think you can limit max travel when elevator+aileron inputs are combined to prevent excessive deflection. And of course, it requires 2 aileron servos. Hhhhmmmmmm, that would allow the ailerons to be used as flaps on the flap knob, too.

I did a little testing... I get weird messages like that for pretty much ANY aircraft I select, built-in or custom. And missing .dds files, color schemes, etc. And the messages don't always reference the same planes. They seem to be more-or-less random. Maybe I should reinstall RF8. Or just reset RF to defaults.
Click to expand...
I figured those messages would show up for other planes too. You might be able to re-import the planes the messages talk about to get rid of them. Then again some of those planes might have problems so just use Manage User Files to remove them. One thing I've noticed in RealFlight is if you have too much travel I see the plane has what I call little stutters as it's making a loop I think the physics doesn't keep up with the flight commands.
 
Last edited:
As I said, I THINK you can limit max travel when inputs are combined, but I'm not SURE you have to worry about it. I don't think RF will rip hinges out if you over-deflect the surfaces. And in C/L Aerobatics I don't know the current rules, or even the old-time ones very well. But my imperfect memory says: for square loops 5ft. radius 90° corners, 5ft altitude bottom, 45° tops, straight equal length sides, - beginning from upright level flight for inside, and inverted level flight for outside, repeated twice, exactly on top of each other. And for round loops, constant radius round (not oval) with 5ft bottoms & 45° tops, repeated 3 times. With similar rules for horizontal/vertical/overhead 8's. Penalties for incorrect size/shape/altitude/position.
 
Bill Stuntz said:
As I said, I THINK you can limit max travel when inputs are combined, but I'm not SURE you have to worry about it. I don't think RF will rip hinges out if you over-deflect the surfaces. And in C/L Aerobatics I don't know the current rules, or even the old-time ones very well. But my imperfect memory says: for square loops 5ft. radius 90° corners, 5ft altitude bottom, 45° tops, straight equal length sides, - beginning from upright level flight for inside, and inverted level flight for outside, repeated twice, exactly on top of each other. And for round loops, constant radius round (not oval) with 5ft bottoms & 45° tops, repeated 3 times. With similar rules for horizontal/vertical/overhead 8's. Penalties for incorrect size/shape/altitude/position.
Click to expand...
Yeah I did a few aerobatic contests back in the day.
 
technoid said:
I just finished the hstab it's not perfect but it's much better than the simple round it was before.

View attachment 129661
Click to expand...
My stab is basically a flat plate, but the elevators taper smoothly beginning at the hinge line to a thin TE. I used the music wire trick & a big sanding block to taper the elevators & ailerons evenly. Would it be appropriate to do something similar for the rudders? Make them the same thickness as the stab? Those 1/8" too-thin pointy rudders are WAY too delicate - as the hanger rash that might be visible in some of my photos probably shows. They're both broken. (Please, don't model THAT little detail! :oops: )

I never competed, way back when or more recently when I got back into C/L & had to drop it again. But I did practice a bit.

I'm going to mess with the odd error messages to see if I can fix them. It's strange that the messages refer to different planes than the ones I'm loading, and sometimes to planes I don't remember having. And even stock planes get error messages. Maybe I messed something up when I manually moved planes from earlier versions of RF rather than re-importing them. I wish RF would automate that.
 
Last edited:
Bill Stuntz said:
My stab is basically a flat plate, but the elevators taper smoothly beginning at the hinge line to a thin TE. I used the music wire trick & a big sanding block to taper the elevators & ailerons evenly. Would it be appropriate to do something similar for the rudders? Make them the same thickness as the stab? Those 1/8" too-thin pointy rudders are WAY too delicate - as the hanger rash that might be visible in some of my photos probably shows. They're both broken. (Please, don't model THAT little detail! :oops: )

I never competed, way back when or more recently when I got back into C/L & had to drop it again. But I did practice a bit.

I'm going to mess with the odd error messages to see if I can fix them. It's strange that the messages refer to different planes than the ones I'm loading, and sometimes to planes I don't remember having. And even stock planes get error messages. Maybe I messed something up when I manually moved planes from earlier versions of RF rather than re-importing them. I wish RF would automate that.
Click to expand...
I'm going with what you saw in the picture I don't want to rework it again. The elevator does have a longer taper than the stabilizer but it's hard to see. But it's not from the elevator leading edge it's just the elevator trailing edge that tapers. Sometimes what you see is what you get.

And yes I'm going to add the same taper to the vstab I just haven't done it yet. Please give me a little leeway on these parts I'm trying to improve them for you but once I do them the first time I don't want to go back and rework them again.
 
No problem. You get as much leeway as you need. Anything I say is a request/suggestion, NOT an order/demand. It's not like I'm paying you for a professional product. I KNOW you're doing this as a favor and to satisfy your own internal drives. If it's good enough to satisfy you, it's good enough to satisfy me - and I'm sure it will be infinitely better than I could do myself. :D
 
I added a bit more pointed look to the vstab too. I may go back and add a little more later they didn't turn out quite as pointed as the hstab.

Trident 49.jpg
 
Looks good to me, more like the stab thickness. The real ones look too thin to me and are WAY too fragile. The ones in the very first attachment looked to me like the edges of the stab & rudders were left pretty square rather than nicely rounded. The rounding feels like a big improvement, even if they're not very thin symetrical airfoils. They look pretty realistic. I'm happy with them.
P.S. I suppose I should pick my own nits & admit that a flat plate with rounded edges IS a thin airfoil.
 
Last edited:
Bill Stuntz said:
Looks good to me, more like the stab thickness. The real ones look too thin to me and are WAY too fragile. The ones in the very first attachment looked to me like the edges of the stab & rudders were left pretty square rather than nicely rounded. The rounding feels like a big improvement, even if they're not very thin symetrical airfoils. They look pretty realistic. I'm happy with them.
P.S. I suppose I should pick my own nits & admit that a flat plate with rounded edges IS a thin airfoil.
Click to expand...
Thanks. They don't need much more but if I pulled them back a little they would match the hstab.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top