@UnknownPTR there's no radio signals to jam or intercept on SP. Mechanically, the build functions. Antenna lifts and turns, vehicle drives, but it can't do electronic warfare since there's no electronic warfare to be done.
We have all learned by observing how others build. However, if you lack the skill to make something yourself even after observing how someone else did it, and you decide to use another person's work to enhance your own, you have to give credit.
While there is no profit to be made here, and nobody is going to sue anybody over a stolen subassembly, it is customary to at least credit the owner of the intellectual property you are using.
Back when I was a moderator, I have removed countless builds over a failure to give credit, so you may as well consider it a law in this community.
@Zhixunlin23 it never did that for me, though I think I know what might be causing it for you. I have uploaded the corrections, so it shouldn't do that if you download it again.
Please report if it does so I can try other fixes.
@DARZAVIATION I know for a fact that this has been reported, since that's how this post came to my attention, so I advise removing that upvote before the mods see it. Other than that, this is a very nice paint scheme.
@MAPA thanks. History must have been at least as difficult to get right as was the build itself. Literally months of studying every bit of information available on these, including a visit to the SMS Bodrog / Sava, which is still afloat in Belgrade.
@Mousewithamachinegun122 eh, it's just kids. You can't expect kids to be rational. I'm on pretty good terms now, years later, with the very worst of them.
Former moderator here.
Being a moderator sort of kills the pleasure of the game and the community, as you are forced to interact with its least bright elements. Not to mention that moderators are often people who have been in this community for years already, and are somewhat tired of it. So yeah, most of their comments will be stock comments.
As for moderators wasting hours of their time, I don't think they do. Back in my day, we did, but now I'm seeing serious offenses and dramas being ignored for days, so I'd say there's not a lot of time being spent on it.
Either way, they are spending their spare time, unpaid, to try to keep this site somewhat clean. Just say "thanks" and quit whining.
@LJh1 @Graingy trouble is that you guys don't know what to look for. A build that has had effort invested into it will have effort invested into description as well. There will also be some imperfections typical of inexperienced builders. It's difficult to explain, but when you have been here for as long as I have, you can see a copy from a mile away 9/10 times.
Oh, and I also follow most of the builders whose builds usually get copied by noobs, so I tend to get a familiar feeling when I see a copy.
@LJh1 I disagree. A low ranking user with a good build that is not based on an existing one usually grows quickly.
@Hafidz333 try spending some time to make builds that can compete with the best. And not by just editing existing builds. Learn how it's done and make something actually good. Builds that score well generally look like real planes, have very realistic performance, interesting features, innovative techniques... You have blocky planes and edits of other people's builds. If you're aiming for upvotes, frankly, the only advice I can give is "git gud".
Sincerely, someone who reached platinum less than three months after making an account.
It's perfect now (:
By the way, mentioning people in description won't send them a notification and will not be a clickable link. To make a clickable link, write [text] (URL of the page).
It looks a lot better with more opacity on the wings. One thing I've noticed though is that you're not using smoothing. The fuselage is quite smooth on the real thing. You also have two major issues. The roundel on the left wing falls off, and both elevators are moving in the same direction, not opposing each other.
Very nice build, though it has a few minor issues. Cameras all auto-center, which makes looking at the levers you want to operate nearly impossible on PC. I'd also recommend using a button to open the door instead of a lever.
The plane rolls to the right due to CoM being offset to the right. Fixing CoM might actually have adverse effect though, as drag is also off-center. I'd suggest building without drag on all parts, and then adding drag to only one or to large parts on the centerline to avoid that problem on future builds. Also, trim does almost nothing. Trim authority should be somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 of the pitch authority.
On the positive note, the build is beautifully sculpted, smooth, everything works, wings are very nice... Overall, I enjoyed flying it.
Why don't you just post unfinished version as unlisted? You are spamming my jet stream, and jet streams of everyone who's following you by posting everything as public.
As per the rules of this website, "It is okay to download someone else's airplane, make some tweaks, and re-upload a new variation.
However, if your variation does not offer any improvements over the existing airplane, then it may be removed.
