There aren't a lot of options for gauge faces, so that will be the most annoying part. Based off of the image you provided, you should use the generic gauge face and nudge labels in for each number, as well as the "mach number" label. There is no mach number variable, so the best you can get to my knowledge will be (TAS / s), where s is the speed of sound in m/s, which is ~343.
The input will be something like 10 * (TAS / 343) * [number of degrees you want the needle to move per mach number increment]
The 10 is there if each increment is 0.1 mach, so TAS / 343 = 0.1 mach * 10 will equal the full number of degrees of needle movement for a 0.1 mach speed.
To prevent the needle from going past 1.5 mach, you can clamp the needle between the zero reading (or 0.5 mach) and 1.5: clamp([equation above ^^], 0, 355)
0 is where the needle zero is and 355 is wherever 1.5 mach is.
@TheAviator77 Do not put a control surface on the structural wing if you can instead put a wing part (w/o control surface too) inside of your custom fuselage block control surface. Of course it's not a guaranteed fix, as some of the jundroo made planes only use structural wing control surfaces and fly just fine, but if you need to use control surfaces you can mess around with the size and placement and it might help.
@TheAviator77 no I mean attach a wing piece inside your custom control surface (like you already did on the elevators) whenever you can, and then don't have a control surface in the wing part for that specific control. And drag is necessary for the wing part
I don't know exactly what the problem is but it happens on some of my planes too, especially when using keyboard controls since it's less smooth. I would try to avoid using the control surfaces built in to the wing parts whenever possible. One of my builds with zero control surfaces does not have this issue at all, one with only ailerons doesn't really have a problem, and one build with only wing part control surfaces has the same problem as yours. I'm not sure if the plane you're building has flaperons, but if it doesn't, I would get rid of the wing ailerons and put a wing part in each aileron attached to the rotator.
@PX41SERUM01 if you're making a stall alarm you might want to use IAS instead of GS. So use agl altitude like you're doing already to make sure the plane is in the air and IAS < whatever value is too slow for your specific plane. If you want to be fancy you can include angle of attack as well, but in my experience PitchAngle is more accurate
@PX41SERUM01 yes but you can put funky code in group as if it were called input. I tested it and it works, so if you were to put GS >= 30 for example the detacher will activate when your ground speed reaches 30 m/s or higher
No disrespect but it looks like you just took his f-89 build without making it a successor, added two missiles, and ended up with less parts than the original. Also to second Shiny, don't be too focused on attention to your builds, as they only yield useless internet points (:
@Graingy stupid Eastern Europe and their high latitude. I guess we just use flat gray for all our planes because we have too much variation in our geography.
Poland Poland Poland Poland Poland
+1A-10
+1what is bro on about we all know 95% of anime profile pics are men
+6@LM0418 best defense against plane crash kids is to make the performance cost too high for their ipads to handle
+1woo Swiss Air ! ! !
+12000 hp stock soopra (sex speed manuel only) can gap a bugati
isn't that guy like 10 years old he probably just learned that word
@Mousewithamachinegun122 no but I have an addiction for cosmoline instead. Better smell and less particulate matter
i aint reading allat
@LunarEclipseSP yeah it's at over 8k performance cost and 1.1 MB
+2I refuse
donut
@Aviatorloke np <3 I'm sure there's a more elegant solution but I tested it and it works
A more accurate representation of the gauge in the image is
(TAS / 343) < 0.5 ? clamp((TAS / 343) * 0.5 * 6, 0, 6) : clamp((10 * (TAS / 343) * 35) - 175, 6, 356)
It puts the zero at 0 degrees, .5 at 6 degrees, and 1.5 and 356, with 35 degrees between each 0.1 mach.
There aren't a lot of options for gauge faces, so that will be the most annoying part. Based off of the image you provided, you should use the generic gauge face and nudge labels in for each number, as well as the "mach number" label. There is no mach number variable, so the best you can get to my knowledge will be (TAS / s), where s is the speed of sound in m/s, which is ~343.
The input will be something like
10 * (TAS / 343) * [number of degrees you want the needle to move per mach number increment]The 10 is there if each increment is 0.1 mach, so TAS / 343 = 0.1 mach * 10 will equal the full number of degrees of needle movement for a 0.1 mach speed.
To prevent the needle from going past 1.5 mach, you can clamp the needle between the zero reading (or 0.5 mach) and 1.5:
clamp([equation above ^^], 0, 355)0 is where the needle zero is and 355 is wherever 1.5 mach is.
Sucks we weren't able to see the full reentry, but at least they'll fly the next one in a few months
+1pontiac aztek
+1aren't we all
+1@WisconsinStatePolice but have you printed a tactical bean holder yet?
+1Osprey
+1@Mousewithamachinegun122 it might be over 1200
+1:3
@Mousewithamachinegun122 you didn't say definitely not so there's still a chance
@Mousewithamachinegun122 are you sure about that
+1@TheAviator77 Do not put a control surface on the structural wing if you can instead put a wing part (w/o control surface too) inside of your custom fuselage block control surface. Of course it's not a guaranteed fix, as some of the jundroo made planes only use structural wing control surfaces and fly just fine, but if you need to use control surfaces you can mess around with the size and placement and it might help.
@TheAviator77 no I mean attach a wing piece inside your custom control surface (like you already did on the elevators) whenever you can, and then don't have a control surface in the wing part for that specific control. And drag is necessary for the wing part
I don't know exactly what the problem is but it happens on some of my planes too, especially when using keyboard controls since it's less smooth. I would try to avoid using the control surfaces built in to the wing parts whenever possible. One of my builds with zero control surfaces does not have this issue at all, one with only ailerons doesn't really have a problem, and one build with only wing part control surfaces has the same problem as yours. I'm not sure if the plane you're building has flaperons, but if it doesn't, I would get rid of the wing ailerons and put a wing part in each aileron attached to the rotator.
save your dignity
+4glock 19 frames to share with the denizens of east st louis
1963 moment
CIA award for excellence in journalism 2024
+4You can't defeat the 10 year olds they will add detachers to your engines
+2I gave up on making a 747 because of this issue. Hope you find a solution
Very nice build. Which maps did you use for your screenshots?
hullo and welcome new guy
🍿🍿🍿
+4@PX41SERUM01 if you're making a stall alarm you might want to use IAS instead of GS. So use agl altitude like you're doing already to make sure the plane is in the air and IAS < whatever value is too slow for your specific plane. If you want to be fancy you can include angle of attack as well, but in my experience PitchAngle is more accurate
@PX41SERUM01 yes but you can put funky code in group as if it were called input. I tested it and it works, so if you were to put
GS >= 30for example the detacher will activate when your ground speed reaches 30 m/s or higherIndeed it is
bro's comment undergoing mitosis
+1@TheAviator77 that's great, but I'm just saying that when 95% of the build is someone else's you should make it a successor post
yes you can use the
+1inputpropertyYou can change the value of the
groupproperty of the detacher and put your funky code there such asGS = 30No disrespect but it looks like you just took his f-89 build without making it a successor, added two missiles, and ended up with less parts than the original. Also to second Shiny, don't be too focused on attention to your builds, as they only yield useless internet points (:
who would've seen that coming!
@Graingy stupid Eastern Europe and their high latitude. I guess we just use flat gray for all our planes because we have too much variation in our geography.
+1Ukraine 58 is my favorite, just might take a while to build
also not a female
+1@TheAviator77 just saying if you can't find one they are quite easy to make
https://www.simpleplanes.com/Videos/View/942672
water weight??
+2