Douglas X-3 Stiletto FSX Native

[Milton Shupe]

Well, I have been pushing vertices around for 4 weeks now when time allows, and finally making some head-way.

Still much to do to get the fuselage and engines shaped before moving forward. It's a slow, labor-intense, tedious process.

[Mach3DS]

Milton, that looks great!

[Mach3DS]

The Xplanes are coming!!! Now where's that vintage Edwards AFB!?

[warchild]

Looking great so far :).. Time for me to get started oon ghat flight model..

[magoo]

Without the wings & tail......it has a certain "Kubrick-esque" look to it.

...No...?

[warchild]

From the time i was a baby watching Flash Gordon on TV, I've always expected to see a small Ming the Merciless walking along the spine of the plane; ray gun in hand; dragging Dale Arden along to keep Flash from interfering..

[mal998]

Pretty cool!

[Milton Shupe]

LOL Thanks. I decided to do the best I can with this one given the limited quality 3-views.

Doing this one especially for Warchild, with special thanks to Penzoil3.

My time has been severely limited lately with 1-2 hours a day available to work on this so it will take some quality time to really make progress.

[warchild]

Welllll, I'm not exactly a speed demon myself there Sir.. :).. Thank you though. I am truly honored..
Pam

[Josh Patterson]

I thought this was going to be another update of the existing X-3. I knew you were apprehensive about taking it on without cross sections Milton. Don't worry, I won't get out my yardstick and calipers, but it sure LOOKS like an X-3 to me so I'm happy! (I think anyone who would complain about freeware is off their nut anyway!) I know it'll look and fly great! (Well maybe fly as well as the X-3 could anyway.)I did find an XF-91, XF-103 and XFV-1 here http://uenoshing.hatenablog.com/archive/category/FSX%20Airplanes%20USA, but they all appear to be WIP and he seems reluctant to release them. I hope he does because they look great as well and X planes are fun too!

[warchild]

Sorry.. Malwarebytes blocked that site as a fraud :( sad pammy..

[Josh Patterson]

Sorry.. Malwarebytes blocked that site as a fraud :( sad pammy.. I'm running AVG and it didn't flag it. I wonder if MWB flagged it because of all the ads that were in the margin? I wonder if anyone else running other anti-virus software has issues as well? (Would be an interesting test to see how various software sees it.) If you google XF-103 FSX or XF-91 FSX you'll probably still be able to see the screenies. (Oh yeah! I forgot he had an XF-10 Jaguar too!)

[warchild]

I like the xf-91. Good lookin aircraft.. Not sure on MWB.. They say the site tries to get account and credit information from you.. Not sure what that entails.. I decided not to risk it, especially since one of the hallmarks of a fraud site is never releasing software.

[Sundog]

Wow, I wasn't expecting this news. :::happy dance::: :)

[glennc]

I don’t read or speak Japanese but I do see date stamps on most of the sections, the newest is two years old. Grumble, grumble :dizzy:

Glenn

[Mach3DS]

http://uenoshing.hatenablog.com/entry/2016/09/21/213015

He responded to my comment about a year or so ago above. He wants to release them freely. but is working out the bugs...

[blanston12]

LOL Thanks. I decided to do the best I can with this one given the limited quality 3-views.

Doing this one especially for Warchild, with special thanks to Penzoil3.

My time has been severely limited lately with 1-2 hours a day available to work on this so it will take some quality time to really make progress.

Looking good Milton, guess that explains why the Ventura/Loadstar project has been so quiet recently

[Jafo]

Looking good, Milton...;)

[Milton Shupe]

Looking good Milton, guess that explains why the Ventura/Loadstar project has been so quiet recently

Not at all. I have been busy with RW stuff (re-landscaping back yard), and a host of other things, not to mention a 1 year old kitten that will not stay off my desk when I am sitting at the computer.

But, also, am evaluating changing out some gauges for the real world counterparts. Scott has redone the Harpoon gauges for FS9 and will be looking at the Lodestar and Ventura for the same.

The betas are in good shape; enjoy them.

[wombat666]

Not at all. I have been busy with RW stuff (re-landscaping back yard), and a host of other things, not to mention a 1 year old kitten that will not stay off my desk when I am sitting at the computer.

But, also, am evaluating changing out some gauges for the real world counterparts. Scott has redone the Harpoon gauges for FS9 and will be looking at the Lodestar and Ventura for the same.

The betas are in good shape; enjoy them.

Milton, I can loan you a couple of Beagles (will work for food) who will ensure your workspace will remain clear!
:encouragement:

[Josh Patterson]

http://uenoshing.hatenablog.com/entry/2016/09/21/213015

He responded to my comment about a year or so ago above. He wants to release them freely. but is working out the bugs... I didn't know that was you! I hope he gets the air files figured out as they do look nice.

[Milton Shupe]

Made some headway last evening with the tail feathers in place and the basic wings.

[fliger747]

Be interesting to also have a what if version with more powerful engines!

T

[Sundog]

BTW, if you're interested in seeing how militarized versions of the X-3 might have looked, you can see one of the ideas in this book, http://a.co/jeMEgpy

You can see it on the cover. It was sort of a U.S. Mistel/two stage attack plane to be launched off of the USS United States (not built in lieu of the B-36).

[Ivan]

This one reminds me a bit of a cross between a Jaguar and a F-104 Starfighter.... and a very angry Mosquito!
Cool Model! (No this is not the first time I have seen photographs of the X-3 Stiletto.)

I hope performance and handling will be better than the real thing!

- Ivan.

[blanston12]

Not at all. I have been busy with RW stuff (re-landscaping back yard), and a host of other things, not to mention a 1 year old kitten that will not stay off my desk when I am sitting at the computer.

But, also, am evaluating changing out some gauges for the real world counterparts. Scott has redone the Harpoon gauges for FS9 and will be looking at the Lodestar and Ventura for the same.

The betas are in good shape; enjoy them.

Great news, as long as kitty does not walk on the delete key, looking forward to the new Lodestar!

[Milton Shupe]

Be interesting to also have a what if version with more powerful engines!

T

I agree Tom; the planned engine should have taken this one to Mach 2; thanks.

[warchild]

I agree Tom; the planned engine should have taken this one to Mach 2; thanks.I might need to raise the elevator a few inches so it doesnt kill us in transonic turns.. The hard part for me would be creating this non developed engine from scratch.. I'm insecure with my level of command over my abilities any more.. Tom?? Would you like to give it a go??

[fliger747]

Just go steal the parameters for something like the JT3C that powered the 707-KC 135 series. Fudge and adjust as needed.

T

[warchild]

::LOL:: Your cruel ::LOL::
ok.. no problem..

[Milton Shupe]

"The X-3 research aircraft had been intended for the exploration of the unknowns of sustained Mach 2 flight, such as aerodynamic heating, intake scoop and air duct flow characteristics, and high-speed stability and control. But Westinghouse's failure to produce a J46 that could fit in the airplane (as promised) effectively transformed the X-3 into a low-speed test bed for aircraft having low-aspect-ratio wings joined to high-fineness-ratio fuselages, nothing more." Quote from "Probing the Sky".

Some similar handling issues notes from NACA about research aircraft (X-3 and XF92A included) and links to various studies:
http://tortuga.angarsk.su/unrar/hallir01/Text/ch3-3.html#n14

[Milton Shupe]

If you are interested in the NACA research aircraft publication "Probing the Sky", you can get it free here:

https://www.noexperiencenecessarybook.com/ZgnrV/probing-the-sky-selected-naca-research-airplanes-and-their-contributions-to-flight.html

[warchild]

Thanks for the Link Milton.. Skimmed over it and its going to be a great read.. Much appreciated..

[warchild]

heh.. How about that. This thing didnt have flaps. only slats..

https://www-mypatentprints-com.exactdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/douglas-x-3-patent-vintage-airplane-airplane-blueprint-airplane-art-pilot-gift-aircraft-decor-airplane-poster-airplane-patent-5a117a7b.jpg?strip=all&fit=2043%2C3000&ssl=1

[Milton Shupe]

The X-3 indeed had flaps, LE slats and TE split flaps. Covered extensively in the manual.

See attached

[fliger747]

Probably spurred some research into high speed tires as well!

I think as a kid I probably built an X3 model, it sure looked like a Mach 2 airplane!

[Milton Shupe]

Probably spurred some research into high speed tires as well!

I think as a kid I probably built an X3 model, it sure looked like a Mach 2 airplane!

It did indeed spur advances in new hi-speed tire technology.
The first early tests kept losing the tire tread before lift off canceling a number of early tests before take off.
The temporary fix was to grind the tire tread down.

[Milton Shupe]

Here are some dimension and characteristic comparisons of test planes.

[Milton Shupe]

Pam,

That is the first drawing I have seen showing the speed brake location and shape. Thanks for posting that. :applause:

[Milton Shupe]

More about wheels and tires, plus ...

[warchild]

Thanks for the correction and the inclusion of data regarding flaps.. That would have been a hell of a blunder on my part.. It's what I get for pressing calculator buttons way too far past eyelids at half mast in the morning.. I'll be honest. I didnt notice the speed brake in the drawing till after i'd posted it and was looking at uit trying to understand why this patent application only showed le slats and not flaps.. It seemed a bit odd too me. Then i noticed the speed brake and figured at least something good could come out of this as ive never seen a drawing with speed brakes either..

Installed a framework to build this flight model around last night and made some printouts Started looking for engines that could fit in the tiny little spaces they allowed for the engines.. It'll be fun.. Also started pondering ways of making the mean aerodynamic center move backwards during transonic speeds. I think that was the real culprit here as at rest, its already quite far back on the airframe. More study, more learning. I really wish someone was here who could make a pot of coffee. I mean, waking up to no coffee: thats almost inhumane. Its gonna be a long night.. :)

[Milton Shupe]

Have a look at the attached and guess where the CoG is.
About at the point where the left and right wing leading edges meet at center fuselage, well ahead of 25% MAC.

Did you see the wing planform above and notice the 4.5% thickness?
Also, no wing incidence.
Note the cross section, the flat surfaces between 30% and 75% MAC.
And the LE and TE are exactly center of the thickness.

Pam, I should have a package for you to test within 2 weeks including a basic flyable FM, and proper FSRef, contact points, fuel stations, etc. with all the known data already present. That will make it easier for you to get started.

EDIT: BTW, don't even think about the intended J-46 or Mach 2. I want to focus on the actual use of the J-37 first.

EDIT2: Also note the CoG with wheels up/down in the red/blue highlighted areas.

[warchild]

Have a look at the attached and guess where the CoG is.
About at the point where the left and right wing leading edges meet at center fuselage, well ahead of 25% MAC.

Did you see the wing planform above and notice the 4.5% thickness?
Also, no wing incidence.
Note the cross section, the flat surfaces between 30% and 75% MAC.
And the LE and TE are exactly center of the thickness.

Pam, I should have a package for you to test within 2 weeks including a basic flyable FM, and proper FSRef, contact points, fuel stations, etc. with all the known data already present. That will make it easier for you to get started.

EDIT: BTW, don't even think about the intended J-46 or Mach 2. I want to focus on the actual use of the J-37 first.

EDIT2: Also note the CoG with wheels up/down in the red/blue highlighted areas.

Sounds wonderful :)

I did see all of that..
Spent the day today making printouts of test data and applying them to Ito-sama's version just to see what pops, but ive got a long way to go. Ito-sama's dimensions were way off all around. So, i've been making basic corrections there and admittedly taking it up to see how it flies.. One thing i can say is; if there were ever an airplane in need of a nose camera, this is it.. I understand now why they land it on a lake bed instead of a 120 foot wide runway. I'm baffled to think that the sr-71 is landable ::LOL::

I think, the biggest challenge for me will be moving the mean aerodynamic center as the plane passes into transonic speeds. Ariane used to use an include file with its 737's that did a whole lot of things but mostly adjusted the CG depending on the load. I may take a look into that and see if theres a way to make use of at least the methods used to move the MAC back and forth with the speed. However, I'm far from being a coder, so, more to learn.. :)..
I also need to learn how to deal with the main wing trailing edge sweep angle. I've got all the data available for each of the wings stations so there may be a way to make use of that, without cludging in a second sweep angle. NACA was pretty thorough in the observations so that makes it easier in some ways, and admittedly, more confusing in others..