If you are circumventing the predecessor/successor system, then you will be banned. Never upload a successor as an original design; give credit to the designer of its predecessor."
Why not make it maneuverable? These things were quite maneuverable. You just need a large vertical wing near CoM to provide directional stability, another one in the tail, and some actual control surfaces. Also, it should be steerable on the pitch axis via both ballast trimming and elevators.
Really nice build for its part count. Cockpit could have been a bit more realistic, but it's usable. Maybe a bit more opacity on the wings. Performance are close to how I'd expect the real thing to fly.
By the way, you have a typo in the description. It says "WWII".
While this certainly is a nice build, randomly tagging people isn't a ay to get any respect and recognition in this community. It's spammy, and, per the rules, it falls under begging for upvotes. Please don't do it again.
This is actually really well done for such a low part count. I love it.
+2You're not allowed to have a gun on the medivac variant. If it has a gun, the enemy is allowed to shoot at it.
@WinsWings Thank you, and thanks for the spotlight.
+1@1link598 sure, take what you need.
@1link598 sure, you got them.
@UnknownPTR there's no radio signals to jam or intercept on SP. Mechanically, the build functions. Antenna lifts and turns, vehicle drives, but it can't do electronic warfare since there's no electronic warfare to be done.
@ThomasRoderick eh?
@GabrielFangster70 you're welcome (:
@1link598 no you don't, the radar's not working XD
+1@1link598 nope
Lovely bird, RJ. Cool concept. I really like the central elevator.
We have all learned by observing how others build. However, if you lack the skill to make something yourself even after observing how someone else did it, and you decide to use another person's work to enhance your own, you have to give credit.
+6While there is no profit to be made here, and nobody is going to sue anybody over a stolen subassembly, it is customary to at least credit the owner of the intellectual property you are using.
Back when I was a moderator, I have removed countless builds over a failure to give credit, so you may as well consider it a law in this community.
@Zhixunlin23 it never did that for me, though I think I know what might be causing it for you. I have uploaded the corrections, so it shouldn't do that if you download it again.
+1Please report if it does so I can try other fixes.
@ToeTips it's good to be back (:
+1@DARZAVIATION I know for a fact that this has been reported, since that's how this post came to my attention, so I advise removing that upvote before the mods see it. Other than that, this is a very nice paint scheme.
+1@DARZAVIATION upvoting your alts is against the rules and could get both your main and alt account permabanned.
+1@VietnameseGuysWithTheAK just be sure to verify when you join. We have a manual verification system to prevent spam bots and impersonators.
If you need help with shipbuilding, PortSP Discord server is a place for you. We are a SimplePlanes server dedicated to making boats.
+1@ThomasRoderick thank you. I was never truly gone, I was checking the site and Discord a few times a day, but yeah, I wasn't posting for a while (:
+1@TheMouse lol enjoy. I hope it won't cause you too much lag.
+1@Yourlocalhuman I'll tell you if you tell me what "ahh" stands for. I've been seeing that around a lot lately, and it's starting to annoy me.
@Rjenteissussy @Eeoo here's how.
+1@MAPA thanks. History must have been at least as difficult to get right as was the build itself. Literally months of studying every bit of information available on these, including a visit to the SMS Bodrog / Sava, which is still afloat in Belgrade.
+1Your upload seems to have failed. I cannot download the build on either of my devices.
@SuperSuperTheSylph Stara Pazova. Ti?
+1Nije loše. Baš sam danas video par Orlova kod Batajnice.
+1@laSoul there is a whole Discord server dedicated to helping people with that. You can find it in the pinned forum post. FT Lab.
+2@laSoul I can't take this apart now to see how you did the hover, but it can already be done with Funky Trees.
It's good to see you back. It's been a while. Very nice build.
If you think it should be VR verified, add VR tag. Then it's curator's job to verify it.
+2Amazing build, and great presentation. I really dig the poster. Good work.
+2@Mousewithamachinegun122 eh, it's just kids. You can't expect kids to be rational. I'm on pretty good terms now, years later, with the very worst of them.
+1@Mousewithamachinegun122 fun stuff. Believe it or not, if you're doing it right, you get litteral death threats XD
+2Former moderator here.
