Very nice. You got the inner wing dihedral, insignia, canopy and nose glazing just right. Also, nice custom gear, almost no one builds custom gear on this subject.
@EpicPigster1 well, it seemed to do the trick, even when the mass was set to “5”...I’m going to see how low a mass I can get the rotators down to and still have the same stabilizing effect, thanks!
@marcox43 it maneuvers like an F-104...doesn’t turn that well, but goes like lightning! That’s why I would suggest you increase the engine power (if you can).
@marcox43 I’ve been playing around with this build. It actually flies descently—difficult for an F-104 replica. I was able to make a few tweaks on my own...moving the wings a little more rearward, working the angle of the rear fuse and tail. I was also able to add a lot more fuel with the wings further back. It could use a little more power...XML the engine for 1.5 - 2x power should give it more realistic performance (1000 mph at sea level, 1,600-ish at 30-40,000’). This would also look great with some custom gear, but understand you want to keep it simple. But to answer your question: Yes, I think you should release the version with the tip tanks.
That camo job is impressive. I really wish there was a way to “paint” in SP, instead we have to make sure every paint but is lightened and still need to make sure the drag points don’t go through the roof.
The laser gun system does nothing against ground targets, so that’s a bit disappointing, but it does fly! Try and use different colors (“Custom” color pallette), as well as the resizable fuselage pieces. That’s practically the only part I use in my creations.
Isn’t this just the Pigpen with different colors...colors which don’t even look good when compared to the original colors? I don’t want to seem overly critical, but why don’t you create your own original build? That’s more likely to get you some Upvotes.
In the designer page, select the little blue icon that looks like a triangle balancing a board with three balls on it. You’ll then notice some lines appearing on your build. Make sure the red line, the Center of Mass (CoM) line, is more forward on your build then the Center of Lift (CoL) line. There are several ways to get these lines to move, the most straightforward way to move CoM forward is to add weight (either fuel or dead weight) to the front of your plane. Make sure the CoM is forward enough to prevent your airplane from tumbling, either immediately on takeoff or when flying and you pull back hard on the stick. You can also adjust the CoL position by changing the size of the wings or the position of the wings on your build. Good luck!
@SFR yes, you are absolutely correct. It’s been that way since the beginning...it’s called SimplePlanes, after all. I would really like to see a VSI, in addition to an AS indicator and a GS readout. Most people on this game have no idea that you might be indicating 300 knots at 20,000 feet, but trueing out at around 450 knots and a faster or slower ground speed depending on winds. It might blow some minds but be educational at the same time.
Yes there is a way to do it: @vonhubert is really best at it and has helped me figure it out. Check out his Bison. Be sure to upvote him...he’s very underrated, but IMHO, one of the most skilled builders on the site. Basically it involves stacking two rotators, one powered, the other floppy on top of each other. These will move the doors. Then once you’ve placed the rotators and doors and adjusted them, you need to use one shock per door, supported on both ends by floppy rotators, which pushes against the doors during extension and retraction. The shocks will absorb the floppy rotation range during retraction, delaying door closing. During extension, the shocks will immediately push the doors open, as they are stacked with floppy rotators and allow them to get out of the way of the extending gear. Hint: you need to XML mod the shocks to between x35 and x75 power to get the proper effect. Also, turning collision off on all parts also helps. It can take awhile and sometimes it’s frustrating, but once you figure it out it works. I’m still working on my own build, but am away from my PC this week so it’s not complete.
@MethaManAircraft ahh, yes. My French is a little rusty. I’m building something similar. Not a Vautour, but same role, time period. Also building custom gear...no way to avoid it, with sequenced gear doors which actually open ahead of the lowering gear and close behind the retracting gear. Yours has a bomb bay as well, correct? I’ll say, that engine nacelle landing gear will be a trick to replicate, can’t wait to see what you come up with.
You all are so young and idealistic. The Obama administration chooses to enforce “net neutrality” in 2015 using a 1934 communications law. We all lived just fine before 2015 and...shocker!...before the internet ever existed. At the end of the day, Americans need to remember that if an ISP decides to hike rates to stream Stranger Things II, go to the ISP that doesn’t...that’s what drives the market. But, I won’t rant. I’m putting a reminder to revisit this one year from now. I just about guarantee the impact will be zero.
@phanps, thanks! This is one of my personal favorite builds I’ve completed, so it was a little frustrating that it didn’t find as big an audience as I was hoping.
@Liquidfox is correct, a B-25 followed by a North American T-28 Trojan. My dad flew one of those during pilot training around 1958. Interesting aircraft, tricycle landing gear and a big radial engine.
