@Telescopeplayer1 For that video, I launched the missiles without a lock, essentially using them as dumb-fire rockets. If you want them to lock, the cockpit has to have direct line-of-sight with the target. In this case, just raise the cockpit up higher
@IndesterSion I'm actually just using the (relatively) new variable-setters feature. It's the (x) icon in the bottom right, near the overload button. You can create a custom input (ie. "stage1"), and set it to: "currentAngle>10?1:Activate2". Then, you can paste "stage1" into the inputs of rotators, piston, etc. and they will act as if you had pasted "currentAngle>10?1:Activate2" into their inputs. This is useful if you have many objects that use the same input, as instead of manually editing the inputs of 8 pistons, you can edit the input in the variable setter and it will automatically apply to all 8.
@WiniMii I simplified everything bar the afterburner and managed to get it down to 562 parts (the afterburner section is over 260 parts alone btw). Hope that's good enough. There's a 300 part version that has the AB removed.
Looks beautiful - very nicely detailed!. Your next steps’ll probably making some better landing gear (try reducing brake torque, it’ll help with the spontaneous combustion)
@ChrisPy I know 7 tonnes is incredibly low for a bomber, but I have to keep it down to make the gear I want - If I want realistic mass, I'd have to increase the mass of the wheels, shocks, all the moving parts. It would just be a mess to make it work reliably (It would be decimated on any high-G manoeuvre, and SP rotator physics gets very wonky at high masses). I built this aircraft with realistic acceleration and flight performance in mind; I ignored the mass. I've tried making reliable custom gear at realistic masses before, it was just too much hassle and not worth the time.
And I love the sound!
My loaded/practical weight is 7000kg, the negative value is just from the game calculating the theoretical value of an empty fuel tank, which is incorrect as the fuel tank is massless, and would never reach that value. I know the plane sucks up a lot of fuel (7 decorative, 3 practical engines) but I just increased the fuel capacity to counter it. And the sound of a prop on a delta-wing jet bomber would drive me mad xD
Sorry if I’m coming off a little hostile btw @ChrisPy
@ChrisPy I use high physics and don't have any issues with the gear (is it spazzing out for you?). I know the high-mass gear trick, but it causes the gear to rip off when I turn, and I'm not really focusing on realistic weight, only speed and manoeuvrability - which is why the engines are so weak, irl it would take a while to get up to Mach 1 and above. And wdym by the weight thing?
@Bird6369 Link in my first comment
@Legomaster0418 Ah, good to know. I'll update my instructions
Get it here today for free!
@SLAY3R1801 I made this before glass was introduced
@Arandomdownloader High, but with my pc, all physics settings work
@Arandomdownloader Try using high physics settings
@Telescopeplayer1 Just hold down the countermeasures button
@Telescopeplayer1 For that video, I launched the missiles without a lock, essentially using them as dumb-fire rockets. If you want them to lock, the cockpit has to have direct line-of-sight with the target. In this case, just raise the cockpit up higher
@IndesterSion I'm actually just using the (relatively) new variable-setters feature. It's the (x) icon in the bottom right, near the overload button. You can create a custom input (ie. "stage1"), and set it to: "currentAngle>10?1:Activate2". Then, you can paste "stage1" into the inputs of rotators, piston, etc. and they will act as if you had pasted "currentAngle>10?1:Activate2" into their inputs. This is useful if you have many objects that use the same input, as instead of manually editing the inputs of 8 pistons, you can edit the input in the variable setter and it will automatically apply to all 8.
Giphy and ImgBB @Lake
I use high, but it appears to work for me on the other modes too @offiry
Can you record a video and upload it somewhere? Reddit, imgur, etc. @rizkiwidiyantoro30
@rizkiwidiyantoro30 It's working fine for me on both PC and Mobile. Are you sure you're launching it correctly?
@Skidkid08 Try adding more weight to your aircraft
link @Coolman1011
link @VINENOLER2222
T
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/1XGmKx/CT-28M-Gypsy @S1lly
@Echostar It's a mod, so I don't think it's available for mobile users unfortunately
Well as I said, I’m quite busy at the moment, so you may have to wait a while… @Brayden1981
Just an occasional vid. I don’t have time right now to build anything new, but maybe in the future @Brayden1981
Interesting… @CarrotSlicingCat
No reshade, just crop + the generic vignette filter from Windows. In this case I used the ocean and clouds 2.0 mod in some of them. @MAHADI
What exactly is it you need help with? (btw I'm terrible at building ships)
@BarracudaProtogen The newest phones'll shrug this off no problem. I'm thinking about the guy still using an iPhone 4 xD
@WiniMii I simplified everything bar the afterburner and managed to get it down to 562 parts (the afterburner section is over 260 parts alone btw). Hope that's good enough. There's a 300 part version that has the AB removed.
@Lennington
You can get it here, but it doesn’t have all the fancy gauges and things
Looks beautiful - very nicely detailed!. Your next steps’ll probably making some better landing gear (try reducing brake torque, it’ll help with the spontaneous combustion)
@ChrisPy I know 7 tonnes is incredibly low for a bomber, but I have to keep it down to make the gear I want - If I want realistic mass, I'd have to increase the mass of the wheels, shocks, all the moving parts. It would just be a mess to make it work reliably (It would be decimated on any high-G manoeuvre, and SP rotator physics gets very wonky at high masses). I built this aircraft with realistic acceleration and flight performance in mind; I ignored the mass. I've tried making reliable custom gear at realistic masses before, it was just too much hassle and not worth the time.
And I love the sound!
My loaded/practical weight is 7000kg, the negative value is just from the game calculating the theoretical value of an empty fuel tank, which is incorrect as the fuel tank is massless, and would never reach that value. I know the plane sucks up a lot of fuel (7 decorative, 3 practical engines) but I just increased the fuel capacity to counter it. And the sound of a prop on a delta-wing jet bomber would drive me mad xD
Sorry if I’m coming off a little hostile btw @ChrisPy
Oh the weight’s only like that because I have a single massless fuel tank, and I like where my engines are right now @ChrisPy
@ChrisPy I use high physics and don't have any issues with the gear (is it spazzing out for you?). I know the high-mass gear trick, but it causes the gear to rip off when I turn, and I'm not really focusing on realistic weight, only speed and manoeuvrability - which is why the engines are so weak, irl it would take a while to get up to Mach 1 and above. And wdym by the weight thing?
@Lennington
@Mustang51
Pinged again because I had to remove the other one.
Literally amazing
Now, that is a name I'd never thought I'd read.
No problem, thanks! @Mrfoxus
Aren’t you the same guy that did my F4? Lol go right ahead :D @Mrfoxus
That’ll be amazing! Go right ahead :D @Mrfoxus
Majority of the weight is in the baseplate. Remove that and it should be fine. @XPlane10ProFlier
Great! All you need now are a couple jet engines and you’re ready to go. Probably.
Yeah go ahead! I’d love to see what you’ll come up with @Kaiteniisan
Only use the grey coloured fuselage block in front of the engine to detach and attach to other things (move around). @Farm249
Thank you, professor Alta for that wondrous and informative lecture. @Alta2809
Absolutely beautiful
Huh I just realised it has a pretty cool suspension system.
Where’s my cheese!?
Does look pretty good tho
Yeah I use that on my modern missiles, this design is quite old. @JA311M
@Lennington
I think he was just correcting your spelling, it’s VTOL not VOTL. @CallsignArtemis