[WIP] McDonnall XP-67 Moonbat

[NovA29R 1,592]

aha

Edited May 16, 2018 by NovA29R

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

On 5/16/2018 at 2:10 PM, NovA29R said:

aha

:ahaa:

 

the public creative server misses you btw

[GhostProdigy 650]

Do you guys ever manage to get the documents?

[Jake_Winterstorm 2]

what br would it even be at

[Soviet_Commando 108]

Wow, that thing looks crazy/awesome!

 

I want to see what it's got! I'll support! 

 

+1

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

On 19/10/2018 at 15:32, GhostProdigy said:

Do you guys ever manage to get the documents?

My father's business trip to DC will be three weeks from now in the least. I'll be going with him then. I will likely have the documents by the end of next month.

 

On 19/10/2018 at 22:27, Jake_Winterstorm said:

what br would it even be at

If not given the engines with their full power that they had once completed (after cancellation of plane), I'd say 4.0 to 5.0 is the range I'd guess for this aircraft. 4.7 is my guess as the Me 410 B-1 is just a little slower with a slightly lower climb rate. It has a perfect climb rate of 12.7 m/s just beating the Me 410 B-1 by 1.9 m/s. I don't know about the handling characteristics in great detail though... It won't turn amazingly but the wing loading may help in a turn as it is similar to the F7F when both are on empty load. It turns slower than the P-51D in general iirc.

 

With the final version of the engines, it could maybe get to 19.76 m/s just by the proportional increase of power to weight ratio when on wep. The power increases by a factor of 1.55 (repeating decimal) (50/9 fraction). Expected top speed was 760 km/h on a total power of either 1350 hp or 1600 hp (likely 1350 as it was the hoped power that would achieve their golden number). Having the ability to reach 2100 hp at war emergency power would help a lot as the engine was eventually capable.

 

Using highly unscientific linear proportionality for something involving drag (exponential) is being used for my calculations. (use of quadratic/root included for later calculations)

 

Based on the F7F, 2320 hp per engine would get to 760 km/h. I could square the difference however and add that to the original number (2080). Ok never mind... lol

 

 

If I use the 1350 hp and 650 km/h, I get 760 km/h with 1578 hp per engine. Not realistic but that's close to the 1600 hp that the engines eventually had as their military rating.

 

Using the 650 km/h and 1350 hp, and a boost to 2100 hp, the speed is 1011 km/h. Not right for obvious reasons. Let's take the root of the difference between original and final speed. Then we add that value to the original. That is then 670 km/h. That seems like it would be well within the abilities of the engines and I'd expect a bit better, honestly. I'd guess more around 700 km/h for such a large change but maybe I'm wrong.

 

Did some really rough calculation based on a test flight of the F7F (stock) I found the top speed on about a power setting around or lower than 1350 hp. I found 516 km/h.Then, I took the top speed of the XP-67 on the same power. This is 1350 hp and 650 km/h. The increase in top speed is a factor of 1.26. Multiply this by the top speed of a stock F7F on 2080 hp (20 short of spaded apparently?) as they essentially share the same engine power if the XP-67 is running 2100 hp per. This results in 806 km/h. Add the root of the difference to the original value of 640. 663 km/h is the final value there.

 

 

 

When looking at 663 km/h, 5% error margin puts max possible at 696 km/h and 2.5% at max of 679 km/h. Using the other number of 670 as the top speed means with 5% error you have a max possible of 703.5 km/h and with 2.5% you top out at 686.75 km/h. If we want to get really wishful, 10% provides 729 km/h and 737 km/h respectively. I used highly unscientific methods... It was proportionalities modified by quadratic/root stuff which is how drag works but I'm missing part of the picture still.

 

Conclusion: 5.3-6.3 with upgraded engines. I'd put my bets on 5.7 as they would make it premium or event and they would want that sort of thing reliably enjoyable and competitive. If it were to turn out to be really good, I could see 6.0 but it would only be so much better than the F7F. It's a bit heavier so I'd be careful even if it's faster. There are some people saying the F7F isn't good enough for 6.0 too. The XP-67 would beat out the F7F in all likelihood with the up-rated engines with 1600 hp MP and 2100 hp WEP so 6.0 is the max for it to be enjoyable. The best possible numbers we could milk from crude calculations actually beat out the Ta 152 C-3 which is exciting.

 

Our final best potential stat card:

 

37 mm M4 cannon x6 (Ammo: 300-348)                                                                     (pretty number of 50 per or 58 per based on some P-63 variants)

or

20 mm AN/M2 cannon x4 (Ammo: 800)                                                                 (based on F8F, F7F, AD-2, AD-4, etc)

12.7 mm M2 Browning machine gun x6 (Ammo: 1800-3000)                                     (idfk about ammo for this with any hint of sense beyond P-51D capacity of 300 per and P-47N with 500 per)

 

Max speed: 737 km/h

at height: 7600 m

Max altitude: 11480 m            (upping by power proportion and taking cubic penalty of drag)

Turn time: 40 s                       (who tf knows???)

