@tsampoy
Here i found a link (to a site with picture of the rear end)
Nobody sees these because it's either shown flying or have that massive trail of fire (and smoke) lol here
No need to thank me or anything. I need it too
@tsampoy
I never had figured it out if I had not tried to build a actual space shuttle in Kerbal Space Program.
If you did then it become extremely apparent because each if the space shuttle's main engines give you 900KN at sea level while the boosters only give some 1200 KN each (not at 100% throttle to prevent accelerating too fast and burning up in atmosphere)
In fact, exactly as my first few attempts in KSP (that, of course, went boom, lol) it immediately pitched down (it was at pitch 90, remember?) so hard.
Yep. you need to angle the thrusters. Look at the airflow deflecting plate, it's angled!
But its okay. It's rocket science lol
I don't know too much about the OMS (orbital maneuvering system, a.k.a smaller engines) though, but because it's on top of the shuttle I reason it should be similarly angled (maybe 10 degrees) to point roughly toward the center of mass (of the shuttle)
@tsampoy
lol.
The reason it will never fly is because the boosters of the shuttle is at a wrong angle
If the solid rocket boosters got detached, the center of thrust will be off the center of mass (which will be between the tank and the plane) which will cause the entire thing to ... well, go under Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly.
Angle the Space shuttle's main engines 22.5 degrees (outward) should slightly improve this issue.
The values (e.g. 4000, 5000 and the like) are only roughly accurate for a supersonic ramjet. Depend on the application (the amount of thrust needed, and the altitude), these values can be easily modified.
Note:
I hold absolutely NO RESPONSIBILITY in decreased range and increased fuel comsumption of modified engines.
Those responsibility are yours, so don't come to me about how it crashes the game, too.
(It really shouldn't. I set hard limits for it, too)
This is actually a bug!
TAS (as a variable for funky trees code you use to xml stuff) is not correctly returned when altitude is above 7500m (or something; it was working allright at sea level)
@LunchBox
I believe they are working correctly. Maybe crash tolerance is lower but ... I mean, it's glass.
They don't explode when they are destroyed either, which is nice.
And they have this "Terraria:pot" breaking sound when broken
@goboygo1
The palm trees had been stretching (being loaded) and shrinking (being unloaded) for very very long. It's probably not a bug.
Same apply to other things (grass, e.g.) and also in other games (world of tanks Blitz, mobile)
@Maxx2245
bug
Yes the start menu (essentially all places without a 3D rendering) is extremely choppy. I guess there's a issue with framerate limit not done proper.
Maybe turn off the double-finger gesture? It will be difficult (or straight-out impossible, because Apple is ####), though
@XP
It would be great, especially if it strengthen wing connections.
It might also be better if the wings are not rendered with square sizes (front and back). They could be rendered like round section of fuselages instead.
@agnanSatrio
wing span of 275 meters ...
.-.
I was initially planning on building a non-mod plane that can carry anything that is smaller than the designer's circle, but your plane make that circle look like a ...
well, that microwave dish is bigger than that.
@V
well maybe the strength or the whatever need cranking.
anyway this is quite a ... interesting novelty item that flies
(have it launch so it face upwards)
"Parents don't really understand the concept of a gaming community."
Whenever they SEE the WORD "game", they go mad at you even if you are like, grown up or stuff.
I was 19 and ... well, I grew to be sneaky and my parents grew to simply not care what I am doing.
I don't know. It's as if they expect you to be studying all the time.
But video games are pretty bad. And the stereotype for video games? CounterStrike. Stuff like Legends of Leagues (intentional. but isn't this name good too?). World of Tanks.
These are mildly violent (ESRB rating! not my opinion) and are heavy games with lots of involvement and excitement. Priority over boring math homework can easily be made by students.
(hear mom footstep)
Gimme a sec I'll pretend I am making my math cheatsheet
\cos^{2}{x}=\frac{1}{2}(1-\cos{2x}
ehh ... where are we?
