@BogdanX nah, I don't think you're annoyed, just engaged, which is a good thing...and I really like your builds as well. Hey, we really started something on the site with Luft '46 builds, didn't we?
@MechWARRIOR57 come on, it doesn't take HOURS to think about fuel...but if you go into aviation in some capacity in your life, you WILL spend HOURS thinking about fuel...whether it's burning it, passing it to another jet, refueling an aircraft, or transferring it for C.G.!
@MechWARRIOR57 read my caveat...if you're modeling something with those characteristics, then, sure. But don't try to sell me on an F-18 with UNlimited fuel...
@MechWARRIOR57 but you're learning in the process, I guarantee you. I have 4,000 hours of real world piloting time and, trust me, you're learning. And having fun doing it.
@t8erh8er @BogdanX @MechWARRIOR57, you are all saying learning isn't fun??? Seriously? Take it from someone who's had plenty of life-worn lessons...you stop learning, you die. Perhaps learning isn't fun the way you normally see it in school, but let me assure you, it is. Case in point: Simple Planes!
@BogdanX agree with assertion that fuel consumption is too high...but, the days (on PC) are much shorter and the world much smaller than the real world, so it correlates, to a degree.
@t8erh8er, I wonder what @AndrewGarrison would say about not learning anything? He and his original team started out building flight simulation software for McDonnell Douglas (Boeing now, I guess). I will just about GUARANTEE you that learning was a core objective of this effort. One of the reasons why I spend a little time with SP as a hobby is because I enjoy teaching the newbies on both SP and real life flying...
@t8erh8er, I don't know about that...I know younger folks who would have no idea how to fly an aircraft IAW the FARs, -1 or other guidance, then go ahead and crash their MS Flight Sim left and right, not having really learned anything at all. I also know plenty of people who learn a lot here...whether they're seeking to or not. I know you have probably learned a few things here and there on this platform yourself and that should be preserved. If you're building to the crowd that doesn't care about learning, I appreciate that, but you have the skills to do both, don't undersell your skills. I know I can EASILY build planes that will fly for 20 or 30 mins in game, what would you estimate the duration is for a newbie player who, as you say, "doesn't care" and just downloads and flies around? Probably 30 seconds...so why not make them learn something challenging in the process?
@t8erh8er very true...I actually try to avoid putting fuel on around the nose or cockpit areas as I agree that's unrealistic as well. But I think you undersell the value of SP in teaching basic aero, flight dynamics, etc., I think it does as good a job as those other games in teaching about those things...probably better because you have to plan for it in your builds.
@t8erh8er hmmm, considering last comment, I can see your point better. I certainly don't fly around at 60% throttle setting, it's up at least 90% most of the time, but it correlates to about 60% of the available thrust, including AB.
@t8erh8er, oh, AB doesn't [significantly] increase RPM. Case in point: Ops limit for a T-38 in mil power is 99.0 - 104%, while in AB it's STILL 99.0 - 104%...
@t8erh8er yes, there is usually a detent, but I would argue that the way SP emulates this in game is through 100% = AB. I don't disagree, though, that there might be a better way to activate AB than what we currently have.
Wow, I'm really liking the debate. One thing is for sure: SP community really knows how to politely debate and defend their positions. Kudos to @AndrewGarrison and the other Devs for cultivating a respectful, debate-minded community.
@t8erh8er you are right. 100% thrust (non-augmented) is also known as "military" thrust or full power, or something else to differentiate from AB. Perhaps SP should add that type of mod, I think it would be a good change.
@t8erh8er I appreciate that you do. However, consider this: Full AB augments the thrust by 40%, fuel consumption increases by even more than that. All AB equipped aircraft only use AB for limited periods, because of the fuel consumption issues. If players flew their aircraft realistically, they would pull the throttle back to 60% or less after they takeoff.
@MrSilverWolf I think you exaggerate a tad...70K + 13K = 83K, which wouldn't really change the flying characteristics that much. I acknowledge that the fuselage parts in SP are a tad bit heavier than they should be, but there are plenty of really heavy aircraft in real life. A Strike Eagle alone weighs in at 81,000 lbs max gross weight, but show me an F-15E on the site which weighs that much. An Airbus 380 weighs over a million pounds...again, there are few/no million pound aircraft on the site. I get it...but, the infinite fuel thing so detracts from the flying experience and required fuel planning, so that it just isn't worth it. In fact, I think it would be far more worthwhile to have an aircraft fly with less fuel as in real life as an offset to the fuse weight thing in SP.
@vonhubert no worries on time. I wanted to let the aftershocks from this build die down anyways, before posting a variation. I think what we can do is a night bomber version of this build. I wanted to tweak a few things as well, like the elevators, increase the wing sweep by about 5 degrees and make the three part wings (LE, center section and TE). Night camo would free us up from the camo thing, as most Luftwaffe night bombers were overall black with white markings. I would be sure to make the black a shade or two lighter than the darkest, that way it stands out against the background. What do you think?
