@PhilipTarpley I think WarThunder has them. Not sure about DCS. Atleast it's in most Joystick programming software like Thrustmaster T.A.R.G.E.T, but it would be more convenient to have it in the game. I don't really need it, as I am fine with linear controls, but some people might like it. :)
Amazing improvement! The controls are now also way smoother and my throttle slider is recognized more correctly. The smaller deadzone allows me to make smaller adjustments in flight. The only things that are left to make it a really professional input system are adjustable curves for all axes, but the deadzone and sensitivity sliders in the calibration-tab are pretty much making up for that already. :D
@slavebreaker I was also thinking about making a bigger one. I already have a working handlebar for the cockpit like in the show, but it's too big for this one, so I need a bigger version to put it in. This time it's going to be a full Arrow III replica, but I'm not sure about additional wings yet, as the crafts are always simulated to be stalling if they are only flying with thrust. For proper flying I would need even bigger wings than on this one. I also had the idea to make my own Arrow IV with a better aerodynamically shaped design and wings in some places.
@RocketLL I'm checking reviews, scores, benchmarks and all that stuff many times a month, so I know the i5 4460 would be a downgrade and the i5 4690K only a small upgrade when overclocked and would come at quite a high price for that. Also I wouldn't consider buying Ivy Bridge, Haswell (Hotwell), Devil's Canyon (Haswell/Hotwell Refresh) or Skylake processors, as they are made of poor quality (atleast everything around the wafer as far as I can tell, because I don't have anything like an X-Ray to look into that) unlike their Intel Core and Intel Core Extreme predecessors and also they are isolating the heat, which greatly reduces lifetime just to reduce the TDP rating (approximated minimum cooling power needed at maximum power in Watts). It's literally the same as burning my money. The Xeon of my friend I talked about is cooled by a decent aftermarket cooler (mid-sized, around 600 g, 120 mm fan) and is undervolted at stock speeds (well, there's nothing else it could run at actually with the artifically bound baseclock and locked multiplier) and still hits 75°C, that's not acceptable for me and it doesn't mean those are failsafe temperatures just because Intel doesn't shut the system down at those (though AMD is also to blame here with a shut off temperature of 90°C, which is nowhere near safe for desktop-use with frequently changing loads, but fine for constant server load).
Sandy Bridge-E is the way I would go, if AMD Summit Ridge fails. It would even be cheaper than going with a new Core i7 with close to no performance difference compared to a new Intel Core i7 Extreme hexacore. The i7 3930K for example would give me almost 100% more CPU performance in tasks that can utilize all cores and 40% better singlecore performance for just around 200€, something no newer Intel processor has to offer.
I know that a CPU won't show any major performance improvement in gaming below 120 FPS, as newer games are more and more GPU-bound, which is actually good, as the CPU by design has insufficient performance in most tasks a game consists of, but I'm also doing some CAD, converting and other stuff, where I can make good use of all CPU power I got. Another reason for a newer platform would be PCI-Express 3.0, which would give me a little GPU performance gain with the higher bandwith additionally.
Well, I could talk about hardware all day I guess. Hope you didn't strain your eyes too much while reading my long-ass post. :D
@RocketLL Haven't gotten my FPS counter up yet, but it is not even close to stress my hardware out. My CPU keeps up just as good as a newer generation i5 in gaming with it's 4.37 GHz overclock, but in some converting operations it's a little behind. I wouldn't choose an upgrade to a Core i5, Core i7 or FX 8350, as it wouldn't give me much of a bonus, if any, and cost a ton for that. Would only upgrade to a Core i7 Extreme, Xeon with 6+ cores and atleast 3.3 GHz or the mentioned 6 and 8 core CPUs from AMDs next generation.
Back in 2011 I had the choice of going with the FX 6100 for 160€ or the i5 2500K for 250€ and I don't regret my choice, as the i5 2500K didn't take much advantage of performance optimizations in games and Windows over time compared to my FX 6100. I may could've gotten a cheap hexacore Xeon E5660 and a X58 motherboard when most people switched to SandyBridge, but that wasn't commonly known back then.
I even tested my system against that of a friend who runs the same card with an H87 board and a Xeon E3-1230v3, which is just an i7 4770 without iGPU, and both score basically the same in gaming benchmarks, though his CPU physics performance is of course slightly better and that with running at just 3.7 GHz while I ran 4.6 GHz.