Oh. Yes. Even as they educate you about "video games are bad", this is not even a typical video game. It actually let you "think" and expand creativity: How do you start a piston engine (in its dead state) without a starter?
I have been fiddling with this question as I come back to this game and focus on perpetual motion devices (that does not use a infinitely larger input).
There's articles out there that actually talk about parental distrust and stuff, and various parents also differ from each other (lol. parents ARE objects, after all. they are animated objects that talk and do stuff)
But if you ask any parents about whether they distrust their kid they usually say "no". Those articles (at least one of them) also claims that this distrust lie in their sub-conscious.
Anyway, I had burnt enough time on this.
\frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{r' \sin{\theta}+r\cos{\theta}}{r'\cos{\theta}-r\sin{\theta}}
"why do challenges with 36 upvotes and 478 downloads only have 9 entries?"
I am not sure where the 469 downloads went. Perhaps they never really started work, 10% of those that started work did nit finish it, and the 10% that finished it did not upload it.
@DilophDilophTheDumDum
everyone should know the smallest (unmodded) plane is this one from me
"a horizontal net external force of 3.7N is applied to a box ..."
What?
Sorry. I was busy with work.
Yes, my plane is slightly wider, but it's shorter AND lower AND flies better. Not advertising, but ... why don't you guys know this?
I'm surprised to see that the entrees didn't have gyros equipped. They will provide so many assistance in flight characteristics of those oversized components ...
@Fedegamer
uh oh. seems like this one was less popular ..
same exploding propeller issue. I know you had tried to make it realistic (like having a really tight shroud) but simpleplanes physics don't work this way.
@Fedegamer
The engine explodes ...
seems like one of the turboprop is too big.
(honestly, why turboprop? regular propeller engine have a smaller footprint too, and the old propeller engines have linear thrust)
It'd be more realistic if you use VTOL nozzles for the fuel injectors (rather than sneaking up a jet engine inside)
and ... why unlimited fuel. stick a unlimited fuel somewhere next to it is better (for people that actually want to use such a engine)
@lemoose
This is very great.
the PID input was very interesting, however unfortunately due to device limitations (or whatever) the aircraft can only yaw at a speed of about 0.3 deg / s and displayed stability issues during takeoff (and/or landing)
I'm not sure how you would do this (or how I would do this), so I'm not saying it's bad.
Simpleplanes cut too many corners.
want to use fuselage to make the entire plane wing-shaped?
this should be actually easy. Start out with two stripes (or three) of fuselage (oval shape, laid horizontally at the edges of the wings) then just "fill in" the gaps with rectangular fuselage.
But it's so black, most efforts used to do this would be efforts wasted. I can't even see the shape (of the engine and cockpit stuff) without changing the color palette.
@winterro
true, the leg suspension is pretty perfect
i wish the ... well, frequency of "walking" can be changed. perhaps the input will then be a function of time, vtol, and throttle
@Weebsruinedthiswebsite
This is enormous ... and reasonably detailed too.
32 might seem low ... but the numbers are now quite difficult to get high.
Games' dying, you know.
@MethaManAerospace
EXACTLY!
And exactly.
So add drag-creating rudder. I am waiting for that.
Hint: just create control surfaces that says "yaw", then offset them into each other. remember to turn "inverse" on
Hint Edit: NOOOO WHAT ARE U DOING YOU ARE CREATING DRAG ON BOTH SIDES. You do not have liftoff today.
Hint Edit Edit: You can mod the input controls. That should do the trick
Hint Edit Edit Edit: You can use airbrakes too, but they generate a small amount of ... roll. Maybe just put them on both up and down (and mod then so they don't create huge drag so to slow down the airplane)
Hint Edit Edit Edit Edit: xD
Unrelated:
Aww you are also playing SR2.
I am playing KSP1.10. Dunno why but the SR2 idea just don't get me.
Perhaps some-time-in-the-future there will be a "MMAerospace" for SR2 instead of "C7 Aerospace" for KSP. I'll wait for it.