Re: J-34.. Yup.. I intend on getting it right first. Truth told, I've been looking at a bunch of engines this morning that fit that little 24" wide space they made for them, and frankly, only the J-34 fits and supplies enough power to move this thing. The other available modeles, even the brand new ones, all develope power on the 2000-3600 pound area, even with afterburners.. So, for now, the J-34 is the greatest show on earth when it comes to this plane. Later, I'll use it as a basis for building the unbuilt engine that should have been done, but my suspicion is that you just cant pack that much power into such a tiny engine..

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Westinghouse_J34.jpg


So the CG is almost four feet behind the Reference datum point ( well, provided my eyes werent too blrry and crossed trying to read my scale ).. This plane just keeps getting more and more aerodynamically interesting by the minute..

[Milton Shupe]

Sounds wonderful :)

... snipped ...

So the CG is almost four feet behind the Reference datum point ( well, provided my eyes werent too blrry and crossed trying to read my scale ).. This plane just keeps getting more and more aerodynamically interesting by the minute..

I am not sure where the reference datum point is but the CoG is 1.3' in front of the main gear and well in front of 25% MAC. :-)

[warchild]

I am not sure where the reference datum point is but the CoG is 1.3' in front of the main gear and well in front of 25% MAC. :-)

Well, typically, in FSX, the reference datum position is the exact center of the plane: aka where they put the middle of the plane when modelling it. I tnd to place it off the nose though when i'm working on an fde as its easier for me to determine position going backwards than it is to hop arround back and forth from the tail too the nose..

OH.. Yeah. I checked out the CG position you indicated.. The plane flies beautifully..

[Milton Shupe]

Pam, I put all my models' FSRef and CoG (initially) on the 25% MAC line longitudinally. That keeps me and the aircraft in balance better in my head. :-) It's just easier for me to keep locations of weight items in check at a glance when I know the "fulcrum" is 25% MAC. :-)

Not a big deal; just my habit.

[warchild]

Ive never tried that method. But thats the beauty of what we do. Theres no one right way to do it. If a company provides a specific reference datum point with their drawings thats cool, but, no matter how we do it, we're all working to get too the same place.

[Bjoern]

When dealing with different fuselage lengths for the same wing (think airliners), a 25% MAC reference datum is the way to go as you will only have to adjust any elements forward and aft of the wing instead of anything requiring coordinates.

[Milton Shupe]

Well, I finished up the modified hexagonal airfoil with its leading / trailing flaps and ailerons, and got all the control surfaces animated, tagged and working. Now on to the gear bays and gear.

[fliger747]

The airfoil is quite interesting in shape, my guess is that it was designed to create two shock waves, one at each break and keep them from moving during mach changes. Split flaps were probably used for structural reasons and to keep a shockwave from developing at the hinge line, which on the XF 92A caused considerable local disturbance and hinge line loading. The wing being only 4 1/2" thick needed all the strength it could muster.

A conventional airfoil has the center of pressure move aft as the transonic area is entered. I wonder where the center of aerodynamic pressure is for this airfoil? I also wonder about the pitch change (possible) with varying power settings due to induced flow under the elevator?

Interesting plane!

[Milton Shupe]

The airfoil is quite interesting in shape, my guess is that it was designed to create two shock waves, one at each break and keep them from moving during mach changes. Split flaps were probably used for structural reasons and to keep a shockwave from developing at the hinge line, which on the XF 92A caused considerable local disturbance and hinge line loading. The wing being only 4 1/2" thick needed all the strength it could muster.

A conventional airfoil has the center of pressure move aft as the transonic area is entered. I wonder where the center of aerodynamic pressure is for this airfoil? I also wonder about the pitch change (possible) with varying power settings due to induced flow under the elevator?

Interesting plane!

I do have a NACA research paper on the wing design, plus two others, Stability and Control Characteristics and Landing Loads.

[Sundog]

The airfoil is quite interesting in shape, my guess is that it was designed to create two shock waves, one at each break and keep them from moving during mach changes. Split flaps were probably used for structural reasons and to keep a shockwave from developing at the hinge line, which on the XF 92A caused considerable local disturbance and hinge line loading. The wing being only 4 1/2" thick needed all the strength it could muster.

A conventional airfoil has the center of pressure move aft as the transonic area is entered. I wonder where the center of aerodynamic pressure is for this airfoil? I also wonder about the pitch change (possible) with varying power settings due to induced flow under the elevator?

Interesting plane!

The airfoil will behave the same as a conventional airfoil at subsonic speed, just not as efficiently. But it was obviously designed to be optimized for supersonic flow based on it's shape. For reference, see the F-117A, although that was done for LO, not compressible airflow reasons. ;) At supersonic speeds it should have a compression shock off of the leading edge and two expansion shock waves off of the "angle" changes across the airfoil and then another compression shock at the trailing edge where the flow comes back together.

Here's a diamond airfoil reference https://www.quora.com/How-is-Lift-generated-in-Supersonic-Flight

[Milton Shupe]

The airfoil will behave the same as a conventional airfoil at subsonic speed, just not as efficiently. But it was obviously designed to be optimized for supersonic flow based on it's shape. For reference, see the F-117A, although that was done for LO, not compressible airflow reasons. ;) At supersonic speeds it should have a compression shock off of the leading edge and two expansion shock waves off of the "angle" changes across the airfoil and then another compression shock at the trailing edge where the flow comes back together.

Here's a diamond airfoil reference https://www.quora.com/How-is-Lift-generated-in-Supersonic-Flight

That's an interesting read and comments Sir. Thanks for that.

The X-3 will be a bit more complicated to fly based on this table :-)

[warchild]

I do have a NACA research paper on the wing design, plus two others, Stability and Control Characteristics and Landing Loads.

would you be willing to share the NACA research/?

[warchild]

Ok, so i'm not finding any wind tunnel data graphs on the web so i'll ask here..

As the pressure cone moves back along the wing, the center of pressure ( Mean Aerodynamic Center ) also moves back??
Since the wing is so far rearward on this plane, if the center of pressure moved far enough back along the wing, wouldnt that create a situation where the leading edge of the wing is providing less lift that the trailing edge??
If the trailing edge is producing all the lift, wouldnt that tend to lift the tail section, causing a downward pitch on the nose??

[Milton Shupe]

would you be willing to share the NACA research/?

Pam,

Frankly, I have forgotten what I have shared and not shared with whom.

I will package everything I have and upload for you.

[warchild]

The airfoil is quite interesting in shape, my guess is that it was designed to create two shock waves, one at each break and keep them from moving during mach changes. Split flaps were probably used for structural reasons and to keep a shockwave from developing at the hinge line, which on the XF 92A caused considerable local disturbance and hinge line loading. The wing being only 4 1/2" thick needed all the strength it could muster.

A conventional airfoil has the center of pressure move aft as the transonic area is entered. I wonder where the center of aerodynamic pressure is for this airfoil? I also wonder about the pitch change (possible) with varying power settings due to induced flow under the elevator?

Interesting plane!

I noticed that on the three view i use for measurements, that 75% cord is prominently marked and i have no idea why. According to the research data, the AC/center of pressure is 27% cord at subsonic speed, but travels back through trans-sonicspeeds. Whether the 75% cord is where it ends up or not is something i want to know as well, and i have a buttload of papers on it, but i cant understand a single thing i'm looking at any more.. Perhaps you will have a better grasp of it..

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19780022113.pdf

If so, please explain it too me as well.. thanks..

[Jafo]

Ok, so i'm not finding any wind tunnel data graphs on the web so i'll ask here..

As the pressure cone moves back along the wing, the center of pressure ( Mean Aerodynamic Center ) also moves back??
Since the wing is so far rearward on this plane, if the center of pressure moved far enough back along the wing, wouldnt that create a situation where the leading edge of the wing is providing less lift that the trailing edge??
If the trailing edge is producing all the lift, wouldnt that tend to lift the tail section, causing a downward pitch on the nose??
I expect that'd be a 'yes'.
Perhaps have a look at whatever you can find re compression lift [and cruise] with the XB-70 ..... another a/c that was instrumental in pioneering multi-mach flight design...;)

[warchild]

I expect that'd be a 'yes'.
Perhaps have a look at whatever you can find re compression lift [and cruise] with the XB-70 ..... another a/c that was instrumental in pioneering multi-mach flight design...;)


oooooooo. great recommendation.. thank you..

[warchild]

place holder note for myself: Allison J-71-A-2E

[Milton Shupe]

Facts and Figures


Douglas had expected the X-3 to reach speeds in excess of Mach 2, but it became clear at an early stage to both the manufacturer and the USAF that this would not happen.



Futuristic design Contemporary engine technology could not match the potential of the advanced airframe design.



After completing its test duties the X-3 was handed over to the US Air Force Museum, in Ohio, where it can still be seen.



Even in the company of the 0-558-1 Skystreak and 0-558-2 Skyrocket, the 'Stiletto' looks futuristic. The two earlier Douglas aircraft enjoyed far greater success than the X-3.



Douglas used a long, slender fuselage with low-aspect ratio straight wings for the X-3.

On 15 October 1952 the X-3 made an unscheduled, but brief, trip aloft and an official first flight five days later.



The X-3 used 850 pinholes, spread over its structure, to record pressures and 185 strain gauges to record air loads.



There were 150 temperature recording points spread across the X-3 airframe.



In its fastest flight on 28 July 1953 the X-3 was clocked at Mach 1.21 in a dive.



The X-3 is on display at the US Air Force Museum, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.



The X-3 had one of the fastest take-off speeds in history - 260 mph.
(Note: and that's why the thread kept coming off the tires - and new tire technology was developed to deal with high speed take-offs)



The gloss white fuselage and tail surfaces contrasted with the highly polished aluminum wings.

[warchild]

couldnt resist. I had to go in and give the wings a bright shiny chrome finish after reading that. yeah, i dont know what i'm doing but it doesnt look too terrible..

Thanks to NACA's impeccable data keeping, i'm about a third done with the initial FDE. However, thats the easy third. The hard parts are still ahead.. None the less, a hard roll at M1.05@ causes the nose of the plane to do some interesting things already. Its not what was reported, but its a start..

https://i.imgur.com/zldbRNi.png

https://i.imgur.com/1rpBCCE.png

[fliger747]

Yea! It fly's! That's a pretty fast takeoff, I think my fastest speed in a ground trike was a bit over 210 mph... I'll be the X-3 felt a lot like the woman in the motorcycle at Bonneville!

[Milton Shupe]

LOL Neat!

Today I roughed out a test bed flight model and have been flying and tweaking it.
Liftoff with 3 notches of appropriate flap settings (30*LE-25*TE) at 260 kias.
Tire tread stayed intact ... I guess; haven't modeled them yet. :-)

Scott Thomas is working on a 2D panel and I should have that soon for testing.

[warchild]

i've been using the panel uploaded here. it's pretty nice..

https://i.imgur.com/so4uqno.png

[warchild]

Yea! It fly's! That's a pretty fast takeoff, I think my fastest speed in a ground trike was a bit over 210 mph... I'll be the X-3 felt a lot like the woman in the motorcycle at Bonneville!
i have too much lift on mine. its taking off at 220. Sideslip angle and weathervane is also off.. engie seems ok with top speed just under mach 1 and maxh 1.2 in a dive.. currently my AC is at 75% mac, but it doesnt really seem to matter where i place it on that wing at the moment during subsonic flight.. Thing is, we all know theres a snake in there waiting to bite at the right speed and i havent quite coaxed it out of hiding yet..