I wouldn't have expected the R9 280X to perform that good when I switched to 1440p a month ago, but I can max out most games, only having to slightly adjust AntiAliasing in some AAA ones, but the higher pixel density allows for that without degrading image quality. I am really picky when it comes to stuttering and smoothness and most games have high changes in frame latency, so I demand atleast 45 FPS in most games to avoid stutter, but in some the latencies are so consistent, that I would only need 30 for smooth gameplay, but still aim higher. Even in ARMA 3 multiplayer I'm normally at 45-70, just dipping to 30 in cities with many players, so I have no problem with performance yet. :D
@RocketLL Fixed it.
My whole setup? Well, there's my PC (If you want more info about the hardware and overclocks, just ask, I just don't want to make this unnecessarily long, but here's my german PC profile), my Dell U2515H 1440p 60Hz IPS-screen with semi-glossy coating and 90-99% sRGB color accuracy, my CM Storm Quickfire TK short mechanical keyboard, my Zowie FK1 optical gaming mouse + Zowie Camade mousebungee to hold the cable + Steelseries QCK mousepad, for flightsims and all that I got my trusty Thrustmaster T.16000M with the same sensor as the Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog stick (would really like a seperate throttle to mine for a HOTAS), for racingsims I got my Fanatec Porsche 911 GT3 RS wheel + CSR pedals + CSR shifter. The audio comes from an ASUS Xonar DSX soundcard and goes either directly to my Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro headphones, but most of the time through a Onkyo TX-8020 stereo-amplifier to my two Canton GLE420.2 speakers. Will probably upgrade CPU and mainboard when AMD Summit Ridge comes at the end of this year, maybe also changing the GPU out to an AMD Polaris/Arctic Islands one, but only money will tell. And if the CPUs disappoint, I'll look out for a used Core i7 Extreme 3930K and a good X79 motherboard (still very great hardware and has a decent price if you buy it used, though used hardware is not that cheap anymore as it used to be some years ago). This should cover up everything. :)
@RocketLL I hope I'm not annoying you, but I wanted to share another piece of footage where I'm forcing it to do some hard spins and try to control it, also some cobras in there. I found out it also makes a great sea plane with very short landing and takeoff! :D I uploaded it to YouTube this time with full quality like it was captured (still a bit blurry because it's 1080p maximum capture resolution, but 1440p native game resolution). It took a little longer, but it is definitely not as blurry as the 720p plays.tv upload. 5 more minutes of Su-47 extreme maneuverability footage
@RocketLL I've done better maneuvers with it, but this was my first successful capture without the need of uploading 1 hour+. Maybe I'll just use 30 FPS in the future, that's smooth enough for a video and allows for better fidelity with my slow upload rate. :D Or I'll begin to setup OBS for capturing, though it needs more resources, but for SimplePlanes that fits well, as it barely uses any of them.
@johnny87019 They don't have version 1.3 on mobile devices yet, so they have no items listed in the category of weapons and pylons and can't use crafts containing those. Probably just until the end of the month, but it could take longer to update the mobile version. :)
@Allstar He would only need to remove the pylons on the wingtips and replace them with structural wings of a similar shape. Really a shame he didn't think about that on such a well designed aircraft. :D
@goboygo1 Why "WeaselZone"? I mean, his videos are quite funny, but he doesn't do anything much useful in SimplePlanes other than using other people's creations, which I can do myself actually and I am able to read the description of the craft to know it's purpose and controls. He can't even fly properly! (._.)/ It would be cool if he was building own crafts and test them in the videos and maybe even give others some design tips/ideas instead of doing boring things even a 6 year-old can do. Just my two cents. This is an amazing vehicle regardless.
@RocketLL I don't know how to post links here yet (figured it out now :) ), but I've made a small capture of two cobra attempts with plays.tv. I play in 1440p, captured in 1080p @ 60 FPS, but the final compressed video is only 720p @ 60 FPS, so quality is not that good, but it should be good enough. Pukachev's Cobra Video
With a joystick I manage to do Pukachev's Cobras with this. :D And very easy to recover from spins. The only small downside is that it loses speed ridiculously fast while maneuvering.