+7Being a moderator sort of kills the pleasure of the game and the community, as you are forced to interact with its least bright elements. Not to mention that moderators are often people who have been in this community for years already, and are somewhat tired of it. So yeah, most of their comments will be stock comments.
As for moderators wasting hours of their time, I don't think they do. Back in my day, we did, but now I'm seeing serious offenses and dramas being ignored for days, so I'd say there's not a lot of time being spent on it.
Either way, they are spending their spare time, unpaid, to try to keep this site somewhat clean. Just say "thanks" and quit whining.
@LJh1 @Graingy trouble is that you guys don't know what to look for. A build that has had effort invested into it will have effort invested into description as well. There will also be some imperfections typical of inexperienced builders. It's difficult to explain, but when you have been here for as long as I have, you can see a copy from a mile away 9/10 times.
+4Oh, and I also follow most of the builders whose builds usually get copied by noobs, so I tend to get a familiar feeling when I see a copy.
@LJh1 I disagree. A low ranking user with a good build that is not based on an existing one usually grows quickly.
+2@Hafidz333 try spending some time to make builds that can compete with the best. And not by just editing existing builds. Learn how it's done and make something actually good. Builds that score well generally look like real planes, have very realistic performance, interesting features, innovative techniques... You have blocky planes and edits of other people's builds. If you're aiming for upvotes, frankly, the only advice I can give is "git gud".
Sincerely, someone who reached platinum less than three months after making an account.
It's perfect now (:
+1By the way, mentioning people in description won't send them a notification and will not be a clickable link. To make a clickable link, write [text] (URL of the page).
It looks a lot better with more opacity on the wings. One thing I've noticed though is that you're not using smoothing. The fuselage is quite smooth on the real thing. You also have two major issues. The roundel on the left wing falls off, and both elevators are moving in the same direction, not opposing each other.
Why not add Malyutka missiles? Our gazelles are compatible with Malyutka missiles. Also, with Kornet missiles now after the modernization.
+2Very nice build, though it has a few minor issues. Cameras all auto-center, which makes looking at the levers you want to operate nearly impossible on PC. I'd also recommend using a button to open the door instead of a lever.
The plane rolls to the right due to CoM being offset to the right. Fixing CoM might actually have adverse effect though, as drag is also off-center. I'd suggest building without drag on all parts, and then adding drag to only one or to large parts on the centerline to avoid that problem on future builds. Also, trim does almost nothing. Trim authority should be somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 of the pitch authority.
On the positive note, the build is beautifully sculpted, smooth, everything works, wings are very nice... Overall, I enjoyed flying it.
+2Why don't you just post unfinished version as unlisted? You are spamming my jet stream, and jet streams of everyone who's following you by posting everything as public.
As per the rules of this website, "It is okay to download someone else's airplane, make some tweaks, and re-upload a new variation.
However, if your variation does not offer any improvements over the existing airplane, then it may be removed.
If you are circumventing the predecessor/successor system, then you will be banned. Never upload a successor as an original design; give credit to the designer of its predecessor."
@Monarchii oh, I didn't know it's for that challenge. Still, could have used gyro for better turning. Good work on the PID controller though.
+1Why not make it maneuverable? These things were quite maneuverable. You just need a large vertical wing near CoM to provide directional stability, another one in the tail, and some actual control surfaces. Also, it should be steerable on the pitch axis via both ballast trimming and elevators.
+1Another chubby little RJ marvel. Very fun build. Good work mate.
+2It's missing the star of David and a few other notable symbols, but it's interesting nonetheless.
+2If you're taking build suggestions, I'd like to see Vickers F.B.9 in your style.
+1Really nice build for its part count. Cockpit could have been a bit more realistic, but it's usable. Maybe a bit more opacity on the wings. Performance are close to how I'd expect the real thing to fly.
+3By the way, you have a typo in the description. It says "WWII".
@ccc12345 no worries, and no need to apologize. Just don't do it again, and everything is fine.
+1While this certainly is a nice build, randomly tagging people isn't a ay to get any respect and recognition in this community. It's spammy, and, per the rules, it falls under begging for upvotes. Please don't do it again.