[fliger747]

I think the XF 92A was capable of takeoff at lower speeds as well but with the lower power available they were afraid of early rotation and high induced drag preventing a climb out as well as possible control issues low and slow.

: )

[fliger747]

Yes, generally the aerodynamic center move aft as the shockwaves establish in the transonic range. This does usually cause a nose down moment, this is often known as "Mach Tuck". One of the issues in WWII fighters touching into this realm.

I have flown the 747 to high Mach numbers and for some reason it did not experience this effect to any noticeable degree. The considerable thrust requited at high mach from the underslung nacelles may have compensated for this.

With a short MAC and a long arm for the elevator, apparently the X-3 had sufficient compensating control.

[warchild]

I've only flown the xf-92 once so far, but compared to the x-3 it flies like a cadillac. Very amazing job all around on it.. The X-3 reminds me of a pool queue. I know some people will have trouble learning to fly the xf-92, but it fits so well into the delta wings that were prevelent during my childhood.. Hi speed takeoff, high speed landing, dont use flaps or you might somersault, I fell in love with all the delta's at a very young age, especially the skyrray and i think it was called the sky bat?? Not too sure about that last name at the moment..

[warchild]

Yes, generally the aerodynamic center move aft as the shockwaves establish in the transonic range. This does usually cause a nose down moment, this is often known as "Mach Tuck". One of the issues in WWII fighters touching into this realm.

I have flown the 747 to high Mach numbers and for some reason it did not experience this effect to any noticeable degree. The considerable thrust requited at high mach from the underslung nacelles may have compensated for this.

With a short MAC and a long arm for the elevator, apparently the X-3 had sufficient compensating control.

I think maybe perhaps the 747 was a stroke of desperate genius.. Boeing just lost its behind on the 2707 and Tripp wanted a big plane for his company. The 747 i dont think could have been made more perfect, except for oxygen generator locations and cargo door retainer designs..

[falcon409]

i've been using the panel uploaded here. it's pretty nice..

https://i.imgur.com/so4uqno.png
Yep, I recognize that one!

[warchild]

yeahh, you did a great job on the panel.. took a bit to get used to switching from the asi to the mack indicator, but its pretty habitual now..I still think it needs a nose or front wheel cam ::lol::

[Milton Shupe]

Yep, I recognize that one!

Ed, I forgot that you did this panel or I would have used it in my tests. :-)

Fortunately, Scott Thomas should have something for me soon. No hurry as I have lots of modeling to do yet.

[Milton Shupe]

The XF-92A beta release and issues have consumed my time in finishing the exterior X-3 model.

I am still dabbling with the wing flaps actuator housings at the moment.
Then on to the gear bays and gear.

[warchild]

No worries Milton.. The XF-92 is your baby and needs you right now.. The X-3 was unexpected to be honest, and moreso than that, it's as much an experiment in flight sim as it wa in real life, because I'm using Nasa's data. The weight, thrust, fuel, everything including the MOI's I'm just copying out of Nasa documentation and plugging into the fde. The plane flies beautifully, at subsonic speeds. i figure it'll give flight sim enthusiasts the ability to directly study and learn about Aircraft design and in this case, the effects of transsonic inertial coupling, if they want too. Since i'm using Nasa's data, enthusiasts will be able to change the variables in the experiment by pulling the changes directly from Nasa's program and plugging them in. It's not my fde you see. It's Nasa's. We can take our time.. Your making that plane is very special to me. The XF-92 is very special to the entire community. There's a difference :)

[fliger747]

Our 747's didn't use Oxy generators, there were actual O2 Tanks in the fwd cargo hold, one for crew and one for Pax.

In their own way both the XF92A and the X3 were successful in that they led to successful production fighters out of the information they provided.

Should be a fun if wild ride!

[warchild]

At the moment, it beyond wild. Its like trying to balance an upside down pyramid sitting on the point of a pin from the top. Of course, this version of the fde is only a trial. It's only been to prove that using real life data will give real life behavior in an fsx aircraft, and too the degree that the data has been available, it has done so magnificently. There is much I have either forgotten or relied too heavily on "inspiration from the gods" in the past, and I am finding myself inadequate to some of the tasks, ( i.e. I do not have an accurate way to calculate Cl, CD0, CD/l or e. ). I'm thinking i can most likely find calculators online to help with some things like CL, but theres some things like "e" which cant be found online. For some of it, I'm waiting for your's and Miltons basic FDE , where i can transfer over NASA's numbers and know i'll be in good shape. No disrespect to Ito-Sama, but his flight models always left me in tears as they were so convoluted and screwed up as to be almost hopeless to repair. Whether we've gotten along or not, you remain one of the four engineers, i hold in respect. So, yeah, It is indeed, a hell of a ride ::LOL::..

History, is a very emotional thing for me these days as i watch the young people of the world, throw so much of it away. Thats why I'm so adamant about these planes. They arent "cool". They havent reigned fire on iraq or afghanistan or cleared the skies of mean nasty old tu-94 bears. But without these plane, those planes couldnt exist. To me thats better than "cool" because it gives the bare roots to understanding the aircraft we fly today in sim and in real life.. I dont feel like I stepped into Chuck Yaegers shoies, or anyones for that matter. It's more like i fly it and my thought is: "You came in THAT hunk of junk? Your braver than I thought!"

[b52bob]

History, is a very emotional thing for me these days as i watch the young people of the world, throw so much of it away. Thats why I'm so adamant about these planes. They arent "cool". They havent reigned fire on iraq or afghanistan or cleared the skies of mean nasty old tu-94 bears. But without these plane, those planes couldnt exist. To me thats better than "cool" because it gives the bare roots to understanding the aircraft we fly today in sim and in real life.. I dont feel like I stepped into Chuck Yaegers shoies, or anyones for that matter. It's more like i fly it and my thought is: "You came in THAT hunk of junk? Your braver than I thought!"

You're the cool one giving life to the flight characteristics of different aircraft. You help make it as real as it gets. Thanks for your contribution and look forward to meeting you in Vegas.

[Milton Shupe]

Here are several approach and landing options. Interesting "contact" touchdown speeds.

[Milton Shupe]

Some progress on one heat shield, the rudder, LE flaps, and aileron actuator housings.

EDIT: The forward heat shield is now added.

[fliger747]

That's looking very nice Milton!

I was peripherally involved in the Milviz T-38 a number of years ago. Not being and Airforce (gentleman?) I never even got near one. But very interesting to fly, probably a little like a civilized version of the X3 with a better view and bigger engines.

My opinion flying with Navy pilots was that they had a better trainer. There was a great book that I read carefully transitioning to jets called "Fly The Wing". Anyway flying the T-38 if you can find a good one would be a little illuminating.

I totally agree that a major aspect of FS aircraft is historical preservation of a world that is totally analogue.

Cheers: T

[Milton Shupe]

Interesting points Tom; thanks :-)

A few wire-frame shots and a solid.

[fliger747]

Yes, the perfect idea in the 50's of what a supersonic plane should look like!

: )

[Cazzie]

I did the very old Lindberg scale model a few years ago. I did the NACA markings for the aircraft. Here's a review link. be sure and include a Paint Kit, nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

https://modelingmadness.com/review/korean/cazx3.htm

[henrystreet]

That's looking very nice Milton!

I was peripherally involved in the Milviz T-38 a number of years ago. Not being and Airforce (gentleman?) I never even got near one. But very interesting to fly, probably a little like a civilized version of the X3 with a better view and bigger engines.

My opinion flying with Navy pilots was that they had a better trainer. There was a great book that I read carefully transitioning to jets called "Fly The Wing". Anyway flying the T-38 if you can find a good one would be a little illuminating.

I totally agree that a major aspect of FS aircraft is historical preservation of a world that is totally analogue.

Cheers: T

Thanks for the heads up about "Fly the Wing"...just ordered a copy.

[Milton Shupe]

I did the very old Lindberg scale model a few years ago. I did the NACA markings for the aircraft. Here's a review link. be sure and include a Paint Kit, nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

https://modelingmadness.com/review/korean/cazx3.htm

Thanks Cazzie. That's a good looking model too. :applause:

Will be modeling for a while yet; haven't thought about paint or a kit but I'm sure that will come.

Trying to get the gear doors cut in and looking correct. First try went well but I overlooked the rounded corners underneath the main gear lower forward door corners, so must go for a second shot at it.

[warchild]

I suppose I made a bit of progress last night. I'm till finding documentation and sifting through it like theres no tomorrow.. I installed the fuel tanks, but i havent found anything yet that tells me how much each one holds. i decided to make a pretend amount for the moment while i continue hunting. Tonight i'll be working on the flaps. they played a very prominent role in the testing, especially the leading edge flaps. I've got numbers for the LE flaps for maximum extension and minimum extension, but theres not a lot that says anything bout the TE flaps angles. I'll keep looking. its got to be out there, even if i have to take a compass to a screenshot and estimate from that. Max engine output has been corrected to 4850 pounds with afterburners, but i'm not so sure i'm getting the 3570 pounds when the afterburners arent being used. I'll be firing up afsd tonight and checking that. I think the biggest question i have is: "What was Douglas's liminal for safety?" With the change of a single number i can make this plane as stable as a rock on solid ground, or as unstable as a mass murderer.. where in that spectrum did this plane actually operate? Video's from the period dont provide a lot of clues as most data was classified and even the plane itself was carted around inside a big box on the back of a semi truck.. Somehow ive got to get inside their heads.. Still a long way to go. Still trying to remember things. It's frustrating when things you knew so well, all dribble away like steam. Worst comes to worst, i'll relearn what i need, but how do you relearn understanding?? How do you take an airfile, and see not a table of numbers, but interacting systems all working together and effecting each other in sometimes very subtle ways?? Quite an adventure..

[Milton Shupe]

Pam,

I have the fuel and flaps info.

Center1 = 8.000, 0.000, 0.000, 455.000, 0.000
Center2 = -18.000, 0.000, 0.000, 453.000, 36.000


LE Flaps 0-10-20-30

TE Flaps 0-15-25-50

It's all in the manual I sent.

[flaps.0] //Trailing Edge Flaps
type = 1 // 1 - trail, 2 - lead
span-outboard = 0.8 // 0.0 .. 1.0
extending-time = 5 // seconds
flaps-position.0 = 0 // degrees
flaps-position.1 = 0 // degrees
flaps-position.2 = 15 // degrees
flaps-position.3 = 25 // degrees
flaps-position.4 = 50 // degrees

damaging-speed = 500 // KIAS
blowout-speed = 550 // KIAS
lift_scalar = 1.0
drag_scalar = 1.0
pitch_scalar= 0.2
system_type = 1 //Hydraulic

[flaps.1] //Inboard Leading Edge Flaps
type = 2 // 1 - trail, 2 - lead
span-outboard = 0.8 // 0.0 .. 1.0
extending-time = 3 // seconds
flaps-position.0 = 0 //
flaps-position.1 = 10 //
flaps-position.2 = 10
flaps-position.3 = 30
flaps-position.4 = 30
damaging-speed = 550 // KIAS
blowout-speed = 600 // KIAS
lift_scalar = 1.0
drag_scalar = 0.0
pitch_scalar= 0.02
system_type = 1 //Hydraulic

I can send you my basic flyable FDE that has all that and more.

Just wrapping up gear doors for the mains now.

[Mach3DS]

Interesting points Tom; thanks :-)

A few wire-frame shots and a solid.

Wow Milton this looks spectacular! I'm very interested in this project. The exotic jet bug has bitten again!