@MethaManAerospace
You need some kind of vertical STABILIZERS
Or, have your wing pitch changed so it can help stabilize things
The reason for that is because if there is no v-stab then the aircraft have all reasons on the world to flip out (and probably result in the flat spin of death)
Make the v-stab bigger and you will end up better.
But how do the B-2 "Spirit" manage to fly?
N/A ...
Ok it had "split-drag rudder" (which basically creates drag on wingtips when needed) so it can help turn the plane.
Same as the A12A.
Just don't go crazy with the stick and I guess it will be okay ... they flew, after all.
@Fedegamer
Well, it do is capable of going 2280Km/h (mach 2.8, 800m/s) at the altitude of 15,000m (sea level).
Simpleplanes is broken. It does not intake more air as the speed went up (general trend), and all engines are linear.
The reason this is so powerful in KSP is because this thing is speed boosted -- the thrust increases linearly as speed goes up, up to 750KN or something.
But Mach 3 at high altitude also mean lots of air for your intakes, so it flies REALLY high (yes, the engines flare out at 26km but it can climb, using pure momentum, to 33Km), and REALLY fast (over 1200 m/s at altitude 15Km)
I do not have any comment on Simpleplanes. Perhaps it's too simple.
That said, I will surely return to KSP now to do other cool things. until time calls for some other coincidences ...
@Fedegamer
This is ACTUALLY my REAL pioneer series spaceplane (using mostly stock parts and .. "small landing gear bay")
spotting those parts shouldn't be difficult for you.
And yes, that bulge in the fuselage is intentional. That is the engine nacelle.
@Fedegamer
Does it also have 130KN at sea level?
Does it flare out (well, never, for SP physics) at 2.6Km (actually a constant number?)
Dude this engine is FIERCE. I got one of my smaller birds up to 33km (was doing science runs in kerbin atmosphere). I was thinking that Panther was cool, but clearly I am wrong.
the air bleed is kinda ... shallow, though.
(does it have a front-end in ksp? it can be (almost always) only attached to the back of a fuselage, so i had not really noticed)
Time to jam this thing up against a TD25 decoupler
@GoCommitNo
Lol true I can just remove it
But I don't think it bothers THAT much.
Also consider that ... really. SP don't have much to offer (I am over at KSP now)
@MTBCrafter
Immensely Impressive. You did end up building it the Lego way.
My (only) lego build is the 42009, and I reasoned that it's impossible to build it the lego way (because when I started it, there is no hollowed fuselage)
It would still be immensely difficult to make it have those lego bars' holes -- consider the sheer size of that thing.
You are welcomed to try (or just drop a vote) :P
@ThunderNova
Public Transport lol ...
Not a problem for a space shuttle this size, I guess ...
very good job. Slightly challenging (but hey man, it's VTOL) so I have nothing against it.
@BagelPlane
Ah hi there. And thank you
@DEN12345
People just like that picture, right?
@cat123
Wow despite the weird controls it actually flown decently
It also in fact looked somewhat decent
@MageMobius
A bit long (or narrow), otherwise decent.
lol the getaway plane for Lord Lazzari
somewhat weird, but hey it's cool
@tominator
@methamanaerospace
@tsampoy
Here i found a link (to a site with picture of the rear end)
Nobody sees these because it's either shown flying or have that massive trail of fire (and smoke) lol
here
No need to thank me or anything. I need it too
@tsampoy
I never had figured it out if I had not tried to build a actual space shuttle in Kerbal Space Program.
If you did then it become extremely apparent because each if the space shuttle's main engines give you 900KN at sea level while the boosters only give some 1200 KN each (not at 100% throttle to prevent accelerating too fast and burning up in atmosphere)
In fact, exactly as my first few attempts in KSP (that, of course, went boom, lol) it immediately pitched down (it was at pitch 90, remember?) so hard.
Yep. you need to angle the thrusters. Look at the airflow deflecting plate, it's angled!
