-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
Douglas X-3 Stiletto
- Thread starter falcon409
- Start date
DennyA
SOH-CM-2023
I had a version of this flying in FS9 or FSX at one point. I think it was Ito? (Edit, yep, Kazunori Ito. And there's an FSX panel. Link.)
It's a beautiful plane, but from everything I've read about, it's far more fun to look at than fly. it was underpowered (designed for 2,000 mph max speed, was subsonic except in a dive), didn't control well (terrible roll coupling), and really, bringing it to FSX/P3D would just let us recreate a failed experiment and fly a bad plane. A beautiful bad plane, sure, but if you ever went out with someone who was stunning but was dumb and had a bad personality, this is the aviation equivalent of that.
I can think of a lot of other 40s/50s jets I'd rather get a chance to fly, as purty as the X-3 was.
It's a beautiful plane, but from everything I've read about, it's far more fun to look at than fly. it was underpowered (designed for 2,000 mph max speed, was subsonic except in a dive), didn't control well (terrible roll coupling), and really, bringing it to FSX/P3D would just let us recreate a failed experiment and fly a bad plane. A beautiful bad plane, sure, but if you ever went out with someone who was stunning but was dumb and had a bad personality, this is the aviation equivalent of that.
I can think of a lot of other 40s/50s jets I'd rather get a chance to fly, as purty as the X-3 was.
Might have to consolidate threads... http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforu...126-Douglas-X-3-Stiletto-X?highlight=stiletto
I had a version of this flying in FS9 or FSX at one point. I think it was Ito? (Edit, yep, Kazunori Ito. And there's an FSX panel. Link.)
It's a beautiful plane, but from everything I've read about, it's far more fun to look at than fly. it was underpowered (designed for 2,000 mph max speed, was subsonic except in a dive), didn't control well (terrible roll coupling), and really, bringing it to FSX/P3D would just let us recreate a failed experiment and fly a bad plane. A beautiful bad plane, sure, but if you ever went out with someone who was stunning but was dumb and had a bad personality, this is the aviation equivalent of that.
I can think of a lot of other 40s/50s jets I'd rather get a chance to fly, as purty as the X-3 was.
I tend to agree. A lot of work to do a good model that you will not fly but a few times. High takeoff and landing speeds, poor handing (imagine the comments this would draw), and then folks would want a realistic parachute.
Not worth the effort IMO.
wombat666
Administrator
I tend to agree. A lot of work to do a good model that you will not fly but a few times. High takeoff and landing speeds, poor handing (imagine the comments this would draw), and then folks would want a realistic parachute.
100% correct Milton.
'Novelty' subjects are just that, entertaining for five minutes and the shelved.
I know Milton has a long list of Aircraft to either model or convert to Native FSX. While I sort of understand why people find it interesting, the idea of building a bad airplane. . .with bad flight characteristics. . .does that really sound like a terrific idea? Not to mention, as Milton already has, the posts that would start immediately after release (actually during beta testing) because people couldn't get it to fly correctly? Well duh, it never did fly correctly so have fun "trying" to flying it. In the end what a lot of people would expect is a model that looks like the Stiletto inside and out, but flies like a normal jet. . .otherwise they would do exactly what has been suggested. . .fly it a few times and put it away. That doesn't seem like a worthwhile endeavor despite it's history.
warchild
Charter Member
Exactly. My Gods. Miltons done his part for god and country three times over and he's going better than ever still.. This isnt on Milton..
Look..
The Pennsylvania Railroad decided to tunnel under two rivers leading into and out of new york city at the turn of the twentieth century, despite lousy soil, and other hardships including the fact that no one had ever done it nor did anyone believe it could be done. They succeeded, and built the grandest train station ( 83 acres ) in the middle of new york city. It became a part of the people and culture of new york, But when Pennsylvania railroad ran into financiAL difficulties, the station and the land it was on was sold, and the entire station bulldozed to the ground. This lead to the creation of the countries first historical preservation society.. But so many other things have been lost or forgotten. We've all looked back to places we've lived ot loved and scratched our heads wondering why they destroyed this or that building or garden. Old things disappear and are forgotten, every day.
In 1919 Junkers deigned and built the worlds first all metal monoplane, with an eye on future passenger service. That dream was shattered when the Nazi's took control of the Fokker company and started producing warplanes.. Where is that first plane today?? Is there any example of it at all?? Something besides pictures??
The P-61 was designed on the back of a napkin, by a Czech imagrant over a sandwich in a new york deli. It was designed as a dedicated nightfighter, but late in the war, it would become a wonderful ground attack aircraft with enough firepower to slice steam locomotives in half, on one pass. it also servd as the nations first weather research aircraft, and several other "firsts" as well. Yeahh, we know of four in real life. None of them are accessible to the majority of people.