[fliger747]

I'm surprised that an official flight manual was produced! I more expected a loose leaf binder full of scribbled notes. Wondering what the effect of the LE and Trailing flaps were at higher Mach numbers. They can be disturbing indeed, All the Boeing products I have flown prohibit uate of any flap devices or slats above FL 200. The Alaska MD 83 that lawn darted into the Ocean N of LA was upset by the flight crew exacerbating a CG/trim problem by experimenting with LE slat extension at altitude. The recovery that was pulled broke the T Tail trim jackscrew (which had been jammed) and control of the stab was totally lost. A particular airline which shall remain nameless did the same thing with slats at altitude crossing the Pacific, damaging the plane in the recovery, injuring some pax and crew and effected an emergency landing at I believe Shemya.

So... Another corner that the experimental aircraft exploring the frontiers that would get boxed into!

[warchild]

I'm surprised that an official flight manual was produced! I more expected a loose leaf binder full of scribbled notes. Wondering what the effect of the LE and Trailing flaps were at higher Mach numbers. They can be disturbing indeed, All the Boeing products I have flown prohibit uate of any flap devices or slats above FL 200. The Alaska MD 83 that lawn darted into the Ocean N of LA was upset by the flight crew exacerbating a CG/trim problem by experimenting with LE slat extension at altitude. The recovery that was pulled broke the T Tail trim jackscrew (which had been jammed) and control of the stab was totally lost. A particular airline which shall remain nameless did the same thing with slats at altitude crossing the Pacific, damaging the plane in the recovery, injuring some pax and crew and effected an emergency landing at I believe Shemya.

So... Another corner that the experimental aircraft exploring the frontiers that would get boxed into!

I've got that data.. all the results for all speeds and from 7* to 30*.. lets trade :)..

[warchild]

Pam,

I have the fuel and flaps info.

Center1 = 8.000, 0.000, 0.000, 455.000, 0.000
Center2 = -18.000, 0.000, 0.000, 453.000, 36.000


LE Flaps 0-10-20-30

TE Flaps 0-15-25-50

It's all in the manual I sent.

[flaps.0] //Trailing Edge Flaps
type = 1 // 1 - trail, 2 - lead
span-outboard = 0.8 // 0.0 .. 1.0
extending-time = 5 // seconds
flaps-position.0 = 0 // degrees
flaps-position.1 = 0 // degrees
flaps-position.2 = 15 // degrees
flaps-position.3 = 25 // degrees
flaps-position.4 = 50 // degrees

damaging-speed = 500 // KIAS
blowout-speed = 550 // KIAS
lift_scalar = 1.0
drag_scalar = 1.0
pitch_scalar= 0.2
system_type = 1 //Hydraulic

[flaps.1] //Inboard Leading Edge Flaps
type = 2 // 1 - trail, 2 - lead
span-outboard = 0.8 // 0.0 .. 1.0
extending-time = 3 // seconds
flaps-position.0 = 0 //
flaps-position.1 = 10 //
flaps-position.2 = 10
flaps-position.3 = 30
flaps-position.4 = 30
damaging-speed = 550 // KIAS
blowout-speed = 600 // KIAS
lift_scalar = 1.0
drag_scalar = 0.0
pitch_scalar= 0.02
system_type = 1 //Hydraulic

I can send you my basic flyable FDE that has all that and more.

Just wrapping up gear doors for the mains now.

I would love to check that out.. Thanks Tom :)..

[warchild]

Tom.. try this link.. it has all the leading flap data..

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc64336/m2/1/high_res_d/19930090188.pdf

[Milton Shupe]

I'm surprised that an official flight manual was produced! I more expected a loose leaf binder full of scribbled notes. Wondering what the effect of the LE and Trailing flaps were at higher Mach numbers. They can be disturbing indeed, All the Boeing products I have flown prohibit uate of any flap devices or slats above FL 200. The Alaska MD 83 that lawn darted into the Ocean N of LA was upset by the flight crew exacerbating a CG/trim problem by experimenting with LE slat extension at altitude. The recovery that was pulled broke the T Tail trim jackscrew (which had been jammed) and control of the stab was totally lost. A particular airline which shall remain nameless did the same thing with slats at altitude crossing the Pacific, damaging the plane in the recovery, injuring some pax and crew and effected an emergency landing at I believe Shemya.

So... Another corner that the experimental aircraft exploring the frontiers that would get boxed into!

Tom,

If you will look closely at the chart I posted above, you will see that LE flaps at 10 degrees were required for cruise speeds at high attitude.

[Milton Shupe]

During modeling breaks, I have started working to add the effects and test a basic flight model.

Also showing effect of using 10 degree LE flaps at high altitude cruise versus not.

[fliger747]

I expect that these LE flaps are merely an adjustable "cuff" to add some camber rather than the rather large Kruger Flaps or slats that move well away from a more rounded LE such as we had. I can see that the X-3 as underpowered as it was was just hanging in there at altitude!

Almost everything they tried in this era was an exploration of the unknown!

[Milton Shupe]

I expect that these LE flaps are merely an adjustable "cuff" to add some camber rather than the rather large Kruger Flaps or slats that move well away from a more rounded LE such as we had. I can see that the X-3 as underpowered as it was was just hanging in there at altitude!

Almost everything they tried in this era was an exploration of the unknown!

Here are some close ups Tom, and how I have them modeled at 30 degrees, and at zero.

[Mach3DS]

I imagine that as speed increased the LE slats would retract nicely as the center of pressure moved aft naturally rolling about the lateral axis and pitching the nose down?

[warchild]

well, keep in mind that the CG was just in front of the LE of the wing, and above and behind the wing, you had 453 gallons of fuel. That was balance by the fuel that was directly in front of the CG. So the main purpose of the LE flaps was to control the point on the wing where the supersonic flows ( top and bottom ) break away from the wing. Since normally, the lower supersonic flow breaks away from the wing at a later point than the top of the wing, i'm not quite certain of how that effects the attitude of the aircraft..
If i might take a guess here, I'd say it was most likely the experiments done with this plane that led to the developments of the LE Slats and other LE devices you mentioned..

[Milton Shupe]

I do not know what the cruise speed was as I have not seen that mentioned.

See the chart attached for flaps use guidance.

Per the test pilots' reports, flaps must be used to 350 kias.
I take off with 3 notches per the chart below, retract one notch at 250-ish, and the last notch (LE = 10) at 350.
Cruise - add back one notch for LE flaps at 10 degrees for lift and pitch adjustment.
BTW, I have AfterBurners kick in at 80% throttle, so cruise at 78 or less, one notch of flaps. This gives around 550 ktas at FL300.

I set up my base flight model that way and it works well.

The LE flaps increase lift but do not add much drag the way I have them set up; they are set for lift and slight nose down pitch.
The trailing edge provides drag, lift, and pitch moments.

I have not added speed brake as it is not modeled yet. Not needed unless you are coming in hot. Provides drag and no pitch moment per the docs.

There is an equal amount of fuel in two tanks spread equidistant fore and aft CoG.
The forward tank feeds the port engine; the aft tank feeds the starboard engine.

Pam, we need to change the fuel tank designations to Left Main and Right Main so they will feed each engine equally to maintain balance.

LeftMain = 8.000, 0.000, 0.000, 455.000, 0.000
RightMain = -18.000, 0.000, 0.000, 453.000, 36.000

[fliger747]

Rick:

They would be flaps as opposed to slats as they do not open up an airway behind them and apparently are manually controlled separately from the TE Flaps. This allows the test pilot to carefully try out different positions and combinations. Interesting that the ailerons droop with the flap extension. This might have made for roll control at low speeds (relatively) being less agile.

The chart is also quite interesting regarding stall speeds in IAS increasing at higher altitudes. The only thing I can imagine changing significantly at altitude would be Mach Number?

Cheers: T

[warchild]

I see what they were doing. Thats no problem. It even makes sense.. So, two fuel pumps too then.. Milton, I think your turning this into an actual X-plane and not some funny shaped craft that flies through the air.. Thank you for that. We'll be able to do some very serious stuff with this.. :)

[Milton Shupe]

Rick:
...snipped...

Interesting that the ailerons droop with the flap extension. This might have made for roll control at low speeds (relatively) being less agile.

...snipped...

Cheers: T

Tom, I have not seen in docs I have anything regarding ailerons drooping with flap extension.

The attached picture showing the x-3 on approach with full flaps shows no aileron droop.

Also, based on pics of the aileron construction and actuating rod housings, I do no believe that is possible

EDIT: added a better pic of the aileron construction

[Milton Shupe]

I see what they were doing. Thats no problem. It even makes sense.. So, two fuel pumps too then.. Milton, I think your turning this into an actual X-plane and not some funny shaped craft that flies through the air.. Thank you for that. We'll be able to do some very serious stuff with this.. :)

Pam,

The Op Manual shows the fuel system layout, pumps and cross-feed options.

[warchild]

Pam,

The Op Manual shows the fuel system layout, pumps and cross-feed options.

I dont believe i have the Ops manual Milton. It's not in my downloads list. However I found a copy of it on amazon for twenty bucks that i intend on buying on the first.. I'll be looking forwaard to having it as it'll help so much its not funny.. I wish we could release this, with all the manuals and documentation and research data so that enthusiasts could find something in the data that tickles their interest and simply load the plane and duplicate it.. :) Kind of like the old chemistry sets, but with airplanes..

[Milton Shupe]

I dont believe i have the Ops manual Milton. It's not in my downloads list. However I found a copy of it on amazon for twenty bucks that i intend on buying on the first.. I'll be looking forwaard to having it as it'll help so much its not funny.. I wish we could release this, with all the manuals and documentation and research data so that enthusiasts could find something in the data that tickles their interest and simply load the plane and duplicate it.. :) Kind of like the old chemistry sets, but with airplanes..

Pam,

I found a freeware version of it in the web.

I sent you the link two times by PM in early April. Was wondering why you were asking about things answered in the manual. :-)

Check your PMs please.

[warchild]

Milton, I am so sorry.. your right. It was right there, and for some reason i cant imagine, i didnt download it at the time.. Thank you.. I really appreciate this..

[Milton Shupe]

Milton, I am so sorry.. your right. It was right there, and for some reason i cant imagine, i didnt download it at the time.. Thank you.. I really appreciate this..

No prob Pam; it's all good. :-)

[warchild]

i'm looking at the forward and aft CG limits and i must confess, it's got me scratching my head.. Forward limit is -2% mac while aft limit is +5% mac?? Sorry. Ice cream brain freeze here.. What?? I truly dont understand. Have I been making an incorrect assumption all these years??

[Milton Shupe]

i'm looking at the forward and aft CG limits and i must confess, it's got me scratching my head.. Forward limit is -2% mac while aft limit is +5% mac?? Sorry. Ice cream brain freeze here.. What?? I truly dont understand. Have I been making an incorrect assumption all these years??

LOL Yup, I had to ask Tom about that one. Maybe helps explain too why all the flaps are needed for a 260kias takeoff. :-)

EDIT: Also, remember that flaps chart above. Three notches of flaps (as I have them setup) required to 250 kias, then one notch to 350 kias. Then you can turn her loose. Test pilots claimed if they left flaps retracted below 350, she would drop like a rock.

[warchild]

LOL Yup, I had to ask Tom about that one. Maybe helps explain too why all the flaps are needed for a 260kias takeoff. :-)

Indeed. especially when the estimated stall speed is 156 knots: over a hundred knots slower..

[Milton Shupe]

Indeed. especially when the estimated stall speed is 156 knots: over a hundred knots slower..

Rotation speeds are high partly because the main gear is about 1.3' behind the CoG, combined with no incidence wings, and being under-powered, you have a good mix of "can't get this thang off the ground". LOL

The Empty Weight CoG shows on the drawing at about where the 28 degree leading edges of the wings would come together on a virtual wing drawing. Remember too that the bottom is really quite flat until after the gear so you would likely get some lift there and from the 2.09 degree static stance.

EDIT: Corrected main gear location based on NACA drawing data, attached.