@Marine, the most recent explanation for the current version is that scaled cockpits create uneven drag. I don't know too much about that cause, but I do know that mirroring parts once they've been nudged from their attachment point (i.e., stick a part on one side, nudge it into place, then mirror it to the other side of your aircraft), causes the newly mirrored part to attach to an attachment point, but not the symmetrically opposite attachment point on the opposite side of the aircraft. The autoroll is generated when the computer senses two parts at different places on the opposite sides of the aircraft and it's worse when the wings are involved. The technique I've adopted for building is to create a part on one side of the aircraft, attach it to the aircraft in approximately the correct position, mirror the part to the opposite side (now they're both on symmetric attach points). Then I nudge both parts into position. Even with the nudging, the computer still uses the original attach points and does not generate autoroll. I scale cockpits all the time, I mirror all the time and I've never had a problem with autoroll since I've started using the described technique, so I really don't think it's the cockpit scaling. My technique may slow the building down a bit, but it has always prevented autoroll in my builds.
@Flash0of0green, the proper shortening of “synchronization” is “sync”. As a military pilot and a History major specializing in Military History, I can tell you we never used “sync gear” as short for “synchronization gear”. Besides, once I read your thread, I then thought I might try to be light in my tone, I thought it was a witty comment, you took it as something snarky and totally the wrong way. Guess I should be more careful in my tone when commenting, sheesh.
Is it your plane or did you download someone else’s creation? If it’s yours...weird. If it’s someone else’s, try activating all the activation groups, then use the throttle. Sometimes users bind the engines to the activation groups. 2. Read the descriptions for those aircraft you download...they’re useful. Mostly. 3. If neither of those two solutions work, well, you might have a glitch. Suggest you restart the program or your computer.
@NathanAviation thank you!
@Tang0five thank you, sir! I’m glad you like it, a very photogenic jet, I agree.
@Blue0Bull as requested.
Very nice. You got the inner wing dihedral, insignia, canopy and nose glazing just right. Also, nice custom gear, almost no one builds custom gear on this subject.
Very impressive work here.
Very accurate shape.
Nice!
Fun build
@EpicPigster1 well, it seemed to do the trick, even when the mass was set to “5”...I’m going to see how low a mass I can get the rotators down to and still have the same stabilizing effect, thanks!
@EpicPigster1 so increase the weight (mass) of the rotator? I don’t want this thing to be too heavy...?
@vonhubert @BogdanX ?
@marcox43 it maneuvers like an F-104...doesn’t turn that well, but goes like lightning! That’s why I would suggest you increase the engine power (if you can).
@marcox43 I’ve been playing around with this build. It actually flies descently—difficult for an F-104 replica. I was able to make a few tweaks on my own...moving the wings a little more rearward, working the angle of the rear fuse and tail. I was also able to add a lot more fuel with the wings further back. It could use a little more power...XML the engine for 1.5 - 2x power should give it more realistic performance (1000 mph at sea level, 1,600-ish at 30-40,000’). This would also look great with some custom gear, but understand you want to keep it simple. But to answer your question: Yes, I think you should release the version with the tip tanks.
Nice build, wish I had more points so that I could Spotlight this.
That camo job is impressive. I really wish there was a way to “paint” in SP, instead we have to make sure every paint but is lightened and still need to make sure the drag points don’t go through the roof.
Nice build.
Very fun to fly!
The laser gun system does nothing against ground targets, so that’s a bit disappointing, but it does fly! Try and use different colors (“Custom” color pallette), as well as the resizable fuselage pieces. That’s practically the only part I use in my creations.
Isn’t this just the Pigpen with different colors...colors which don’t even look good when compared to the original colors? I don’t want to seem overly critical, but why don’t you create your own original build? That’s more likely to get you some Upvotes.
Pretty nifty!
Great subject, nice build. I like what you did with the guns. A little bigger than the actual subject, but some very nice details here. 👍
In the designer page, select the little blue icon that looks like a triangle balancing a board with three balls on it. You’ll then notice some lines appearing on your build. Make sure the red line, the Center of Mass (CoM) line, is more forward on your build then the Center of Lift (CoL) line. There are several ways to get these lines to move, the most straightforward way to move CoM forward is to add weight (either fuel or dead weight) to the front of your plane. Make sure the CoM is forward enough to prevent your airplane from tumbling, either immediately on takeoff or when flying and you pull back hard on the stick. You can also adjust the CoL position by changing the size of the wings or the position of the wings on your build. Good luck!
@SFR yes, you are absolutely correct. It’s been that way since the beginning...it’s called SimplePlanes, after all. I would really like to see a VSI, in addition to an AS indicator and a GS readout. Most people on this game have no idea that you might be indicating 300 knots at 20,000 feet, but trueing out at around 450 knots and a faster or slower ground speed depending on winds. It might blow some minds but be educational at the same time.
It’s a ground speed, not an airspeed indicator.