Thanks too the X-3, we not only have its bastard son, the F-104, but fast, safe flight itself. Sure it was a failure at testing engines, but we learned so very much about coupled inertia that they were able to develop new technologies to counter adverse yaw, such as the yaw dampener..
I watch these documentaries on WWII and Korea and yeah, even vietnam, and so often i find myself crying along with the veterans because I was in that hell too, and i know that particular brand of pain.
Glenn Edwards died at Murock california in an XB-35 that mysteriously broke up in flight. Edwards Airforce base was named after him, and had beren till then, called Murock.
Like Glenn Edwards, there have been thousands and thousands of people who have done incredible work, in a time when all ther was was pen and paper. Succeed or fail, their contributions to this world, lead the way for the advancements we enjoy today. We thrive on their sacrifices and hard work. We owe our children and our childrens children, the continuation of their legacy so that no one ever forgets what they did.
I look at groups like A2A and PMDG which have made aircraft so true to the real aircraft, that they can be flown directly from the manufacturers book. FSX, P3D, X-Plane? These arent games. Theyre simulators. They bring to life for so many, the past and present and future when it arrives, for so very many, and we developers, are the only ones who can bring it too them. Good, bad, or indifferent, we need to do this, if not for ourselves, then our childrens children, before it all becomes bulldozed for another madison square gardens..
The X-3 like the delta dart, dlta dagger, X1 X-15, all of them, is important to the advancement of flight. It taught us a lot.. It neds to be built. I dont care by whom, but it needs to be built..
Pam
(edited for correctness with apologies for inaccuracies )..
Look..
The Pennsylvania Railroad decided to tunnel under two rivers leading into and out of new york city at the turn of the twentieth century, despite lousy soil, and other hardships including the fact that no one had ever done it nor did anyone believe it could be done. They succeeded, and built the grandest train station ( 83 acres ) in the middle of new york city. It became a part of the people and culture of new york, But when Pennsylvania railroad ran into financiAL difficulties, the station and the land it was on was sold, and the entire station bulldozed to the ground. This lead to the creation of the countries first historical preservation society.. But so many other things have been lost or forgotten. We've all looked back to places we've lived ot loved and scratched our heads wondering why they destroyed this or that building or garden. Old things disappear and are forgotten, every day.
In 1919 Junkers deigned and built the worlds first all metal monoplane, with an eye on future passenger service. That dream was shattered when the Nazi's took control of the Fokker company and started producing warplanes.. Where is that first plane today?? Is there any example of it at all?? Something besides pictures??
The P-61 was designed on the back of a napkin, by a Czech imagrant over a sandwich in a new york deli. It was designed as a dedicated nightfighter, but late in the war, it would become a wonderful ground attack aircraft with enough firepower to slice steam locomotives in half, on one pass. it also servd as the nations first weather research aircraft, and several other "firsts" as well. Yeahh, we know of four in real life. None of them are accessible to the majority of people.
Thanks too the X-3, we not only have its bastard son, the F-104, but fast, safe flight itself. Sure it was a failure at testing engines, but we learned so very much about coupled inertia that they were able to develop new technologies to counter adverse yaw, such as the yaw dampener..
I watch these documentaries on WWII and Korea and yeah, even vietnam, and so often i find myself crying along with the veterans because I was in that hell too, and i know that particular brand of pain.
Glenn Edwards died at Murock california in an XB-35 that mysteriously broke up in flight. Edwards Airforce base was named after him, and had beren till then, called Murock.
Like Glenn Edwards, there have been thousands and thousands of people who have done incredible work, in a time when all ther was was pen and paper. Succeed or fail, their contributions to this world, lead the way for the advancements we enjoy today. We thrive on their sacrifices and hard work. We owe our children and our childrens children, the continuation of their legacy so that no one ever forgets what they did.
I look at groups like A2A and PMDG which have made aircraft so true to the real aircraft, that they can be flown directly from the manufacturers book. FSX, P3D, X-Plane? These arent games. Theyre simulators. They bring to life for so many, the past and present and future when it arrives, for so very many, and we developers, are the only ones who can bring it too them. Good, bad, or indifferent, we need to do this, if not for ourselves, then our childrens children, before it all becomes bulldozed for another madison square gardens..
The X-3 like the delta dart, dlta dagger, X1 X-15, all of them, is important to the advancement of flight. It taught us a lot.. It neds to be built. I dont care by whom, but it needs to be built..
Pam
(edited for correctness with apologies for inaccuracies )..
Somewhere, someplace in the archives, there are engineering drawings, cross sections from which this aircraft was built. When those are found, I will build it. Until then, we can fly the one model that does represent all that you say, the model by Kazunori Ito. Until then, a more exacting likeness cannot be built from the meager 3-views already found.
warchild
Charter Member
It's OK Milton.. Theyll turn up from somewhere.. I believe in that.. The biggest question I have to answer, is "am I capable of making the flight model?"
with the various performance issues that are documented, is FSX/P3D, up to duplicating them?? A trans-sonic roll to the left, flipped the nose up twenty degrees, and another time, flipped it down fifteen degrees..