[fliger747]

With the thin X contoured airfoil, small angles of attack could increase induced drag a lot, especially they the small aspect ratio. The straight turbojets of the era gained thrust with speed and a combination of high induced drag, possible low control and low thrust would make a high rotation speed more necessary.

When we would blast off from say Hong Kong to cross the Pacific in the 747, our minimum flaps up maneuvering speed was something like 280 knots. Even nearing Anchorage at altitude (couple hundred miles out) ATC might ask us to slow to 250 knots, they would get a little irritated when we would say "Unable".

As to the ailerons, I'll have to look through the manual again, but pretty sure I saw a photo with the flaps down and the ailerons apparently drooped.

Cheers: Tom

[Milton Shupe]

I have not been able to work on the model today but I did get a good start on the main gear last night after completing the main gear door animations and getting hinges in place.

Scott Thomas has been working on the 2D panel and gauges and that is looking really good with authentic looking gauges. I'll use those gauges in the VC with some 3D gauge bezel work. I will build the VC as close to the real thing as I can with the pics I have.

I have all but one of the afterburner effects working so good progress there.

[Javis]

I build the VC as close to the real thing as I can with the pics I have.


I bet you have these too so it's just in case: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cockpit_of_Douglas_X-3

Smooth modeling, Milton ! :encouragement:

Cheers,
Jan

[Milton Shupe]

I bet you have these too so it's just in case: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cockpit_of_Douglas_X-3

Smooth modeling, Milton ! :encouragement:

Cheers,
Jan

Thanks Jan :-)

I do have those pics, and several more, plus some graphics drawings from the manual.
Not nearly enough but we can do a reasonable likeness.
Of course, if anyone lives close to the museum in Ohio, they could get some better pics possibly, but of course that will not likely happen until after I complete the modeling. LOL

[Milton Shupe]

Rotation speeds are high partly because the main gear is about 1.3' behind the CoG, combined with no incidence wings, and being under-powered, you have a good mix of "can't get this thang off the ground". LOL

The Empty Weight CoG shows on the drawing at about where the 28 degree leading edges of the wings would come together on a virtual wing drawing. Remember too that the bottom is really quite flat until after the gear so you would likely get some lift there and from the 2.09 degree static stance.

EDIT: Corrected main gear location based on NACA drawing data, attached.

EDIT2: When setting up the NACA drawing shown above, and getting all the LWH dimensions exact, the Main Gear appears to be 2.6' behind the CoG (instead of 1.3') noted on the NACA chart. It's like they halved the main gear distance number. So, I am adjusting the model to what appears to be correct gear placement based on the drawings and the pictures I have showing the main gear struts up close to the wheel bay door cut at rear. Gear placement with respect to empty weight CoG is critical.
Unfortunately, this means redoing the main gear bay door cuts and doors, internal walls and ribs.

[fliger747]

Well....

Got to fly the beastie, actually lining up with Muroc Dry lake and not using the whole thing was interesting!! First FSX plane I have flown that one could actually get into a pilot induced phugoid. tender touch required!!

T

[fliger747]

At 29000' got Mach 1.01 in level flight, just took forever to get there. Landing wasn't too bad, but I'll guess that a chase plane was following along to talk him down on landing. Undoubtedly a pre planned approach profile was attempted.

T

[warchild]

Havent been feeling up to par the last couple days but did get a chance to take her up for a bit today. I was totally delighted to see it "misbehaving" almost on cue. She fliy's beautifully between 500 and 650 knots and is a delight. Right around 730 knots @ sea level she gets real interesting. It's like trying to swim through half dried concrete, which is a it should be. Landing was amazing. From the VC its real easy to line up on the runway, but setting it down in one piece without screwing something up is definitely an artform to be developed. Hehehe.. two mile long stopping distance.. I am quite confident that this is going to be one of the masterpieces of flight sim.. Great job Milton and team.. absolutely magnificent.

[Mach3DS]

Rick:

They would be flaps as opposed to slats as they do not open up an airway behind them and apparently are manually controlled separately from the TE Flaps. This allows the test pilot to carefully try out different positions and combinations. Interesting that the ailerons droop with the flap extension. This might have made for roll control at low speeds (relatively) being less agile.

The chart is also quite interesting regarding stall speeds in IAS increasing at higher altitudes. The only thing I can imagine changing significantly at altitude would be Mach Number?

Cheers: T

Yes that's my mistake. I should have looked more observantly at the photos! Rookie mistake from someone who knows better!

[Milton Shupe]

Havent been feeling up to par the last couple days but did get a chance to take her up for a bit today. I was totally delighted to see it "misbehaving" almost on cue. She fliy's beautifully between 500 and 650 knots and is a delight. Right around 730 knots @ sea level she gets real interesting. It's like trying to swim through half dried concrete, which is a it should be. Landing was amazing. From the VC its real easy to line up on the runway, but setting it down in one piece without screwing something up is definitely an artform to be developed. Hehehe.. two mile long stopping distance.. I am quite confident that this is going to be one of the masterpieces of flight sim.. Great job Milton and team.. absolutely magnificent.

Thanks Pam. It's only a basic FDE for testing the model and general development. I was hoping to give you a good starting point for FDE development, but mainly just needed my usual base test flight model.

I know you can take it to a level we need for realism.

EDIT: Just FYI, the LE and TE flaps do have individual controls. I hope to use xml to accommodate that, but for now, I have the two flaps sections doing what the pilot would do with separate flap controls. Also added the speed brake now, and it works perfectly well.

[warchild]

Thanks Pam. It's only a basic FDE for testing the model and general development. I was hoping to give you a good starting point for FDE development, but mainly just needed my usual base test flight model.

I know you can take it to a level we need for realism.

EDIT: Just FYI, the LE and TE flaps do have individual controls. I hope to use xml to accommodate that, but for now, I have the two flaps sections doing what the pilot would do with separate flap controls. Also added the speed brake now, and it works perfectly well.

Oh excellent.. Thank you Milton.. :)

I'll need to translate the adverse roll into adverse roll + pitch.. It'll need some study and experimentation from me. Since ive never made an fde that specifically follows an exact and well documented performance curve, it'll be a real challenge. It's almost like i have to unlearn how to make a nice enjoyable plane. My old experience flying the cherokee has no relevance here..
heheh I'm really going to enjoy this..

There's another phenomena that happens at transsonic speeds that i want to look at with this model as well.. As you approach the speed of sound, your drag doubles, but once you pass the speed of sound, it drops to half. I'm sure we can program that in with an xml baed config file seperate from aircraft.cfg, but i'm very curious about how it all ties in together, especially since the adverse yaw happens at 1.05 mach, right where the drag starts to drop..

[Milton Shupe]

Pam,

The FDE is apparently compensating for or simply ignoring the real dynamics of drag I suspect, or simply compensating with thrust to get to M1.05.

If you add any more drag pre-mach, it will never get there without boosting the thrust.

[warchild]

oH no.. I'm sory.. did I make it sound like the fde is doing that?? No.. That happens in real life.. It's very bizaar and may be related to what Tom says is Mach Tuck. More for me to learn :)..


https://www.theairlinepilots.com/forumarchive/principlesofflight/wavedrag.jpghttps://www.theairlinepilots.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=691&sid=322be5fb5b9e02d92e2bb65065e8dd3f


Another related phenomena is that as you transit the speed of sound, the shock cone narrows..
(https://www.theairlinepilots.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=691&sid=322be5fb5b9e02d92e2bb65065e8dd3f)

[fliger747]

Pam:

The mach drag can be directly modeled in the .Air file, Table 430. The major issue with it is that it is in .2 Mach intervals, would be nice if it was a closer spacing.

Cheers: T

[warchild]

Pam:

The mach drag can be directly modeled in the .Air file, Table 430. The major issue with it is that it is in .2 Mach intervals, would be nice if it was a closer spacing.

Cheers: T

I.m not so sure microsoft could ever perceive that anyone would delve this deep into flight characteristics. They wouldnt have a reason to think more granularity is needed.. Mach drag doesnt have an effect until 0.75 mach, so the normal airliners see only a limited amount of its effect. concorde sees its full effect, but has enough power it isnt even noticeable to the normal passenger..
I dont normally like messing with tables, because i make so many mistakes, but i guess i need to learn eh??

[Milton Shupe]

Looks like table 430 takes care of that and that thrust does in fact overcome it in our little aircraft that can :-)

[warchild]

So heres something thats blowing my mind. According to the airlinerpilots page, as you go supersonic, the pressure wave turns rectangular??

https://www.theairlinepilots.com/forumarchive/principlesofflight/pressurepattern.jpg


https://www.theairlinepilots.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=691&sid=322be5fb5b9e02d92e2bb65065e8dd3f

[warchild]

Looks like table 430 takes care of that and that thrust does in fact overcome it in our little aircraft that can :-)

Excellent.. :). I can be my typical little cowardly self and not cause any grief :).. I really like that.. ::LOL::

Now, if we take that ([ correction ]) drag curve, and add in the below, overlaying it in our minds ( because we dont have a million dollar wind tunnel ) we start to see a complete picture.. :)

On a typical transonic airfoil the transonic rearward shift of the CP occurs at about M 0.75 to M 0.98

On an example wing (Symmetrical at 2 deg alpha with MCrit at M0.75)

At MFS (free stream Mach) of M0.75:

- Mini shockwaves form on upper surface of wing.

- CP 20%

MFS between M0.75 and M0.81:

- As Mach number increases the shock waves join up and move aft.

At MFS of M0.81:

- A single clearly defined shockwave is formed at 70% chord.

- CP moves aft to 30%

- Bottom flow (not so fast at 2 deg alpha) is not yet sonic. Its just below it.

At MFS of M0.89:

- Top shockwave is stuck at 70% chord (high pressure behind it).

- Bottom shockwave is at the trailing edge.

- CP moves forward to 15%

At MFS of M0.98:

- Both shockwaves at trailing edge.

- CP moves back to 45% (in the transition from M0.89 to M0.98 )

At MFS of M1.4:

- Bow shock attaches (MDet)

- Trailing edge shocks become oblique.

- CP 50%

[warchild]

And your right zMilton. This is definately the little plane that can. Westinghouse may have screwed up, but douglas created something amazing..

[fliger747]

Intereresting test flight. Got up to M 1.02 in level flight at 25,000' (ISA). However in a dive to M 1.25, I found the ailerons completely loose effectiveness above M 1.1. The plane will remain in whatever roll attitude it is in without regard to cockpit input.

Interesting in the .Air file there are more entries for Mach related effects than any other single area. Hmmmm.

The 737 started hitting a mach drag slope after M .74, any faster took a lot of thrust. The 747, especially, was a race car. It was optimized for about M .86 but would cruise happily all day at M .90-.92. At that speed one could crane their neck around in the cockpit and see a shockwave standing up about 10-15 feet inside the winglet. However at those speeds (much higher was possible if not certified) fuel consumption increased significantly.

[warchild]

If you continue to accelerate you will find that that loss of aileron control i the onset of reverse control. left aileron will cause the plane to roll to the right, and right aileron will cause the plane to roll to the left. Its a bit primitive, but its exactly in line with this aircrafts adverse yaw behavior..

[fliger747]

The usual reason for aileron reversal is wing flexibility. What happens is the aileron starts acting as a booster tab and warps the wing in the opposite direction. It's that reason that large swept wing aircraft usually have the outboard ailerons locked out above a certain speed and roll control is provided by inboard ailerons and spoilers.

However, as you point out, in the high transonic environment the drag induced by one wing developing critical mach over that wing and not the other can cause a change in lift and drag inducing an opposite roll moment. As shockwaves in this environment come and go quickly when on the "edge" I would guess it is sudden onset condition and not preceded by aileron lock over any appreciable speed range. Any info on that?

Interesting airplane! I did successfully land it at KEDW using about 2/3 runway! Haven't crashed it yet...

Cheers: T

[Bjoern]

Pam:

The mach drag can be directly modeled in the .Air file, Table 430. The major issue with it is that it is in .2 Mach intervals, would be nice if it was a closer spacing.