@CDUflappy The center of mass could still be moved a bit to the back, as it pitches down even on higher speeds and it doesn't seem unstable. CoM should be as close to the CoL as possible for agility, but if the aircraft heavily pitches upwards or you lose control while pitching, it should be moved further to the front. Your aircraft handled pretty well and realistic in it's previous state already. :)
@JShay @TheLatentImage @HakkeAirTech @Jasperjl @deusalgor @yeolde1rishman @Kimo @FIOu You guys pushed me up to Bronze in just one day! :D As no one seems trying to land it on the USS Tiny, I am going to upload the version with improved rudder anyways (as a standalone and not a successor to the Stealth Plane Challenge). You can check it out in some minutes. :)
I could XML edit it to have more horsepower, that would also create more thrust and allow for a smaller diameter. :) I've tested the plane and I don't see a problem in diameter, the problem is that the front wheels are too close to the center of mass, so you have a huge downwards movement on the front when braking. CoM should be further behind the wheels or the wheels further in front of the CoM.
If someone manages to land it on the USS Tiny and hands out a legit screenshot of that, I'll upload a version with improved rudder (not in the challenge of course). :D
@TheLatentImage Thank you very much! I was impressed by it myself. It was supposed to be a delta-wing, but that didn't work out as the fuselage was too light and the engines in the back too heavy, it made backflips right from the start. I didn't want more weight, so I decided to give it a proper tail for stability and upwards lift in the back. That worked out very very well. The rest was only a little bit of adjusting weight distribution and size of control surfaces. :)
@HakkeAirTech Special weapons technology also made out of calbon fibel (^_^)/ Missile bays don't seem like a good option to me, as they tend to screw many creations up, though it would definitely be worth a try. And my bigger concern was the maneuverability, because it's worth way more in a battle than any stealth technology you could think of. That's actually why the USAF chose the YF-22 (F-22 Raptor) with better maneuverability over the YF-23 with smaller radar footprint. :D Thanks for your comment!
@dsr1aviation I hoped so. :D What about the looks and flight characteristics? I made it very bulky, rounded and with rocket elements like all the vehicles in Fallout.
@PhilipTarpley I think WarThunder has them. Not sure about DCS. Atleast it's in most Joystick programming software like Thrustmaster T.A.R.G.E.T, but it would be more convenient to have it in the game. I don't really need it, as I am fine with linear controls, but some people might like it. :)
Amazing improvement! The controls are now also way smoother and my throttle slider is recognized more correctly. The smaller deadzone allows me to make smaller adjustments in flight. The only things that are left to make it a really professional input system are adjustable curves for all axes, but the deadzone and sensitivity sliders in the calibration-tab are pretty much making up for that already. :D
@slavebreaker I was also thinking about making a bigger one. I already have a working handlebar for the cockpit like in the show, but it's too big for this one, so I need a bigger version to put it in. This time it's going to be a full Arrow III replica, but I'm not sure about additional wings yet, as the crafts are always simulated to be stalling if they are only flying with thrust. For proper flying I would need even bigger wings than on this one. I also had the idea to make my own Arrow IV with a better aerodynamically shaped design and wings in some places.
You mean a non-weaponized craft? Otherwise you could just put a bomb in it and activate it with button 6. :D
Looks very scale. I hope it also handles like the real one. :D
@RocketLL I'm checking reviews, scores, benchmarks and all that stuff many times a month, so I know the i5 4460 would be a downgrade and the i5 4690K only a small upgrade when overclocked and would come at quite a high price for that. Also I wouldn't consider buying Ivy Bridge, Haswell (Hotwell), Devil's Canyon (Haswell/Hotwell Refresh) or Skylake processors, as they are made of poor quality (atleast everything around the wafer as far as I can tell, because I don't have anything like an X-Ray to look into that) unlike their Intel Core and Intel Core Extreme predecessors and also they are isolating the heat, which greatly reduces lifetime just to reduce the TDP rating (approximated minimum cooling power needed at maximum power in Watts). It's literally the same as burning my money. The Xeon of my friend I talked about is cooled by a decent aftermarket cooler (mid-sized, around 600 g, 120 mm fan) and is undervolted at stock speeds (well, there's nothing else it could run at actually with the artifically bound baseclock and locked multiplier) and still hits 75°C, that's not acceptable for me and it doesn't mean those are failsafe temperatures just because Intel doesn't shut the system down at those (though AMD is also to blame here with a shut off temperature of 90°C, which is nowhere near safe for desktop-use with frequently changing loads, but fine for constant server load).
Sandy Bridge-E is the way I would go, if AMD Summit Ridge fails. It would even be cheaper than going with a new Core i7 with close to no performance difference compared to a new Intel Core i7 Extreme hexacore. The i7 3930K for example would give me almost 100% more CPU performance in tasks that can utilize all cores and 40% better singlecore performance for just around 200€, something no newer Intel processor has to offer.
