Yup. You remember when the 1.2 BETA was running? A lot of players were criticising the propeller engines for being WAY overpowered. I know why, it's because they were making planes too small. Take for example, the H-4 "Spruce Goose". It has a max weight of 400,000 LBS. It has 8x 3000HP propeller engines. If I'm correct, no 8x turboprop engines in SP can lift 400,000 LBS. It also, has a max speed of 250MPH. 8x 3000HP engines in SP can't go that fast with that amount of weight. It's like trying to kick a cow into the air.
If you're wondering about the picture, that's just a zoomed in picture of my cat. I thought it was funny for a meme.
I fell for you mate
@BaconEggs with fuselage blocks u can hide stuff inside
Just see my "Eye" UGV
@xXTmorphXx Nah, too lazy. I'd just hide some jet engines somewhere...
Mod the engines... problem solved
Use negative weight to make your plane lighter
XD
Anyway though, yes, the engines are quite underpowered when used as one should and the fuel drain on the T2000s and T3000s is FAR exaggerated.
I tend to agree with you on this one. I have found a bug, quite by accident though, with the old T1000s. I'm well known for making contra-rotating designs, a habit I picked up from @TheOwlAce. However, when I first started making them I didn't know how to nudge and so I just pulled a chunk out of the middle of one of his planes and that was my "power egg" for future designs but with a different prop. Although most of my planes had engines in front of the wings the engines were all faced BACKWARDS and I'd turn out speedy designs. Once I learned how to nudge I tried making my own power eggs without the engines facing backwards - and invariably they turned out around 75 to 100 mph slower. I have a four engine (Really 8 engine, but for the story its four 2,000 HP inlined driving contra-rotating props.) At 66% throttle at 41.5k feet she can pull off 682 mph loaded with 8 tons of bombs and enough fuel to strike the capital of the US or Canada from Helsinki Finland At full throttle and level flight she can pull off 710+mph. Nevermind my dive tests that revealed the ability to hit nearly 900 mph and recover - so glad I use structural wings where appropriate! XD Note, experimental bombs on the one published here cause a lot of drag which reduces that performance. I will likely upload the revised loadout model soon.
If you mess with the settings you can get them to have much more power without XML. Width, # of blades, and the propellor pitch all affect the power.
New props are still partly for decoration only, I've a habit of a sticking old style props (modified or not) inside fuselage blocks if you need extra thrust
Well said.
@SHCow I wonder if there's an XML string that modifies fuel drain-rate.
@SHCow That's all modded though. I'd like more powerful stock parts.
@BaconEggs I've suggested the addition of a ramjet engine before. I would really like to see one.
@BaconEggs hm but I hope devs would see this post and rethink about it
@AviownCorp it's because it generates the same thrust at different speeds. In KSP, the whiplash engine generates more thrust at higher speeds. Too bad this mechanic is non-existent I Simpleplanes.
Same with the jet engines too. Say the Lockheed SR-71A Blackbird has speed of mach 3.3 with two 34,000 lbf engines which is near our blasto afterburner. But can we get that speed without modding?
@DatsunEngineeringCompany
I think you upload a pic to imgur, edit it with photo shop( if you want and before posting to imgur I think) then upload to community then copy the image address and place it in the forums.
How do you make images like that and put words on them?
@BaconEggs
@CL4TRP lol
The meme made me think that this was clickbait for a second