Cheers: T

That's what table 154a is for, but it's not usable for RTM/SP1/SP2 users.





So heres something thats blowing my mind. According to the airlinerpilots page, as you go supersonic, the pressure wave turns rectangular??

https://www.theairlinepilots.com/forumarchive/principlesofflight/pressurepattern.jpg


https://www.theairlinepilots.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=691&sid=322be5fb5b9e02d92e2bb65065e8dd3f

This only denotes an almost instantaneous pressure increase.

[zswobbie1]

Is there anyway we can use some of the configs in FS2004? Or are they unique to FSX

[fliger747]

Yes the 154a table (at the very bottom of the F18 .Air file) is probably what the 430 table should have been but given the Freeware market segment we are probably stuck with the 430 table for compatibility. I think I may still have the RTM version on an ancient computer somewhere, running XP.

Both the XF 92A and the X-3, along with many jets of the era suffered from low available thrust. A skating buddy of mine was a WIZZo on the B-47, what interesting stories! Not enough thrust, just add engines! Even the 747 project almost failed due to engines, the first ones needed water injection to meet takeoff performance requirements. A long way from the sky rocket the 400 was.

[Milton Shupe]

As mentioned in an earlier post, I had to re-do the gear doors. Available time has limited progress but now have left side doors, hinges, actuating rods, interior bay area, floor, ceiling, ribs, etc. close to done. Just got to tie the upper and lower actuating rods together to a common junction used to rotate the doors.

Then, on to the wheels and tires, torque links, brake lines, .... then clone for the other side.

[Bjoern]

Yes the 154a table (at the very bottom of the F18 .Air file) is probably what the 430 table should have been but given the Freeware market segment we are probably stuck with the 430 table for compatibility. I think I may still have the RTM version on an ancient computer somewhere, running XP.

Primarily use table 154a, then put interpolated values into table 430 and a disclaimer in the manual that the thing won't fly quite correctly in RTM/SP1/SP2. FSX will choose the best table automatically. Problem solved.

[Milton Shupe]

Slowly making progress to complete the left gear bay, doors, and the many gear parts and animations. A couple of brake line animations to do, then clone for the other side.

[fliger747]

Having some landing gear instead of the magnetic levitation will be nice addition! Looking good!!

[Milton Shupe]

Yes, main gear finally modeled, animated, and working.

Now, on to the nose gear. :-)

[Jafo]

It's looking good....painters are getting restless...;)

[warchild]

this is looking just absolutely wonderful :)..

[Milton Shupe]

Thanks for the comments.

Building the gear components from scratch so it is taking some time. But have gotten over the hump and now working to finalize the nose gear braces, damper, door cutouts, hinges and little stuff.

[fliger747]

Straight on, foreshortened, it looks like a mouse?

Proceeding very well indeed!

T

[Milton Shupe]

Straight on, foreshortened, it looks like a mouse?

Proceeding very well indeed!

T

LOL It does indeed, just like the real thing head on. A lot of hours invested trying to get the right look and proportions without cross sections to help. Yes, it can be done, but it is painfully tedious.

[warchild]

and extremely appreciated.. :) its looking wonderful..besides, the fact it looks like a supersonic mouse is one of the things i fell in love with when i was just six years old :)..

[Milton Shupe]

Thanks Jafo and Pam.

@Jafo, understand the restless thing. That's how I am until I get the modeling and mapping done and can make it available to the paint shop. :-)

Pam and Tom, I should have you an updated package today or early Sunday.

[warchild]

thats great Milton.. Thank you..
With the RF-61 released to beta, I should be able to switch over and focus on the X-3 more intently within the next few days.. It's going to be a major amount of fun :)..

[Milton Shupe]

thats great Milton.. Thank you..
With the RF-61 released to beta, I should be able to switch over and focus on the X-3 more intently within the next few days.. It's going to be a major amount of fun :)..

Thanks, but no hurry Pam; lots to do yet. :-)

Take care of the P-61 for now.

[Milton Shupe]

Nose gear is done and tested.

Now trying to get a basic VC panel in place so it is available for Scott to populate temporarily for testing.

[warchild]

Nose gear is done and tested.

Now trying to get a basic VC panel in place so it is available for Scott to populate temporarily for testing.

Ohhh those images.. With all Respect Ito-Sama.. eat your heart out :)..

[fliger747]

Maybe it's the way I fly it, I often have to bob my head around in the cockpit to see the runway on approach. Not so different from landing some of the hog nose radial powered fighters!

Cheers: T

[MrZippy]

Ohhh those images.. With all Respect Ito-Sama.. eat your heart out :)..

+1 Looks like a rocket on wheels.:applause:

[Milton Shupe]

Pam, Tom, and Scott: Updated package available for you.

Added a bit more infrastructure to the basic VC.

[warchild]

Maybe it's the way I fly it, I often have to bob my head around in the cockpit to see the runway on approach. Not so different from landing some of the hog nose radial powered fighters!

Cheers: T

With Miltons X-3 its easy, with Ito-Sama's, not so much. Like with everything i do, I use a mental image of the approach i'm making, once i'm pretty sure i'm lined up on a runway. That image plays out in my head, while i'm adjusting speed and watching my altitude.. As long as my hands dont start trembling, i'm in good shape :)..

[warchild]

The X-3 over Fuji-Sama at Yokota AFB,,

https://i.imgur.com/Ui8Tmp5.jpg


Life hates me some days!

https://i.imgur.com/GEwInWi.jpg

[Milton Shupe]

The X-3 exterior model is pretty much completed now with all the access doors and speed brake done. A few tweaks now and cleanup as necessary are left before moving forward.

Here we show the speed brake and the pilot's entry/exit door, also completed in the VC.
Scott has made great progress on the 2D panel and popup panels.

[fliger747]

Ah yes, Fuji Yama from Yokota. The X-3 must have gotten there in one of the C-130's parked behind! We used to fly "stuff" from Travis to Yokota and back. No X-3's however... Or at least we can't confirm or deny...

[warchild]

I need so much more stick time in this it isnt funny. Its still like taking it out on its first date, every time i fly it. I just havent had th time to get to know it ell enough.. Thats definitely going to get fixed though..

[Milton Shupe]

I need so much more stick time in this it isnt funny. Its still like taking it out on its first date, every time i fly it. I just havent had th time to get to know it ell enough.. Thats definitely going to get fixed though..

Take off: Flaps 3
Climbout: Full AfterBurner to altitude
At 250, begin rotate
At 280, Flaps 2
At 350, All flaps up
Cruise less than 350, Flaps 1 (LE 10)
Descent: Below FL180, less than M.92
Appoach: Slow to <350 for long approach
Below 350, flaps 1
Below 300, gear down, flaps 2
Below 260, full flaps
Maintain 250 to short final
Landing: slow to 240-255 over the fence for touchdown contact

Speed brake may be used anytime, any speed, any altitude - affects only drag (I rarely need it)

See chart

[Milton Shupe]

NACA pilots are clamoring for a ride :-)

[Flyboy208]

Loving the progress of this aircraft from "Shupeworks" ! Mike :applause:

[warchild]

Here's my curiosity.
What will the difference between the two sims be, in the way they handle the adverse yaw/pitch at Mach 1.05?? That could be a bit of a challenge making them both behave the same..

[warchild]

OK, so late last night/Extremely early this morning ( 2AM) I started blending in the NACA/Nasa Data with the FDE provided by Milton. I even added the seemingly backwards CG Aft and forward limits. I also saved off Miltonsairfile and replaced it with the one I had started while working on Ito_Sama's version, into which i added the Naca/Nasa data relevant to the Air file. I think youll agree after watching this that i need to reloacate all the Naca/Nasa airfile data, over to Miltons airfile. After inserting all the data, I turned on shadow play and recorded the very first flight of the full, base fde. I've never broken a horse before, but i imagine it must be something like your about to see. The recording was at 6AM this morning. Since then, Ive gotten light years beyond this.. Truth told, this is one of the best first flights, i have ever had in an aircraft. Usually they spin wildly out of control or bounce up and do back flips.. This is a good start.. :) Enjoy..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkdSaxyKrBQ&amp;feature=youtu.be

[Jafo]

Nope...you didn't crash and burn...;)

[Milton Shupe]

Making some progress on several fronts ...

Exterior: Window seals, wheel chocks, wheel and tire textures

Interior: Yoke, X-3 Emblem on the yoke, VC interior windows (no outside reflections) in rubber seals, side wall insulated covers

[warchild]

was just flying this :).. :) :) :) .. Thats looking so good in so many ways, it ain't funny. Beautiful job on the flaps too and speed brake too.. hell, i'm in love..

Still working on blending things. Currently the elevator has a bit too much authority and the plane complains at anything over 4G's. I'm tempted to practically flatten out the angle of attack rate. This thing wasnt exactly an aerobatic plane anyway, and at seven hundred mph, i imagine the G's pile on real fast. Should have something by the end of the week though..:)

Pam

[Milton Shupe]

was just flying this :).. :) :) :) .. Thats looking so good in so many ways, it ain't funny. Beautiful job on the flaps too and speed brake too.. hell, i'm in love..

Still working on blending things. Currently the elevator has a bit too much authority and the plane complains at anything over 4G's. I'm tempted to practically flatten out the angle of attack rate. This thing wasnt exactly an aerobatic plane anyway, and at seven hundred mph, i imagine the G's pile on real fast. Should have something by the end of the week though..:)

Pam

Pam, I believe the best description of handling and stalling characteristics is described in this NACA test document I sent:

STABILITY AND CONTROL CHARACTERISTICS OBTAINED DURING
DEMONSTRATION OF THE DOUGLAS X- 3 RESEARCH AIRPLANE

I believe the pos G no flaps was set at 6.5 which was attained during one test flight. I have the cockpit shaking and rumbling starting at 5G's I think; that can be changed.
Attached are the Load Factors from data I sent.

AoA at cruise was 2 degrees, I read somewhere but can't find it at the moment. At speeds less than 350IAS, the LE flaps need to be set at 10 degrees.

RE: Elevator authority, see attached.

[warchild]

thanks Milton..I'll have another read through. The load data i am very grateful for. I've been looking for that for some time. Now i can put everything into its right place. Caan even almost begin visualizing the chain of events leading to the coupled effects. I'm still working on getting the nose to not bounce when the elevator is used. otherwise, the plane is currently in a stable and controllable configuration for the moment. I'm currently working on all the coefficients in the air file and weeding my way through those. It may take a while but hopefully not too long. Tonight, I'm taking off work to get a little rest. I've been pushing both ends of the candle with the P-61 and X-3 and i'm a little tired.. Gonna get a good nights rest.
I'm still trepidatious about making the plane reach out and bite you at exactly 1.05 Mach. Still unsure how to go about doing that, but hoping perhaps once i have everything else correct, it'll do it on its own. I'm considering adding in the various station weights and locations as well, like i did with the OzX goose redux. Currently its a great plane to fly.. Lots of fun.

[Milton Shupe]

thanks Milton..I'll have another read through. The load data i am very grateful for. I've been looking for that for some time. Now i can put everything into its right place. Caan even almost begin visualizing the chain of events leading to the coupled effects. I'm still working on getting the nose to not bounce when the elevator is used. otherwise, the plane is currently in a stable and controllable configuration for the moment. I'm currently working on all the coefficients in the air file and weeding my way through those. It may take a while but hopefully not too long. Tonight, I'm taking off work to get a little rest. I've been pushing both ends of the candle with the P-61 and X-3 and i'm a little tired.. Gonna get a good nights rest.
I'm still trepidatious about making the plane reach out and bite you at exactly 1.05 Mach. Still unsure how to go about doing that, but hoping perhaps once i have everything else correct, it'll do it on its own. I'm considering adding in the various station weights and locations as well, like i did with the OzX goose redux. Currently its a great plane to fly.. Lots of fun.

