As an aviation fan of some 25yrs, this is pretty cool for fallout! Nice looking plane, dude!
It reminds me of the P51 Mustang and Dornier 335. Also, I think your plane looks pretty much like something they actually had in Star Trek Enterprise... Way back when, if memory serves. But that was done with just computer graphics for a quick fly by...
Don't get me wrong, I love your plane, I love planes - BUT - the nose wheel/landing gear balance with the engine looks it might have a design flaw if this was actually real. Because the engine would be pretty much the heaviest part of planes (esp. twin prop engines! And yours looks like a turbo prop, no less!), it just looks abit like it would dip to the ground because it's behind all the wheels. BTW, for possible future inspirations, I think all of those counter rotating twin props are also noisy as hell so you're plane should have maybe a crazy scary screetch -like sound! Those turbos have a cool 'whining' -sound of their own aswell.
Also, the blades kind of seem like they're awfully close to the ground, the horizontal stabilizer looks abit small and the control surfaces look like they don't have any moving parts. Also, I would tilt the wing tips at the joint of the first panel maybe 45 degrees upwards to protect the wings from tearing if landing w/o wheels. I think they're abit stronger that way (for normal flight) and add some stability when flying into eddies which is the main point of doing that. That's how it is with planes I think... Unless it's all changed now since I haven't read an aviation magazine in years... But some birds do the same thing with their wingtips aswell, upwards... I think there's less air resistance that way so less stress on the wing. Probably just a hair more speed too, though it means there would be that much less lift... Hmmm... And modern rocket launchers have a cone shaped nose to help reduce drag and excess stress on the wings... OK, I'm getting carried away now! I'll stop!
MY SUGGESTION:
Since I guess there's no way to fit a tail wheel in there, just make the nose section like 1/3 longer and the horizontal stabilizer abit larger and it's near perfecto! Or the fuselage could be abit wider on the nose/front/cockpit section with the larger stabilizers. Alternately, the wing span could be shorter but much more wider towards the nose, also with larger horizontal stabilizer. Oh, and one last thing, those radio antennas are on top so as to protect them if you have to land w/o wheels - you can still at least try calling for help that way.
EDIT:
You're gonna kill me slowly but, I just realized the horizontal stabilizer might haveto be abit more higher than the wings which would work if the nose was longer. They create drag of their own which would hit the wings possibly with an undesired effect... I think the vertical stabilizers on the wings are pretty much centered with the engine/fuselage which is probably good but they might haveto be abit higher on top but since you have a third one on the tail, it's probably just right.
But damn it's a cool looking palane! The wings remind me of a huge airliner!
Really good plane. Wish there was a way to fly this in game. Hopefully someone can find a way to add this to the workshop so they can at least be static models for an airfield settlement in game. Thank you for this 500slr.
This is not the Shinden, but the Curtiss-Wright XP-55 Ascender, a prototype fighter that didn't make production in WWII for the USAAC. Myself, I like the XP-56 Black Bullet by Northrup another aircraft in the competition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss-Wright_XP-55_Ascender https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=550 What you are referring to is this: https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/kyushu-j7w1-shinden-magnificent-lightning
Very nice model, there are a few modders whom may have a use for this and if the game engine was more persistent it would be cool to actually fly one but as it is the cell by cell nature of the engine mean's that even running around the commonwealth can be a very jerky experience.
It is a very nice push prop air craft and would certainly go extremely nice for example on an air craft carrier OR an air field (not like fallout 4's poor excuse for Boston air field but more like the New Vegas one's which for example actually had runway's) so this would certainly be a beautiful asset to spice it up.
Always liked push prop's with canard wing's and they had a lot of advantage over pull prop's but of course wing mounted engine nacell's were always going to be the simpler alternative and actually had less disadvantage overall as the fuselage did not impede the air flow and only the wing and the nacell engine housing itself posed any air flow restriction.
Very nice and very reminiscent of Crimson Skies which also favored push prop's as game assets as they looked so much cooler than pull prop's. Real world advantages were that the Push prop with canard wing's was more maneuverable by it's nature and really pull prop's were and are just a legacy hangover from the early biplane day's even though some early biplane's were actually push prop.
Give Feedback
7 comments
It reminds me of the P51 Mustang and Dornier 335. Also, I think your plane looks pretty much like something they actually had in Star Trek Enterprise... Way back when, if memory serves. But that was done with just computer graphics for a quick fly by...
Don't get me wrong, I love your plane, I love planes - BUT - the nose wheel/landing gear balance with the engine looks it might have a design flaw if this was actually real. Because the engine would be pretty much the heaviest part of planes (esp. twin prop engines! And yours looks like a turbo prop, no less!), it just looks abit like it would dip to the ground because it's behind all the wheels. BTW, for possible future inspirations, I think all of those counter rotating twin props are also noisy as hell so you're plane should have maybe a crazy scary screetch -like sound! Those turbos have a cool 'whining' -sound of their own aswell.
Also, the blades kind of seem like they're awfully close to the ground, the horizontal stabilizer looks abit small and the control surfaces look like they don't have any moving parts. Also, I would tilt the wing tips at the joint of the first panel maybe 45 degrees upwards to protect the wings from tearing if landing w/o wheels. I think they're abit stronger that way (for normal flight) and add some stability when flying into eddies which is the main point of doing that. That's how it is with planes I think... Unless it's all changed now since I haven't read an aviation magazine in years... But some birds do the same thing with their wingtips aswell, upwards... I think there's less air resistance that way so less stress on the wing. Probably just a hair more speed too, though it means there would be that much less lift... Hmmm... And modern rocket launchers have a cone shaped nose to help reduce drag and excess stress on the wings... OK, I'm getting carried away now! I'll stop!
MY SUGGESTION:
Since I guess there's no way to fit a tail wheel in there, just make the nose section like 1/3 longer and the horizontal stabilizer abit larger and it's near perfecto! Or the fuselage could be abit wider on the nose/front/cockpit section with the larger stabilizers. Alternately, the wing span could be shorter but much more wider towards the nose, also with larger horizontal stabilizer. Oh, and one last thing, those radio antennas are on top so as to protect them if you have to land w/o wheels - you can still at least try calling for help that way.
EDIT:
You're gonna kill me slowly but, I just realized the horizontal stabilizer might haveto be abit more higher than the wings which would work if the nose was longer. They create drag of their own which would hit the wings possibly with an undesired effect... I think the vertical stabilizers on the wings are pretty much centered with the engine/fuselage which is probably good but they might haveto be abit higher on top but since you have a third one on the tail, it's probably just right.
But damn it's a cool looking palane! The wings remind me of a huge airliner!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss-Wright_XP-55_Ascender
https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=550
What you are referring to is this:
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/kyushu-j7w1-shinden-magnificent-lightning
It is a very nice push prop air craft and would certainly go extremely nice for example on an air craft carrier OR an air field (not like fallout 4's poor excuse for Boston air field but more like the New Vegas one's which for example actually had runway's) so this would certainly be a beautiful asset to spice it up.
Always liked push prop's with canard wing's and they had a lot of advantage over pull prop's but of course wing mounted engine nacell's were always going to be the simpler alternative and actually had less disadvantage overall as the fuselage did not impede the air flow and only the wing and the nacell engine housing itself posed any air flow restriction.
Very nice and very reminiscent of Crimson Skies which also favored push prop's as game assets as they looked so much cooler than pull prop's.
Real world advantages were that the Push prop with canard wing's was more maneuverable by it's nature and really pull prop's were and are just a legacy hangover from the early biplane day's even though some early biplane's were actually push prop.