I'm not an aerodynamics engineer. Everything I know, wouldnt be more than the last drop of coffee in their cups.. It's not an easy question too answer, and to be honest, this plane frightens me a little, because of it.. I feel strongly about history though, and truthfully, for me, thats what its all about..
A place, we cant go any more..
with the various performance issues that are documented, is FSX/P3D, up to duplicating them?? A trans-sonic roll to the left, flipped the nose up twenty degrees, and another time, flipped it down fifteen degrees..
I'm not an aerodynamics engineer. Everything I know, wouldnt be more than the last drop of coffee in their cups.. It's not an easy question too answer, and to be honest, this plane frightens me a little, because of it.. I feel strongly about history though, and truthfully, for me, thats what its all about..
A place, we cant go any more..
johnwillimas2
SOH-CM-2023
I think Rob Richardson (http://www.robertjamesrichardson.co.uk/index.html)was working on one at one point before his Cougar but I don't know if he's still on it....
llanning08
SOH-CM-2025
Until adequate Douglas X-3 drawings are located, might it not be productive to further develop and refine the X-3 flight model using Kazunori Ito's X-3 as the visual model?
Built for Fs2002 and Fs2004. it displays well in FSX. Ito's X-3 Aircraft.cfg and X-3 Stiletto.air files could really use some work. This improved flight model subsequently might be transferred to the new X-3 model.
Perhaps a new cockpit and VC might also be developed in a similar manner.
In reality, a project to simulate the aircraft would focus on the cockpit and view. The systems modeled would be modular and later translated into the actual mechanical, hydraulic and electrical systems. Perhaps converting Ito's X-3 to native FSX might also be useful, if feasible.
Just a bit of random musings ...
Built for Fs2002 and Fs2004. it displays well in FSX. Ito's X-3 Aircraft.cfg and X-3 Stiletto.air files could really use some work. This improved flight model subsequently might be transferred to the new X-3 model.
Perhaps a new cockpit and VC might also be developed in a similar manner.
In reality, a project to simulate the aircraft would focus on the cockpit and view. The systems modeled would be modular and later translated into the actual mechanical, hydraulic and electrical systems. Perhaps converting Ito's X-3 to native FSX might also be useful, if feasible.
Just a bit of random musings ...
Above all else Kazunori Ito was an artist. His creations were always well received, easy to paint and fun to fly. He had a list of expectations for his models once release, such as; all repaints should be done just as he did them, standard 256 color so that they would display on anyone's system, no matter what version of Flight Sim they used or how old their system was, they were not to be used in a Combat Sim. . .he was adamant about that, his models were not be reverse engineered in any way. As far as his air file and aircraft config files, basically he had several that he used based on what type of aircraft it was. He admitted to me several times that he knew very little about building a realistic FDE and so he would use what was available and as long as it was close he was ok with that. His VC's got considerably better as he went on but I'm not sure he was doing them, possibly someone else was lending a hand there because most of his early airplanes had no VC at all. As far as converting his X-3 to Native. . .NO. That goes against his wishes and it's my opinion that should be honored.
warchild
Charter Member
As it should be..
Besides, the X-3 and the F-104 were both heavily fuselage loaded instead of wing loaded. That means that the fuselage exerted more force over the wings, than the wings exerted over the fuselage as in normal aircraft. You were literally flying a missile There arent any FDE's in FSX or P3D that use that dynamic and starting with someone elses premade FDE isnt only in bad taste, it's incorrect, and this whole FDE will have to be done from scratch just to get it too fly somewhere in the ballpark of reality.
I dont want to make just another pretty plane. Over the last ten years, every time i have asked if you wanted me to make it real or make it fun, you have consistently said, make it real. So I'm gonna do that here too, and start with a literally blank FDE so i can add in a piece at a time, just like i did with the SU-37.
magoo
SOH-CM-2013
.....It might be the perfect opportunity to experiment with the "coupling" of the three MOI values. Start low....like with 50.0, and work up to say.... 500.0....watch what happens.
Might be interesting.
warchild
Charter Member
Thats about what the plan is going to be, but rather than experimenting, or assigning some value determined by potentially incorrect formulas, i'm going to learn everything i can about this phenomena so i can more clearly understand what the forces are actually doing.. Because of the lack of aircraft in any of the simulators beyond X-Planes X-15, Inertial coupling is usually and for valid reasons, ignored. It played a part in creating the sopwith camel we did years ago for classic wings, wherein the tail is so heavy on the real aircraft, it would sometimes, wag the dog so to speak.. After WWII science still did not understand this phenomena, and a whole plethora of long bodied narrow aircraft such as the B-36 and the boeing 707 were coming into prominence. The commercial aviation sector had a problem and they needed a solution. The data provided from the X-3 and later, the X-15 paved the way to developing that solution..