Pam, there is no hurry. Project is just getting started. Model has a long way to go yet, then textures, VC, sounds, docs, etc.

No need to punish yourself here. Focus on the things that are important now; put this at the end of the list.

[Milton Shupe]

Making some progress in the VC with 3D gauge cages and bezels. The gauge code is 2D same as the 2D panel so they will be changeable by those who wish to do their own thing.

Thanks to Scott Thomas for all the new gauge works. Great stuff!

[Jafo]

Making some progress in the VC with 3D gauge cages and bezels. The gauge code is 2D same as the 2D panel so they will be changeable by those who wish to do their own thing.

Thanks to Scott Thomas for all the new gauge works. Great stuff!
Cool...I like messing with 2D panels...;)

[warchild]

I'm loving these gauges, and the seal around the widows is first rate :) loving it all really..

Could you ask Mr. Thomas if he would be so kind as to extend the Mach speed indicater gauge out to Mach 2.5 Please?? My logic is the the plane was always intended to be a Mach 2 plane, and would have been designed as such, with gauges to support it.. Thanks in advance.

More soon :)..:) :)

Addendum:
FDE v Alpha 1.0 is ready to go to the devs for their perusal and testing. I will get that out to Milton in the next five minutes..I'm calling it the "Easy Chair" version. Really, a 747 should be this smooth. The reason I made it this smooth and stable was to get a controllable state to start the real work in. As is, the real plane made 43 flights, of which it experienced Adverse yaw/pitch in only three of the flights. I need to get the plane to the point where given the right amount of everything, including weather and wind, it will experience that same adverse yaw/pitch with the same freaquency as the real aircraft, and at the same speed.. Now that it's stable, i can do that. Time to do some more research and reading..
Milton, Tom, Scott! I do hope you enjoy my humble offering. Turn off limited fuel and enjoy the view through those big panes of glass.. :) Milton? ould you please forward the fde to Mr. Thomas?? Thank you..

Pam

[Milton Shupe]

I'm loving these gauges, and the seal around the widows is first rate :) loving it all really..

Could you ask Mr. Thomas if he would be so kind as to extend the Mach speed indicater gauge out to Mach 2.5 Please?? My logic is the the plane was always intended to be a Mach 2 plane, and would have been designed as such, with gauges to support it.. Thanks in advance.

More soon :)..:) :)
... snipped ..

Pam

Scott and I talked about the Mach meter going to 2.1 but the original panel gauge, as all gauges we have now, are just like the real world panel. So, we decided to stay authentic instead.

With that said, the tool tip does read past the gauge markings to give actual Mach in a dive. I believe I got it to M1.1 on one dive.

[warchild]

well, if it follows the standard path for an eliptical wing then the lower pressure wave moves back to about 25% MAC while the upper pressure wave moves back to a little over 50% mac. the other phenomena observed during this time is that the pressure cone gets narrower/smaller (??)

[Milton Shupe]

Okay, correction on the Mach meter - the museum piece in Ohio has a Mach 1 meter.

As Pam has pointed out from the manual, the graphics show a Mach 3 meter. So, we will in fact upgrade our Mach meter to one that is "more authentic". :-)

[warchild]

Okay, correction on the Mach meter - the museum piece in Ohio has a Mach 1 meter.

As Pam has pointed out from the manual, the graphics show a Mach 3 meter. So, we will in fact upgrade our Mach meter to one that is "more authentic". :-)

Thanks Milton.. That will be awesome.. Theoretically i actually have someone coming to visit me today. :). So i'll be waiting till tomorrow to jump back on the fde..

Theresanother curiosity i wnt to play with at some point in the future.. The bottom of this plane is flat, in a way that almost mimics and F-14, Now, Nasa hadnt even thought of their first lifting body at that point, so they wouldnt have taken into account, the amount of lift generated by that flat space, like the engineers at Grumman did twenty years later. But that lift would be there. it'll be intreresting to see how it plays into the behavior of the plane..

[Milton Shupe]

Time available has been limited but some progress to report.

Found the sweet spot for hi-res gauges for the vc panels, and Scott continues evolving the 2D panel and pop-ups. Scott also added a Mach 3 meter as an option.

Did some tweaking of the main gear to stiffen suspension while ensuring proper ride height, tweaked yoke animations, and yoke handles appearance.

Working to map the VC panels and gauges now.

EDIT: adding a gmax view of the VC panel and gauges construction just for interest

[Milton Shupe]

Thanks Bob; no problem; we are having too much fun :-)

Just wrapping up exterior work so I can get started with exterior texture mapping, and hopefully get some textures started while work continues in the other phases of the project.

[Mach3DS]

Milton this project is looking excellent!

[Jafo]

Milton this project is looking excellent!

Minor understatement...;)

[Milton Shupe]

LOL Thanks for the comments. I do find it exhilarating to fly too. :jump:

Now working on the tedious task of selecting some 5376 polys of the fuselage and engines by hand to map for texture application.

Because of the fuselage and engines being one big complex part, it makes mapping a real challenge. I am now through the bulk of the poly selections with only another 276 polys left to assign to one of the channel groups. Once that is done and verified, I can begin the mapping process selecting one channel at a time, applying the map view, generating the texture template, then applying the template texture to the mapped areas. It's all part of the fun. :-)

[fliger747]

Think of how much fun making the sheet metal was!

T

[Milton Shupe]

Minor understatement...;)

LOL 000Rick000 strives for perfection in every way.

So much so, I am happy to announce the Rick has joined the X-3 team to take responsibility for textures.

Welcome aboard Rick, and thanks. :applause:

[Milton Shupe]

Think of how much fun making the sheet metal was!

T

I cannot even imagine the skills and time required to hand shape the sheet metal.

Oh my aching hands! Not another piece ... :banghead:

[Jafo]

LOL 000Rick000 strives for perfection in every way.

So much so, I am happy to announce the Rick has joined the X-3 team to take responsibility for textures.

Welcome aboard Rick, and thanks. :applause:
Gonna need my sunnies, I think....lots of alphas and specs....wall to wall metal...;)

[warchild]

Nahhh. Mines only gonna have metal wings, with mighty mouse painted on the nose below the cocpit:)

[Josh Patterson]

LOL Thanks for the comments. I do find it exhilarating to fly too. :jump:

Now working on the tedious task of selecting some 5376 polys of the fuselage and engines by hand to map for texture application.

Because of the fuselage and engines being one big complex part, it makes mapping a real challenge. I am now through the bulk of the poly selections with only another 276 polys left to assign to one of the channel groups. Once that is done and verified, I can begin the mapping process selecting one channel at a time, applying the map view, generating the texture template, then applying the template texture to the mapped areas. It's all part of the fun. :-) Seeing these pics I do believe the X-3 would wear the color red nicely! (Maybe some white accents with black trim like a Pitts but in a style to suit the shape! Perhaps the entire vertical being white with that tapering down to become a cheat line and terminating at a point at the tip of the nose and a Pitts style burst pattern on the wing.)

[warchild]

Welll, keep in mind this lady isntyour normal prom date. More like "Janeys got a gun". its latterally unstable below .85 mach and requires a steady hand and a lot more skill than any other plane youve flown to fly. and then of course theres the fact that at mack 1.05 its quite possible if will try to kill you.

[warchild]

Terribly sorry. Couldn't resist

[Milton Shupe]

Just sent the X-3 to Rick's Paint Shop :jump:

[Mach3DS]

When 1940's and 50's aircraft come to the paint shop, they are bare metal. They leave with paint. :santahat:

[Mach3DS]

It starts....


http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60227&stc=1

[Mach3DS]

Materials Test passed! Let the creative process begin!

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=60228&stc=1

[centuryseries]

What a pointy looking beast!

Looking good Milton!

[Milton Shupe]

What a pointy looking beast!

Looking good Milton!

Thanks! I like it 'cause its got dual exhausts! :-)

[Sundog]

That is looking great, unsurprisingly. You know it deserves to be painted like a bird with that long beak and scowl of a cockpit. ;)

[warchild]

ok, my miondis sufficiently blown..

https://i.imgur.com/iSD5xiJ.jpg

i remember that fiberboard looking back panel from modern laundry rooms in the fifties..The headliner is amazing..

[warchild]

ok, soo, general update from the peanut gallery here..
After discussing sevcerlthings about the fde with the team, we've narrowed the initial thrust of it down to a more or less exact set of behaviors we need to see.. Some of it, we're beginning to see. Other things will take some time..
You see, I'm trying to set this up exactly like the experiments back in 1954. Heres the issue..
In flightsim ( any flight sim ) there are very specific and defined ways that each component of an fde interacts with each other and with the environment.
In real life, the is a very specific way thteach component of an aircraft interacts with each other and the environment.
The two arent the same.
So what has to be done is to translate the real world, into flight sim values, allowing the aircraft to fly in the envioronment it was designed for, and do it within the sim.
Currently, the Alpha 1.01 fde has been given to the team to beat up. They in turn have been providing me with tons of valuable insight and information, and i;m moving forward with the initial debugging phase, creating a seconf baseline to which i can add in all the personality and behaviors this plane had, at a later time. The speed is slightly too high, the engine too underpowered, P3D cant seem to thell the difference between 1000 feet and 30000 feet. The environment hasntbeen bjuilt according to the world the plane lived in is what that tells me.. Bear with me.. I'm working on it.. ;)
Pam

[Dev One]

Pam, I noticed the other day when checking my W10 removed apps folder that Herve Sors has an 'Advanced Jet Performance Calculator' software - AJPC v2.41. Never used it so cannot confirm if it is good or not, but he claims it is better than other programs.
Have you tried it?
Keith

[warchild]

Pam, I noticed the other day when checking my W10 removed apps folder that Herve Sors has an 'Advanced Jet Performance Calculator' software - AJPC v2.41. Never used it so cannot confirm if it is good or not, but he claims it is better than other programs.
Have you tried it?
Keith

Just downloaded it, thank you..

Perhaps we can use it to learn the why's and where-for's of one or two niggling problems.. Heres the thing though.
It's one thing to use a calculator when you have to find a value, which is the way it is with most aircraft we fly. It's another thing, when every single value you coul;d possibly squeeze into that fde is given too you by the nations oldest and greatest authority on aerodynamics, and the results dont match the results of that very self same organization ( NACA ) that makes you scratch your head.. And we're seeing some of tht crop up at the moment.
We enter the exact vluesthat the Naca give us. We double and triple check them to ensure there are no issues, and the sim itself says "NOPE" not gonna happen. I'm just gonna go off over here and do this other thing".. So, theres something in the base flight model we all start with ( the one provided by microsoft ) that is incorrect..We just have to do a bit of detective work.

[Penzoil3]

Good old Microsnot.
LOL
Sue

[Milton Shupe]

Making some head-way on the VC albeit it slow and tedious. Just taking a sub-panel and console at a time. Lots to do yet.

[warchild]

Looking awesome..Very very awesome.. No hurry.. It's not like i'm speedy gonzales either ::LOL::
I dont have pictures but the stuff i'm dealing with now is (for 1954 ) straight out of science fiction.. Gods what those engineers must have felt. This terrible exhileration. All the hopes of a company, balanced on the point of a needle.
Yes, the lifting body element they unintentionally designed into the plane changes things but it'll take time to get the correct balance here..
Tally Ho...

[warchild]

Does this remind you guys of anything??

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/343875main_EC75-4914_full.jpg


Stay tuned because we're getting real.. :devilish:

[Mach3DS]

http://www.aviationexplorer.com/douglas_x-3_stiletto_experimental_jet_aircraft/Douglas-X-3-Stiletto-cockpit_view.jpg

[warchild]

awesome pic. Thanks Rick.Thats the one at the airforce museum with the incorrect mach meter.. :)

[Milton Shupe]

Still slugging it out in the VC wrapping up the modeling for the side panels and consoles. Another 2 days to get the pedals and lower center and overhead parts modeled, then we can finalize mapping for the interior and animations.