I know that a CPU won't show any major performance improvement in gaming below 120 FPS, as newer games are more and more GPU-bound, which is actually good, as the CPU by design has insufficient performance in most tasks a game consists of, but I'm also doing some CAD, converting and other stuff, where I can make good use of all CPU power I got. Another reason for a newer platform would be PCI-Express 3.0, which would give me a little GPU performance gain with the higher bandwith additionally.
Well, I could talk about hardware all day I guess. Hope you didn't strain your eyes too much while reading my long-ass post. :D
@RocketLL Haven't gotten my FPS counter up yet, but it is not even close to stress my hardware out. My CPU keeps up just as good as a newer generation i5 in gaming with it's 4.37 GHz overclock, but in some converting operations it's a little behind. I wouldn't choose an upgrade to a Core i5, Core i7 or FX 8350, as it wouldn't give me much of a bonus, if any, and cost a ton for that. Would only upgrade to a Core i7 Extreme, Xeon with 6+ cores and atleast 3.3 GHz or the mentioned 6 and 8 core CPUs from AMDs next generation.
Back in 2011 I had the choice of going with the FX 6100 for 160€ or the i5 2500K for 250€ and I don't regret my choice, as the i5 2500K didn't take much advantage of performance optimizations in games and Windows over time compared to my FX 6100. I may could've gotten a cheap hexacore Xeon E5660 and a X58 motherboard when most people switched to SandyBridge, but that wasn't commonly known back then.
I even tested my system against that of a friend who runs the same card with an H87 board and a Xeon E3-1230v3, which is just an i7 4770 without iGPU, and both score basically the same in gaming benchmarks, though his CPU physics performance is of course slightly better and that with running at just 3.7 GHz while I ran 4.6 GHz.
I wouldn't have expected the R9 280X to perform that good when I switched to 1440p a month ago, but I can max out most games, only having to slightly adjust AntiAliasing in some AAA ones, but the higher pixel density allows for that without degrading image quality. I am really picky when it comes to stuttering and smoothness and most games have high changes in frame latency, so I demand atleast 45 FPS in most games to avoid stutter, but in some the latencies are so consistent, that I would only need 30 for smooth gameplay, but still aim higher. Even in ARMA 3 multiplayer I'm normally at 45-70, just dipping to 30 in cities with many players, so I have no problem with performance yet. :D
@goboygo1 Alright, that's a proper reason I guess. :D
@RocketLL Fixed it.
My whole setup? Well, there's my PC (If you want more info about the hardware and overclocks, just ask, I just don't want to make this unnecessarily long, but here's my german PC profile), my Dell U2515H 1440p 60Hz IPS-screen with semi-glossy coating and 90-99% sRGB color accuracy, my CM Storm Quickfire TK short mechanical keyboard, my Zowie FK1 optical gaming mouse + Zowie Camade mousebungee to hold the cable + Steelseries QCK mousepad, for flightsims and all that I got my trusty Thrustmaster T.16000M with the same sensor as the Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog stick (would really like a seperate throttle to mine for a HOTAS), for racingsims I got my Fanatec Porsche 911 GT3 RS wheel + CSR pedals + CSR shifter. The audio comes from an ASUS Xonar DSX soundcard and goes either directly to my Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro headphones, but most of the time through a Onkyo TX-8020 stereo-amplifier to my two Canton GLE420.2 speakers. Will probably upgrade CPU and mainboard when AMD Summit Ridge comes at the end of this year, maybe also changing the GPU out to an AMD Polaris/Arctic Islands one, but only money will tell. And if the CPUs disappoint, I'll look out for a used Core i7 Extreme 3930K and a good X79 motherboard (still very great hardware and has a decent price if you buy it used, though used hardware is not that cheap anymore as it used to be some years ago). This should cover up everything. :)
Can it also have small jet-engines like the ones that came out near the end of WW2, or only props?