But its okay. It's rocket science lol
I don't know too much about the OMS (orbital maneuvering system, a.k.a smaller engines) though, but because it's on top of the shuttle I reason it should be similarly angled (maybe 10 degrees) to point roughly toward the center of mass (of the shuttle)
@tsampoy
lol.
The reason it will never fly is because the boosters of the shuttle is at a wrong angle
If the solid rocket boosters got detached, the center of thrust will be off the center of mass (which will be between the tank and the plane) which will cause the entire thing to ... well, go under Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly.
Angle the Space shuttle's main engines 22.5 degrees (outward) should slightly improve this issue.
@tsampoy
lol
you'd get better off if you had used one of those spheres
@tsampoy
Did the real thing had no wheels?
You could just slap on some of this useless stuff called ... gears, or you can use frictionless hemispheres
@tsampoy
I don't know how this thing got to 89 upvotes.
None from me, sadly. I see no point in this.
But the can is nice tho
@tominator
Dude this is dope
I'm not too happy about the welding joints, so I reflowed them
here
@LUFTWAFFALES
yep it is
The values (e.g. 4000, 5000 and the like) are only roughly accurate for a supersonic ramjet. Depend on the application (the amount of thrust needed, and the altitude), these values can be easily modified.
Note:
I hold absolutely NO RESPONSIBILITY in decreased range and increased fuel comsumption of modified engines.
Those responsibility are yours, so don't come to me about how it crashes the game, too.
(It really shouldn't. I set hard limits for it, too)
@AndrewGarrison
BUG
This is actually a bug!
TAS (as a variable for funky trees code you use to xml stuff) is not correctly returned when altitude is above 7500m (or something; it was working allright at sea level)
@AquiliusEpic
Yes, the Mig 25 is supersonic. for 1920 ... mph? it goes to roughly mach 3.
@AndrewGarrison
I quite like this build. Simple but to the point. THIS is SimplePlanes spirit.
@LunchBox
I believe they are working correctly. Maybe crash tolerance is lower but ... I mean, it's glass.
They don't explode when they are destroyed either, which is nice.
And they have this "Terraria:pot" breaking sound when broken
@goboygo1
The palm trees had been stretching (being loaded) and shrinking (being unloaded) for very very long. It's probably not a bug.
Same apply to other things (grass, e.g.) and also in other games (world of tanks Blitz, mobile)
@Maxx2245
bug
Yes the start menu (essentially all places without a 3D rendering) is extremely choppy. I guess there's a issue with framerate limit not done proper.
Maybe turn off the double-finger gesture? It will be difficult (or straight-out impossible, because Apple is ####), though
@XP
It would be great, especially if it strengthen wing connections.
It might also be better if the wings are not rendered with square sizes (front and back). They could be rendered like round section of fuselages instead.
@agnanSatrio
wing span of 275 meters ...
.-.
I was initially planning on building a non-mod plane that can carry anything that is smaller than the designer's circle, but your plane make that circle look like a ...
well, that microwave dish is bigger than that.
@BagelPlane
lol
@V
well maybe the strength or the whatever need cranking.
anyway this is quite a ... interesting novelty item that flies
(have it launch so it face upwards)
"Parents don't really understand the concept of a gaming community."
Whenever they SEE the WORD "game", they go mad at you even if you are like, grown up or stuff.
I was 19 and ... well, I grew to be sneaky and my parents grew to simply not care what I am doing.
I don't know. It's as if they expect you to be studying all the time.
But video games are pretty bad. And the stereotype for video games? CounterStrike. Stuff like Legends of Leagues (intentional. but isn't this name good too?). World of Tanks.
These are mildly violent (ESRB rating! not my opinion) and are heavy games with lots of involvement and excitement. Priority over boring math homework can easily be made by students.
(hear mom footstep)
Gimme a sec I'll pretend I am making my math cheatsheet
\cos^{2}{x}=\frac{1}{2}(1-\cos{2x}
ehh ... where are we?
Oh. Yes. Even as they educate you about "video games are bad", this is not even a typical video game. It actually let you "think" and expand creativity: How do you start a piston engine (in its dead state) without a starter?