@vonhubert the gloss is XML modding. Access the XML files (thisPC/C:/Users/Your profile name/AppData/LocalLow/Jundroo/SimplePlanes/AircraftDesigns), open the corresponding folder and go to the color list, which is near the bottom of the file. Open the file you want using Notepad. Select the color you want to modify and set m = "1" and s = "1". The color list will be in the same order as in the custom color palette (left to right, top to bottom). You can also Google "hexcolor" to get color codes for any custom color you want to choose and substitute the listed color for the new color. Save the file, then you have to reload the aircraft in the editor to see the new color and gloss settings. As far as modding the plane, sure, have at it! I like the mouse controlled turrets idea, you'll have to tell me how to do that for my next build. As for the gear and door synchro, sure, sounds great. The wing Mod, well, I considered making them out of several big XML modded parts, but wouldn't have been able to carry the camo pattern over if I had done that.
Just a suggestion for your next train build. I would have taken the first screenshot and zoomed in to fill the screen, I think it would have been more impressive that way and better noticed, because this one deserves it. Second screenshot would have been a close up of the trucks, because a lot of work went into those things.
The same goes for you @Feanor, @MechWARRIOR57 and @MrSilverWolf.
@BogdanX @t8erh8er @FennVectorCWA...seriously, you guys are all talented builders and great debaters, I appreciate the engagement.
@t8erh8er--44,000+ downloads AND 140 upvotes?!? Hmmm...must be propelled by an advanced fuel system.
@t8erh8er I'll look him up, thanks!
@BogdanX nah, I don't think you're annoyed, just engaged, which is a good thing...and I really like your builds as well. Hey, we really started something on the site with Luft '46 builds, didn't we?
@t8erh8er what's a hypoplane? I probably wouldn't understand those anyways!
@MechWARRIOR57 ok, fair enough! I'll probably still upvote your builds!
@BogdanX yeah, apologies, just wanted to keep you in on the debate, no hard feelings, ok?
@t8erh8er very true, that Nuc reactor thing was a bad idea...what would they have done if they had crashed the airplane???
@MechWARRIOR57 come on, it doesn't take HOURS to think about fuel...but if you go into aviation in some capacity in your life, you WILL spend HOURS thinking about fuel...whether it's burning it, passing it to another jet, refueling an aircraft, or transferring it for C.G.!
@MechWARRIOR57 it means an exception to the rule, LOL
@MechWARRIOR57 read my caveat...if you're modeling something with those characteristics, then, sure. But don't try to sell me on an F-18 with UNlimited fuel...
@MechWARRIOR57 but you're learning in the process, I guarantee you. I have 4,000 hours of real world piloting time and, trust me, you're learning. And having fun doing it.
@MechWARRIOR57 what's cod iw?
@MechWARRIOR57, then again, maybe I WOULD like Nuc powered aircraft, but the description would have to sell me on it!
@t8erh8er @BogdanX @MechWARRIOR57, you are all saying learning isn't fun??? Seriously? Take it from someone who's had plenty of life-worn lessons...you stop learning, you die. Perhaps learning isn't fun the way you normally see it in school, but let me assure you, it is. Case in point: Simple Planes!
@MechWARRIOR57 yes, Nuc reactor aircraft, would be unrealistic, so I prob wouldn't like those either.
@BogdanX agree with assertion that fuel consumption is too high...but, the days (on PC) are much shorter and the world much smaller than the real world, so it correlates, to a degree.
@t8erh8er, agreed!
@Feanor LOL!
Thanks @FennVectorCWA...finally, someone who agrees with my viewpoint! Whew, they DO exist!
@t8erh8er, I wonder what @AndrewGarrison would say about not learning anything? He and his original team started out building flight simulation software for McDonnell Douglas (Boeing now, I guess). I will just about GUARANTEE you that learning was a core objective of this effort. One of the reasons why I spend a little time with SP as a hobby is because I enjoy teaching the newbies on both SP and real life flying...
@Testin123 I do, so I disagree with you. I do LOTS of testing of my creations prior to posting. Just restart or respawn for a second go.
@t8erh8er, I don't know about that...I know younger folks who would have no idea how to fly an aircraft IAW the FARs, -1 or other guidance, then go ahead and crash their MS Flight Sim left and right, not having really learned anything at all. I also know plenty of people who learn a lot here...whether they're seeking to or not. I know you have probably learned a few things here and there on this platform yourself and that should be preserved. If you're building to the crowd that doesn't care about learning, I appreciate that, but you have the skills to do both, don't undersell your skills. I know I can EASILY build planes that will fly for 20 or 30 mins in game, what would you estimate the duration is for a newbie player who, as you say, "doesn't care" and just downloads and flies around? Probably 30 seconds...so why not make them learn something challenging in the process?