Yes there is a way to do it: @vonhubert is really best at it and has helped me figure it out. Check out his Bison. Be sure to upvote him...he’s very underrated, but IMHO, one of the most skilled builders on the site. Basically it involves stacking two rotators, one powered, the other floppy on top of each other. These will move the doors. Then once you’ve placed the rotators and doors and adjusted them, you need to use one shock per door, supported on both ends by floppy rotators, which pushes against the doors during extension and retraction. The shocks will absorb the floppy rotation range during retraction, delaying door closing. During extension, the shocks will immediately push the doors open, as they are stacked with floppy rotators and allow them to get out of the way of the extending gear. Hint: you need to XML mod the shocks to between x35 and x75 power to get the proper effect. Also, turning collision off on all parts also helps. It can take awhile and sometimes it’s frustrating, but once you figure it out it works. I’m still working on my own build, but am away from my PC this week so it’s not complete.
@MethaManAircraft ahh, yes. My French is a little rusty. I’m building something similar. Not a Vautour, but same role, time period. Also building custom gear...no way to avoid it, with sequenced gear doors which actually open ahead of the lowering gear and close behind the retracting gear. Yours has a bomb bay as well, correct? I’ll say, that engine nacelle landing gear will be a trick to replicate, can’t wait to see what you come up with.
Vantour?
@phanps thanks, I appreciate it!
You all are so young and idealistic. The Obama administration chooses to enforce “net neutrality” in 2015 using a 1934 communications law. We all lived just fine before 2015 and...shocker!...before the internet ever existed. At the end of the day, Americans need to remember that if an ISP decides to hike rates to stream Stranger Things II, go to the ISP that doesn’t...that’s what drives the market. But, I won’t rant. I’m putting a reminder to revisit this one year from now. I just about guarantee the impact will be zero.
@phanps, thanks! This is one of my personal favorite builds I’ve completed, so it was a little frustrating that it didn’t find as big an audience as I was hoping.
@Liquidfox is correct, a B-25 followed by a North American T-28 Trojan. My dad flew one of those during pilot training around 1958. Interesting aircraft, tricycle landing gear and a big radial engine.
@RedstoneAeroAviation. Oh. Sorry. I’ve corrected it again. WNP87. Got it. 😜
@Johndfg and @RedstoneAeroAviation corrected. You dingus😆
Wow! One of my favorite cars of all time! Smokey and the Bandit lives!
@Marine, the most recent explanation for the current version is that scaled cockpits create uneven drag. I don't know too much about that cause, but I do know that mirroring parts once they've been nudged from their attachment point (i.e., stick a part on one side, nudge it into place, then mirror it to the other side of your aircraft), causes the newly mirrored part to attach to an attachment point, but not the symmetrically opposite attachment point on the opposite side of the aircraft. The autoroll is generated when the computer senses two parts at different places on the opposite sides of the aircraft and it's worse when the wings are involved. The technique I've adopted for building is to create a part on one side of the aircraft, attach it to the aircraft in approximately the correct position, mirror the part to the opposite side (now they're both on symmetric attach points). Then I nudge both parts into position. Even with the nudging, the computer still uses the original attach points and does not generate autoroll. I scale cockpits all the time, I mirror all the time and I've never had a problem with autoroll since I've started using the described technique, so I really don't think it's the cockpit scaling. My technique may slow the building down a bit, but it has always prevented autoroll in my builds.
@Flash0of0green, my fault for conveying the wrong tone, my apologies.
@Flash0of0green, the proper shortening of “synchronization” is “sync”. As a military pilot and a History major specializing in Military History, I can tell you we never used “sync gear” as short for “synchronization gear”. Besides, once I read your thread, I then thought I might try to be light in my tone, I thought it was a witty comment, you took it as something snarky and totally the wrong way. Guess I should be more careful in my tone when commenting, sheesh.
It’s actually “synchronization gear”, thought I was reading my about new submarine parts here!
Nice job fixing the roll issues, now following!
Beautiful, as always. I really like your build style.
Well, it’s huge. And very fast (2500 mph+ at 60,000’). Nice work.
@blueshirtandjeans whoops didn’t see the blue text, sorry. I downloaded and it worked normally for me. What device are you using?
@blueshirtandjeans which post is it? Can you post a link — ! [Descriptive Name] (link) — remove the spaces between the “!”, “[]” and “()”
A 92’ long fighter? Quite beefy, sir!
Amazing, flies great...a little swift on the acceleration, but to be expected. Plus, my iPhone 8 runs it just fine!
Ok, I don’t think my iPhone 8 can handle this...but i’m gonna try...
Only two upvotes?? That’s not right, here’s a Spotlight!
Very nice, quite quick and a joy to takeoff and land (once I figured out to touchdown at 100 mph or slower) 😀
@niggelas100 very cool, the A-4 is one of my all time favorites.