I have been fiddling with this question as I come back to this game and focus on perpetual motion devices (that does not use a infinitely larger input).
There's articles out there that actually talk about parental distrust and stuff, and various parents also differ from each other (lol. parents ARE objects, after all. they are animated objects that talk and do stuff)
But if you ask any parents about whether they distrust their kid they usually say "no". Those articles (at least one of them) also claims that this distrust lie in their sub-conscious.
Anyway, I had burnt enough time on this.
\frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{r' \sin{\theta}+r\cos{\theta}}{r'\cos{\theta}-r\sin{\theta}}
"why do challenges with 36 upvotes and 478 downloads only have 9 entries?"
I am not sure where the 469 downloads went. Perhaps they never really started work, 10% of those that started work did nit finish it, and the 10% that finished it did not upload it.
@Shemes213
cute. I like it.
Dude that's some advanced use of fuselage blocks. That is very nice ...
@Shemes213
this is very very beautiful. From the pics, at least.
@SledDriver
High speed flight characteristic is pretty decent.
For that, I will give my share of upvote.
How come do is this module weigh 20 tons?!
@V
lmao
you could totally slap a gyro on it tho :p
@DilophDilophTheDumDum
everyone should know the smallest (unmodded) plane is this one from me
"a horizontal net external force of 3.7N is applied to a box ..."
What?
Sorry. I was busy with work.
Yes, my plane is slightly wider, but it's shorter AND lower AND flies better. Not advertising, but ... why don't you guys know this?
I'm surprised to see that the entrees didn't have gyros equipped. They will provide so many assistance in flight characteristics of those oversized components ...
Clearly I am late to this game
It's almost equivalent to programming, except when I can't add variables.
Is there a way to get the current value of the input?
@MTBCrafter
I'm glad you got a job.
@Fedegamer
uh oh. seems like this one was less popular ..
same exploding propeller issue. I know you had tried to make it realistic (like having a really tight shroud) but simpleplanes physics don't work this way.
@Fedegamer
The engine explodes ...
seems like one of the turboprop is too big.
(honestly, why turboprop? regular propeller engine have a smaller footprint too, and the old propeller engines have linear thrust)
It'd be more realistic if you use VTOL nozzles for the fuel injectors (rather than sneaking up a jet engine inside)
and ... why unlimited fuel. stick a unlimited fuel somewhere next to it is better (for people that actually want to use such a engine)
@lemoose
This is very great.
the PID input was very interesting, however unfortunately due to device limitations (or whatever) the aircraft can only yaw at a speed of about 0.3 deg / s and displayed stability issues during takeoff (and/or landing)
I'm not sure how you would do this (or how I would do this), so I'm not saying it's bad.
Simpleplanes cut too many corners.
want to use fuselage to make the entire plane wing-shaped?
this should be actually easy. Start out with two stripes (or three) of fuselage (oval shape, laid horizontally at the edges of the wings) then just "fill in" the gaps with rectangular fuselage.
But it's so black, most efforts used to do this would be efforts wasted. I can't even see the shape (of the engine and cockpit stuff) without changing the color palette.
@scratch
why spend that much time with a car/truck
just strap on a bunch of wheels (like a armored personal carrier) and roll it. it wont tip, too
@winterro
true, the leg suspension is pretty perfect
i wish the ... well, frequency of "walking" can be changed. perhaps the input will then be a function of time, vtol, and throttle
@Weebsruinedthiswebsite
This is enormous ... and reasonably detailed too.
32 might seem low ... but the numbers are now quite difficult to get high.
Games' dying, you know.
Anyway, make that 33
@MethaManAerospace
EXACTLY!
And exactly.
So add drag-creating rudder. I am waiting for that.
Hint: just create control surfaces that says "yaw", then offset them into each other. remember to turn "inverse" on
Hint Edit: NOOOO WHAT ARE U DOING YOU ARE CREATING DRAG ON BOTH SIDES. You do not have liftoff today.