[Milton Shupe]

Howdy Folks :-)

Looking for a quality exterior texture artist who understands FSX materials, is comfortable with spec and bump maps, and is willing do a paint kit.

Rick has checked out the basics of the templates and we feel this is ready for some serious texture application.

Rick however is a bit overwhelmed with Spring sports activities (he is quite active in same) with the kids so he is willing to turn this over to someone who has the time and talents to bring this to fruition.

Please PM me if you have the time, interest, and skills to help move this to the finish line.
No deadlines, but we are are moving forward.

Thanks for your consideration.

[Milton Shupe]

Position filled; thanks to Wellis and welcome to the team. :jump:

[Josh Patterson]

Does this remind you guys of anything??

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/343875main_EC75-4914_full.jpg


Stay tuned because we're getting real.. :devilish: SURE! The Shuttle coming in with a T-38 chase plane! (Or it just reminds me that I haven't seen or heard a Starfighter in almost 20 years! Gotta get down to Florida!)

[Milton Shupe]

We are making good progress in the VC, the flight model, and exterior textures. Much to do yet, however.

We are looking for someone to join the team as a sounds engineer for the X-3. If you are interested in creating a full set of authentic sounds, please notify me by PM. Thanks

[Jafo]

I'm just itching to crash and burn....er....fly the thing....;)

[and chuck some paint on it]...;)

[Milton Shupe]

I'm just itching to crash and burn....er....fly the thing....;)

[and chuck some paint on it]...;)


Thank you Jafo for your interest. I think that you will really enjoy flying this one; it's different and it's exciting, and fast enough to get your attention.

[txnetcop]

I'm getting that tingly feeling already...it's either hives coming on or excitement LOL!
Ted

[warchild]

I'm getting that tingly feeling already...it's either hives coming on or excitement LOL!
Ted

::LOL:: Hives indeed ::LOL::

[Cazzie]

I was several days late, but glad to hear the Paint Kit project has been taken. I would have been glad to have tried it, I have loads of reference from the scale model I built years ago of the X-3 tested by NASA. So I am most interested in the X-3 and having a go at Wellis' Paint Kit once all is finalized.

Cazzie

[Milton Shupe]

I was several days late, but glad to hear the Paint Kit project has been taken. I would have been glad to have tried it, I have loads of reference from the scale model I built years ago of the X-3 tested by NASA. So I am most interested in the X-3 and having a go at Wellis' Paint Kit once all is finalized.

Cazzie

Hi Caz, thanks for jumping in. Sorry you missed the opportunity but Wellis will do a beautiful job for us.

Your model was astoundingly realistic. Excellent work on your part; hope we do as well.

[warchild]

https://i.imgur.com/DvPf8f5.png

[Josh Patterson]

We are making good progress in the VC, the flight model, and exterior textures. Much to do yet, however.

We are looking for someone to join the team as a sounds engineer for the X-3. If you are interested in creating a full set of authentic sounds, please notify me by PM. Thanks I really like RAZBAM's J-34 sound in the Banshee. Even if the X-3 came out with the default Lear sound I think I know what I'd really alias to! (Just like there are a few payware planes in my hangar with R-2800s pulling sound from the great sounding Marauder!) After the B-26 and XF-92 I'm quite interested to hear what the sound will be like for the Stiletto, but iffin I don't like it at least there is a nice fallback available for myself and others who own the Banshee. (And I do think anyone who enjoys vintage jets would have it.)

[WarHorse47]

It's nearly the end of June. How 'bout an update?? :bump:

[Milton Shupe]

It's nearly the end of June. How 'bout an update?? :bump:

Thanks for your interest Sir.

Generally, progress on all fronts. We have been quiet as we do our due diligence.

The 2D and VC panels, gauges, and xml custom coding are pretty much done save some VC panel and floor shading.
The elevator/ejection seat is just getting started.

The exterior paints are making headway with the fuselage base panel lines and rivets layed down.
Wellis is now working on the wings and tails to get the basics in place.

Pam and Paul continue work on the flight model.

No interest was shown from anyone willing to develop sounds particular to the X-3 engines.

Here are a few screen shots.

[Jafo]

All looking good...;)

[WarHorse47]

Beautiful. Thank you for the update, Milton. :encouragement:

[warchild]

C'Mon guys..this thing may have been underwhelming in performance but the J-34 more than made up for it in sound.. The sound profile on the J-34 was surpassed only by the Avons used on the B-2 Vulcan.. Check out its Growl..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYvu1uHTeww

[Moses03]

I like that video!

[Taco]

Shucks, can't get it to play.:banghead:

[warchild]

Shucks, can't get it to play.:banghead:

Did you try playing it directly from You Tube??.. theres also a ton of J-34 run up videos there that were recorded from the front and the sides. sadly the growl is heard mainly from the aft quarter..
This video isnt as good as the tech that is runnning the engine is doing something weird and the cameraman didntlet it run up all the way..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB31gbtMPFU

[Milton Shupe]

Here are two screens of the VC I should have included above.

[Sundog]

That looks amazing Milton. Nice work. :)

[falcon409]

Here are two screens of the VC I should have included above.
Awesome work as always Milton.

[Jafo]

Me is champing at the bit...;)

[docjohnson]

That's a nice looking cockpit, great work!

[StormILM]

C'Mon guys..this thing may have been underwhelming in performance but the J-34 more than made up for it in sound.. The sound profile on the J-34 was surpassed only by the Avons used on the B-2 Vulcan.. Check out its Growl..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYvu1uHTeww

That delayed Light-Off was certainly undesirable! Last time I saw that happen was when I was assisting starting a Lear 23 (which happened to be the oldest Learjet flying in the late 80's/early 90's) and they were having issues with the fuel feed & pressurization system on #1 which is also the side where the GPU receptacle is located (on the fuselage under the left engine). During the prolonged spool-up of #1, raw Jet-A Fuel was pouring out of the nozzle onto the ground and the delayed light-off pretty much was the same as this video BUT in this case it endangered the aircraft, crew and ground crews & GPU. I had to suppress the fire on the ramp with a fire bottle and then rapidly close the electrical contact switch on the GPU + unplug it from the aircraft and push it out of the way. It all happened in seconds! Scary stuff at times!

[Mike71]

C'Mon guys..this thing may have been underwhelming in performance but the J-34 more than made up for it in sound.. The sound profile on the J-34 was surpassed only by the Avons used on the B-2 Vulcan.. Check out its Growl..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYvu1uHTeww

It certainly was a noisy, smokey engine, and very underpowered. I went through basic jet training at NAS Meridian, Mississippi in the single engine T-2A. Most people are more familiar with the two engine T-2B and T-2C, powered by J-60s and J-85s, respectively.

During 4-plane formation training, it was easy to keep track of everyone during a running rendezvous after taking off at 10 second intervals. If you were number 4, you couldn't see the lead airplane as you started the takeoff roll, but you sure could see his smoke trail, along with the #2 and #3 as well. Once at altitude and back on the power, I seem to recall they did not smoke all that much - if at all - though.

[Dev One]

I think you will find that Vulcan B2's were fitted with Olympus - the prototype B1 had Avons.
The noisiest aircraft I can recall was the AW52 - it had a very high pitched scream as well as the exhaust roar.

[warchild]

That delayed Light-Off was certainly undesirable! Last time I saw that happen was when I was assisting starting a Lear 23 (which happened to be the oldest Learjet flying in the late 80's/early 90's) and they were having issues with the fuel feed & pressurization system on #1 which is also the side where the GPU receptacle is located (on the fuselage under the left engine). During the prolonged spool-up of #1, raw Jet-A Fuel was pouring out of the nozzle onto the ground and the delayed light-off pretty much was the same as this video BUT in this case it endangered the aircraft, crew and ground crews & GPU. I had to suppress the fire on the ramp with a fire bottle and then rapidly close the electrical contact switch on the GPU + unplug it from the aircraft and push it out of the way. It all happened in seconds! Scary stuff at times!

Yes, Fire coming out the pipe during startuipis usually a bad sign. Not being a powerplant person i can only assume what you described is exactly whats happening here.. Either way, its sad..

[warchild]

It certainly was a noisy, smokey engine, and very underpowered. I went through basic jet training at NAS Meridian, Mississippi in the single engine T-2A. Most people are more familiar with the two engine T-2B and T-2C, powered by J-60s and J-85s, respectively.

During 4-plane formation training, it was easy to keep track of everyone during a running rendezvous after taking off at 10 second intervals. If you were number 4, you couldn't see the lead airplane as you started the takeoff roll, but you sure could see his smoke trail, along with the #2 and #3 as well. Once at altitude and back on the power, I seem to recall they did not smoke all that much - if at all - though.

Breaking it down all the way, the J-34 wasnt a bad engine. It powered a lot of great aircraft from that time period, but the X-3 had several thousand pounds on all of them. Mind you, the X-3 was small, and perhaps too nimble, but it's reality was that it weighed 22000 pounds which was the same as a B-25 bomber..The fact that that lil engine vcould drive this plane anywhere close to mach 1 was in myt mind a miracle, but it did it and it did it with gusto.. 9000 pounds is only around 3000 pounds off from ideal, because once you break mach 1, the drag drops to half and it becomes much easier to achieve Mach 2. However, please dont ask for Mach 2. Westinghouse was incapable of packaging 6000 pounds of thrust in a 27" wide engine, and evewn if they had, the plane would have become completely and fataly unflyable somewhere just above mach 1 due to the then unforseen anomolies involved with that specific design.

Paul Currently is running the fdethrough his sieve of utilities and dialing it in. I guarantee that when he and I finish it. It's going to be a challenging, yet very satisfying ( if not just a little terrifying ) experience..Perhaps even the best he and I have ever done ( and we've done some very good ones )..

[warchild]

I think you will find that Vulcan B2's were fitted with Olympus - the prototype B1 had Avons.
The noisiest aircraft I can recall was the AW52 - it had a very high pitched scream as well as the exhaust roar.


ACH!!! Your right..Mia Culpa.. I apologize.. I must have been having a senior moment when i stated that.. Thanks for the correction :)..

Pam

[Dev One]

No problem Pam, I have plenty of those senior moments...... but with regard to Avon noise, maybe you are thinking of the Hawker Hunter 'blue note'?
Keith

[warchild]

No problem Pam, I have plenty of those senior moments...... but with regard to Avon noise, maybe you are thinking of the Hawker Hunter 'blue note'?
Keith

I wish.. Now there was a legendary aircraft :)..But no.. I just got confused. I've had so many airp[lanes and so many engines go past my eyueballs these last 11 years that i sometimes just cant keep em all straight..

[WarHorse47]

Wow. Three months and no update. Time to BUMP this one. :bump:

[warchild]

Partly my fault WarHorse.. I had to padsss it off to Paul ( my partner ) and I did so just at the time Just Flight needed him to dig in and get some things done on some of their work.. I'll try and contact him and seee how its going..

[Milton Shupe]

The delay is mostly my fault as I have taken a long break from project work due to some RW issues.

Not entirely resolved but am trying to get the package out for a "first beta exposure".

There are a few minor unresolved gauge/PTT warning light issues but no major functional issues in our testing.
I also have not mapped/textured the seat, and there is a minor flight model change pending.
IMO, no show stoppers.

I will get a package out and hopefully we can get some feedback to help get any other issues resolved.

[MrZippy]

No rush, Milton. Life comes first:wavey:

[Milton Shupe]

Available now: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=113044

[Jafo]

Yay....downloading....;)

[MrZippy]

Me too! Putting on my bubblewrap flight suit:encouragement: Better use a VERY long runway and don't do nuttin' stupid once it's up. You will lose all flight capabilities and plunge to your ultimate destruction!:wavey: This is gonna take some practice:banghead:

64327

64328