Rate of climb: 19.76 m/s

Takeoff run: 735 m                 (proportionality with the Ki-83 power to weight lol so uhhhh ?????) (just a number and plane's info I had on hand and for no particular reason)

Edited December 31, 2018 by PickleJarOfDeath

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

Update: I am going to Washington DC on the 19th of February to collect up to 50 oversize documents including blueprints and performance data sheets. I'll be using Wednesday the 20th, Thursday, and potentially Friday to collect needed documents. There is a google doc with my schedule for the week and we purchased our tickets for the Tuesday and Sunday of that week. It is final.

 

I'm also going to the Udvar Hazy Center to see the Ho 229 in it's new display location.

[NovA29R 1,592]

Cool! Make a lots of photos!! And have a nice trip!

[Boblem123 1]

this looks good but after this could you make the mighty xp-72 a normal one with 6 50s or 4 37mms and after make that perhaps the one with the dash 19 engine with 4000hp and 540mph? but again i am very happy to see somone making later war us prots

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

On 11/05/2019 at 20:56, Boblem123 said:

this looks good but after this could you make the mighty xp-72 a normal one with 6 50s or 4 37mms and after make that perhaps the one with the dash 19 engine with 4000hp and 540mph? but again i am very happy to see somone making later war us prots

Not enough information on this aircraft shows up in the national archives data base and I don't think I want to go scouring the earth for those documents...

[Guest PANZER_eagle]

lindo esse avião acho muito mais interessante que o ultimo avião colocado da line americana, AM-1 nada aver se já viria um premium na mesma categoria fora os dois aD2 e 4, mas vamos a outra coisa que está incomodando muito, as batalhas de simulação tanque, todos contra russia nos top tier está complicado de achar partida, acho que se refere as tanques mais fáceis de se identificar entre as naçoes, porem ainda ocorre muito TK, uma sujestão seria o spot pelo menos no mapa como foi testado uma vez, somente no mapa os aliados aparecem assim evitaria os tk em 30 a 40 %, outra seria mudar de todos contra russia para todos conta EUA e inglaterra, acho que as duas também tem tanques bem destintos das outras naçoes que facilitaria a identificação, fora que a aliança entre essa duas é bem provável contra qualquer resistencia eminente, vale tentar nova configuração para melhorar a busca por partidas simulação tanque obrigado...

 

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

This time it is actually happening. I am in DC now and will be getting the blueprints from Monday (tomorrow) to Wednesday. I'll hopefully be able to stream this as well. I think I'll be doing it from Twitch if possible. https://www.twitch.tv/picklejarofdeath

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

Ok as it turns out there’s a lot of waiting so not much is worth streaming

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

This is the XP-67 model near completion. That which remains is the cockpit, flap, and gear wells. I had to completely remove the cockpit and canopy and restart it, I cleaned up the air intakes' geometry, I fixed the nose curve, I adjusted the position of the engine nacelles, I smoothed out the sides of the nacelles, I remade the wings, I replaced the ailerons, and I reduced unnecessary geometry. This was a lot of work...

 

I need to do the uv map after the cockpit, flap, and gear wells are done. I can then begin texturing the aircraft and bring it to life.

 

 

[_fishbox_ 127]

Loks great. hope it gets implimanted and if its a premium i`ll definitely buy it  

[Gavin_Mactavish 943]

Hope it gets implemented, preferably as a premium (content creator program) so that you profit aswell!

[Sternjaeger84 1,073]

Definitely +1 !

[PlutoTheProtogen 62]

just decided to randomly check the forums and found this, looks incredible, i hope it gets added..

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

6 hours ago, KotaFox said:

just decided to randomly check the forums and found this, looks incredible, i hope it gets added..

Thank you. We have a good few corrections to still make. It should be ready by the the holiday season at the latest. Here are the other renders I forgot to put here on this thread. I’ll be sure to post an update soon with the corrections to the vents, air intakes, and exhausts that are located in the aft sections of the nacelles.

[Solarmod 1,199]

I'm excited to see where this goes tbh.

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

current progress

Edited November 13, 2019 by PickleJarOfDeath

[silentrain 1,463]

So beautiful.

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

The central gear well is going to be a disappointment to look inside when this model is done. No source material exists for that. I have moved on to the cockpit though and I am doing the high poly model first.

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,496]

https://live.warthunder.com/post/870869/en/

current progress

[AN_TRN_26 70]

On 22/11/2019 at 17:45, PickleJarOfDeath said:

The central gear well is going to be a disappointment to look inside when this model is done.

Can you look at other aircraft developed by the same company to get a general consensus of their layouts and come up with something which would be relatively close in what it should be?