Hint Edit Edit: You can mod the input controls. That should do the trick
Hint Edit Edit Edit: You can use airbrakes too, but they generate a small amount of ... roll. Maybe just put them on both up and down (and mod then so they don't create huge drag so to slow down the airplane)
Hint Edit Edit Edit Edit: xD
Unrelated:
Aww you are also playing SR2.
I am playing KSP1.10. Dunno why but the SR2 idea just don't get me.
Perhaps some-time-in-the-future there will be a "MMAerospace" for SR2 instead of "C7 Aerospace" for KSP. I'll wait for it.
@MethaManAerospace
You need some kind of vertical STABILIZERS
Or, have your wing pitch changed so it can help stabilize things
The reason for that is because if there is no v-stab then the aircraft have all reasons on the world to flip out (and probably result in the flat spin of death)
Make the v-stab bigger and you will end up better.
But how do the B-2 "Spirit" manage to fly?
N/A ...
Ok it had "split-drag rudder" (which basically creates drag on wingtips when needed) so it can help turn the plane.
Same as the A12A.
Just don't go crazy with the stick and I guess it will be okay ... they flew, after all.
@Fedegamer
Well, it do is capable of going 2280Km/h (mach 2.8, 800m/s) at the altitude of 15,000m (sea level).
Simpleplanes is broken. It does not intake more air as the speed went up (general trend), and all engines are linear.
The reason this is so powerful in KSP is because this thing is speed boosted -- the thrust increases linearly as speed goes up, up to 750KN or something.
But Mach 3 at high altitude also mean lots of air for your intakes, so it flies REALLY high (yes, the engines flare out at 26km but it can climb, using pure momentum, to 33Km), and REALLY fast (over 1200 m/s at altitude 15Km)
I do not have any comment on Simpleplanes. Perhaps it's too simple.
That said, I will surely return to KSP now to do other cool things. until time calls for some other coincidences ...
@Fedegamer
Oh wow you are ... that make me even older :P
I am 19
@Fedegamer
This is ACTUALLY my REAL pioneer series spaceplane (using mostly stock parts and .. "small landing gear bay")
spotting those parts shouldn't be difficult for you.
And yes, that bulge in the fuselage is intentional. That is the engine nacelle.
@Quagga
That "part" is the pointy ... cone inside the the engine exaust
How did @Fedgame did it was a mystery
@Fedegamer
Does it also have 130KN at sea level?
Does it flare out (well, never, for SP physics) at 2.6Km (actually a constant number?)
Dude this engine is FIERCE. I got one of my smaller birds up to 33km (was doing science runs in kerbin atmosphere). I was thinking that Panther was cool, but clearly I am wrong.
the air bleed is kinda ... shallow, though.
(does it have a front-end in ksp? it can be (almost always) only attached to the back of a fuselage, so i had not really noticed)
Time to jam this thing up against a TD25 decoupler
@GoCommitNo
Lol true I can just remove it
But I don't think it bothers THAT much.
Also consider that ... really. SP don't have much to offer (I am over at KSP now)
oh that predecessor? Ignore it -- it's unimportant. It's unlisted, too.
@plane918273645
lol for that
"not suitable for planes over mach 1"
Simpleplanes physics, right?
@MTBCrafter
Definitely. Call me in when you are about to tackle something this crazy, too!
You know, it's perhaps one of the few vehicles under the new "construction equipment" category...
@MTBCrafter
Immensely Impressive. You did end up building it the Lego way.
My (only) lego build is the 42009, and I reasoned that it's impossible to build it the lego way (because when I started it, there is no hollowed fuselage)
It would still be immensely difficult to make it have those lego bars' holes -- consider the sheer size of that thing.
You are welcomed to try (or just drop a vote) :P
@ThunderNova
Public Transport lol ...
Not a problem for a space shuttle this size, I guess ...
very good job. Slightly challenging (but hey man, it's VTOL) so I have nothing against it.
@plane918273645
Lol I don't even know this build exists until ... I saw one featured in another build
if they want big ones you can always scale them