@t8erh8er very true...I actually try to avoid putting fuel on around the nose or cockpit areas as I agree that's unrealistic as well. But I think you undersell the value of SP in teaching basic aero, flight dynamics, etc., I think it does as good a job as those other games in teaching about those things...probably better because you have to plan for it in your builds.
@t8erh8er hmmm, considering last comment, I can see your point better. I certainly don't fly around at 60% throttle setting, it's up at least 90% most of the time, but it correlates to about 60% of the available thrust, including AB.
@t8erh8er, oh, AB doesn't [significantly] increase RPM. Case in point: Ops limit for a T-38 in mil power is 99.0 - 104%, while in AB it's STILL 99.0 - 104%...
@Testin123, yeah, but half the aviation lesson is for the builder, as well as the player...don't you think so?
@t8erh8er yes, there is usually a detent, but I would argue that the way SP emulates this in game is through 100% = AB. I don't disagree, though, that there might be a better way to activate AB than what we currently have.
Wow, I'm really liking the debate. One thing is for sure: SP community really knows how to politely debate and defend their positions. Kudos to @AndrewGarrison and the other Devs for cultivating a respectful, debate-minded community.
@t8erh8er you are right. 100% thrust (non-augmented) is also known as "military" thrust or full power, or something else to differentiate from AB. Perhaps SP should add that type of mod, I think it would be a good change.
@t8erh8er I appreciate that you do. However, consider this: Full AB augments the thrust by 40%, fuel consumption increases by even more than that. All AB equipped aircraft only use AB for limited periods, because of the fuel consumption issues. If players flew their aircraft realistically, they would pull the throttle back to 60% or less after they takeoff.
@t8erh8er in full AB? Yes they do.
@MrSilverWolf I think you exaggerate a tad...70K + 13K = 83K, which wouldn't really change the flying characteristics that much. I acknowledge that the fuselage parts in SP are a tad bit heavier than they should be, but there are plenty of really heavy aircraft in real life. A Strike Eagle alone weighs in at 81,000 lbs max gross weight, but show me an F-15E on the site which weighs that much. An Airbus 380 weighs over a million pounds...again, there are few/no million pound aircraft on the site. I get it...but, the infinite fuel thing so detracts from the flying experience and required fuel planning, so that it just isn't worth it. In fact, I think it would be far more worthwhile to have an aircraft fly with less fuel as in real life as an offset to the fuse weight thing in SP.
@EliteIndustries1 exactly...as they do in real life.
@vonhubert no worries on time. I wanted to let the aftershocks from this build die down anyways, before posting a variation. I think what we can do is a night bomber version of this build. I wanted to tweak a few things as well, like the elevators, increase the wing sweep by about 5 degrees and make the three part wings (LE, center section and TE). Night camo would free us up from the camo thing, as most Luftwaffe night bombers were overall black with white markings. I would be sure to make the black a shade or two lighter than the darkest, that way it stands out against the background. What do you think?
Well it flies really well, except for the weird shaking with the bomb racks....did you notice that?
@vonhubert ok, that makes sense...what did you want to do with the wings?
@vonhubert the gloss is XML modding. Access the XML files (thisPC/C:/Users/Your profile name/AppData/LocalLow/Jundroo/SimplePlanes/AircraftDesigns), open the corresponding folder and go to the color list, which is near the bottom of the file. Open the file you want using Notepad. Select the color you want to modify and set m = "1" and s = "1". The color list will be in the same order as in the custom color palette (left to right, top to bottom). You can also Google "hexcolor" to get color codes for any custom color you want to choose and substitute the listed color for the new color. Save the file, then you have to reload the aircraft in the editor to see the new color and gloss settings. As far as modding the plane, sure, have at it! I like the mouse controlled turrets idea, you'll have to tell me how to do that for my next build. As for the gear and door synchro, sure, sounds great. The wing Mod, well, I considered making them out of several big XML modded parts, but wouldn't have been able to carry the camo pattern over if I had done that.
It would be a TRULY great build if you could evade Snowstone's radar!
It's pretty cool. I like the shape, nice and fast and the roll control winglets especially.
Love the Skywarrior! Awesome build!
@Smasher oh...sorry...
Just a suggestion for your next train build. I would have taken the first screenshot and zoomed in to fill the screen, I think it would have been more impressive that way and better noticed, because this one deserves it. Second screenshot would have been a close up of the trucks, because a lot of work went into those things.
Nice build!
@grizzlitn it is! I was wondering why it didn't seem right, plus he lied and said it was a modification of his old plane!
Fine Tuner. It's in the Mods section. Another good mod to have is Overload.
@MechWARRIOR57 yes, it detects angle of attack pretty well. Use a symetrical wing in your case
@Hockeygoalie21 good, glad it worked. I thought it might have been a wing flex issue, but I guess in this case, it was not
Try this. You're not the first one to have this problem, it's common in SP