@RocketLL I hope I'm not annoying you, but I wanted to share another piece of footage where I'm forcing it to do some hard spins and try to control it, also some cobras in there. I found out it also makes a great sea plane with very short landing and takeoff! :D I uploaded it to YouTube this time with full quality like it was captured (still a bit blurry because it's 1080p maximum capture resolution, but 1440p native game resolution). It took a little longer, but it is definitely not as blurry as the 720p plays.tv upload. 5 more minutes of Su-47 extreme maneuverability footage
@RocketLL I've done better maneuvers with it, but this was my first successful capture without the need of uploading 1 hour+. Maybe I'll just use 30 FPS in the future, that's smooth enough for a video and allows for better fidelity with my slow upload rate. :D Or I'll begin to setup OBS for capturing, though it needs more resources, but for SimplePlanes that fits well, as it barely uses any of them.
Guess I've brought you some inspiration. :D Nice to see other attempts of creating cruise missiles. Will test out it's capabilities now.
@johnny87019 They don't have version 1.3 on mobile devices yet, so they have no items listed in the category of weapons and pylons and can't use crafts containing those. Probably just until the end of the month, but it could take longer to update the mobile version. :)
@Allstar He would only need to remove the pylons on the wingtips and replace them with structural wings of a similar shape. Really a shame he didn't think about that on such a well designed aircraft. :D
@goboygo1 Why "WeaselZone"? I mean, his videos are quite funny, but he doesn't do anything much useful in SimplePlanes other than using other people's creations, which I can do myself actually and I am able to read the description of the craft to know it's purpose and controls. He can't even fly properly! (._.)/ It would be cool if he was building own crafts and test them in the videos and maybe even give others some design tips/ideas instead of doing boring things even a 6 year-old can do. Just my two cents. This is an amazing vehicle regardless.
@RocketLL I don't know how to post links here yet (figured it out now :) ), but I've made a small capture of two cobra attempts with plays.tv. I play in 1440p, captured in 1080p @ 60 FPS, but the final compressed video is only 720p @ 60 FPS, so quality is not that good, but it should be good enough. Pukachev's Cobra Video
@goboygo1 No problem, one of the best working vehicles I've tested! :)
@RocketLL I don't have it on video, but maybe I could do one. :)
With a joystick I manage to do Pukachev's Cobras with this. :D And very easy to recover from spins. The only small downside is that it loses speed ridiculously fast while maneuvering.
Really great performance!
@CDUflappy The center of mass could still be moved a bit to the back, as it pitches down even on higher speeds and it doesn't seem unstable. CoM should be as close to the CoL as possible for agility, but if the aircraft heavily pitches upwards or you lose control while pitching, it should be moved further to the front. Your aircraft handled pretty well and realistic in it's previous state already. :)
@CDUflappy Here you go! :)
@JShay @TheLatentImage @HakkeAirTech @Jasperjl @deusalgor @yeolde1rishman @Kimo @FIOu You guys pushed me up to Bronze in just one day! :D As no one seems trying to land it on the USS Tiny, I am going to upload the version with improved rudder anyways (as a standalone and not a successor to the Stealth Plane Challenge). You can check it out in some minutes. :)
I could XML edit it to have more horsepower, that would also create more thrust and allow for a smaller diameter. :) I've tested the plane and I don't see a problem in diameter, the problem is that the front wheels are too close to the center of mass, so you have a huge downwards movement on the front when braking. CoM should be further behind the wheels or the wheels further in front of the CoM.
Awesome model with all those details and functions.
If someone manages to land it on the USS Tiny and hands out a legit screenshot of that, I'll upload a version with improved rudder (not in the challenge of course). :D
@TheLatentImage Thank you very much! I was impressed by it myself. It was supposed to be a delta-wing, but that didn't work out as the fuselage was too light and the engines in the back too heavy, it made backflips right from the start. I didn't want more weight, so I decided to give it a proper tail for stability and upwards lift in the back. That worked out very very well. The rest was only a little bit of adjusting weight distribution and size of control surfaces. :)
@HakkeAirTech I've seen you're running on Android. I'll upload a weaponless version, so you can also test it out instead of just looking at it. :D
@HakkeAirTech Special weapons technology also made out of calbon fibel (^_^)/ Missile bays don't seem like a good option to me, as they tend to screw many creations up, though it would definitely be worth a try. And my bigger concern was the maneuverability, because it's worth way more in a battle than any stealth technology you could think of. That's actually why the USAF chose the YF-22 (F-22 Raptor) with better maneuverability over the YF-23 with smaller radar footprint. :D Thanks for your comment!
@dsr1aviation I hoped so. :D What about the looks and flight characteristics? I made it very bulky, rounded and with rocket elements like all the vehicles in Fallout.
This would be great!
This plane is just georgeous. Highest maneauverability + stability I've seen in this game so far.