We do not care what a user is doing off the site. The person in question can join just like anyone else, but must uphold the rules of this community, including "No sexually suggestive content or foul language". Same applies for SP-related Discord servers that I am moderating.
I'm focusing on part count reduction, so I have sacrificed detachers and and base rings you have on your launchers, reducing part count by 16. I'm trying to make some highly functional builds that even people on low end devices will be able to use.
I have made a simplified ripoff of this system for my upcoming IFV. Mine doesn't use detachers. You simply launch rockets with very short delay. You'll still get credit for the idea. Also, these are fun to use near bridges and wind turbines.
@FENRIRpapapa no problem. However, I was expecting a lot more from this build. Simple builds like this one usually have good performance, but this one doesn't. You have too much drag, forcing you to use way too much power for achieving realistic top speed. That means you have extreme acceleration and climb rate, unrealistic for a plane like this. Also, it pitches down even at full speed and takeoff speed is too high. To fix these issues, I advise reducing drag a lot, reducing engine power to get the same max speed, and moving CoM back by removing mass from the front (adding mass in the back would further increase takeoff speed).
F-16 has a very complex shape. It can't even be done right with sculpting (overlapping fuselage blocks). You'd need paneling, which would probably be too much to expect from the first build. I suggest trying a more builder-friendly design, like a jet trainer or an attacker. Those tend to have easier shapes and more obvious proportions. If you are on PC or Android, I suggest looking up Fine Tuner and Overload on the "Mods" page, as those are very helpful while building. They are second and third highest rated, I think.
@ThomasRoderick cruise missiles range from around 500kg to around 7500kg in mass, 800km/h to 5500km/h, and are generally very soft targets. However, you usually need a decent-size fragmentation warhead for them to increase chances of hitting.
@SledDriver @Tully2001 @spefyjerbf rules of the site state "Please, just be courteous.". Currently, all three of you are breaking that rule. Move this conversation to Discord or some other platform. You are all respected members of this community and it would be stupid if I had to issue you strikes.
@ChisP sorry I haven't replied on unlisted. I was busy and forgot later. F-16 has all-moving horizontal stabilizers that control both pitch and roll. Also, wheels are too small, and trailing edges look cheap.
@ArcturusAerospace @randomusername click here for picture.
Attach custom body to the back of the detacher. For best effect, use fuselage blocks with no drag, mass, and collisions for custom body, and don't put any actual wing pieces on it. Attach the stock missile that you want to use to the big side of the detacher, nudge everything together, and attach to the plane via small side of the detacher. You can also mod the missile for better/different performance by using these inputs that work in Overload.
@jamesPLANESii all of your heavy components (engine, shaft, gesrs, probably tank) are behind or exactly at CoL. I've tried hard to be fair to everyone. I do like your build, and it's really good, but there are better ones and I had to adjust my rating scale in every area to cover the best possible as 10 and worst as 0. Also, these are short reviews, and I didn't state everything I like and dislike about every build, just what I found to be the most mention worthy.
You need to remove "s" from "https" when using Imgur as a host. Otherwise, only you can see your pictures, and only while you're logged into Imgur. I fixed it for you here.
Finally, an option to stop the rotor shake. This will be very useful in designs using helicopter rotors for things other than helicopters, like ground effect vehicles and hovercraft.
I suggest using this in combination with this and this. It'll let you do wonders (including accurate rotation and positioning and very advanced things normally impossible with stock parts.
Barrel has incredibly thin walls. It wouldn't endure a single shot. Edit the inlet thickness. Also, what's with the headlights on the frame? Other than that, it looks nice.
No problem. It's a great replica. I like how you used different deflections of elevator segments to simulate wing warping. Performance seem to be spot on.
You can tag people in a comment to send them notification. If the build is a joint project, you should keep your plane a successor to their unlisted version.
@enzoBoeing757 what problem exactly do you have with challenges ending on your birthday?
+2We do not care what a user is doing off the site. The person in question can join just like anyone else, but must uphold the rules of this community, including "No sexually suggestive content or foul language". Same applies for SP-related Discord servers that I am moderating.
+2No problem. Very interesting design.
+2I'm focusing on part count reduction, so I have sacrificed detachers and and base rings you have on your launchers, reducing part count by 16. I'm trying to make some highly functional builds that even people on low end devices will be able to use.
+2I have made a simplified ripoff of this system for my upcoming IFV. Mine doesn't use detachers. You simply launch rockets with very short delay. You'll still get credit for the idea. Also, these are fun to use near bridges and wind turbines.
+2That's huge, Đorđe.
+2@HellFireKoder you're a dev. Just put it in the next update.
+2I love the moment when the drone blew up. Best SP video I've ever seen.
+2First time I'm seeing a deep V to shallow V hull better than on my river class. Good job.
+2@FENRIRpapapa no problem. However, I was expecting a lot more from this build. Simple builds like this one usually have good performance, but this one doesn't. You have too much drag, forcing you to use way too much power for achieving realistic top speed. That means you have extreme acceleration and climb rate, unrealistic for a plane like this. Also, it pitches down even at full speed and takeoff speed is too high. To fix these issues, I advise reducing drag a lot, reducing engine power to get the same max speed, and moving CoM back by removing mass from the front (adding mass in the back would further increase takeoff speed).
+2@MailboxIsMyGender aww, thanks :)
+2@ThomasRoderick thanks for the entry.
+2@Notaleopard some old moderators decided they don't want to moderate anymore, as they no longer have the time for SP.
+2@Pietro I'm glad you do.
+2@ForeverPie I'll inform Andrew.
+2F-16 has a very complex shape. It can't even be done right with sculpting (overlapping fuselage blocks). You'd need paneling, which would probably be too much to expect from the first build. I suggest trying a more builder-friendly design, like a jet trainer or an attacker. Those tend to have easier shapes and more obvious proportions. If you are on PC or Android, I suggest looking up Fine Tuner and Overload on the "Mods" page, as those are very helpful while building. They are second and third highest rated, I think.
+2Very nice build. Clean, enough details, and well performing.
+2@xGeneralFischx no post gets removed for no reason. This site has rules. If the post is against the rules, it gets removed.
+2@ThomasRoderick cruise missiles range from around 500kg to around 7500kg in mass, 800km/h to 5500km/h, and are generally very soft targets. However, you usually need a decent-size fragmentation warhead for them to increase chances of hitting.
+2@ThomasRoderick thanks for the praise.
+2@MTakach yeah, I'd say I'm pretty good with ships.
@Shippy456 one goes to the entry. The rest are up to you, but must be your builds. You can't transfer them to other users.
+2@SledDriver @Tully2001 @spefyjerbf rules of the site state "Please, just be courteous.". Currently, all three of you are breaking that rule. Move this conversation to Discord or some other platform. You are all respected members of this community and it would be stupid if I had to issue you strikes.
+2Impressive. Great performance, very clean look. Everything I love about plane.
+2I am hoping to see cleaner wings than on your previous builds. I suggest using this simple technique for that.
+2@ChisP sure does look better than the previous one. Hopefully, next one will be even better. For good trailing edges, click here.
+2@ChisP sorry I haven't replied on unlisted. I was busy and forgot later. F-16 has all-moving horizontal stabilizers that control both pitch and roll. Also, wheels are too small, and trailing edges look cheap.
+2@ArcturusAerospace @randomusername click here for picture.
+2Attach custom body to the back of the detacher. For best effect, use fuselage blocks with no drag, mass, and collisions for custom body, and don't put any actual wing pieces on it. Attach the stock missile that you want to use to the big side of the detacher, nudge everything together, and attach to the plane via small side of the detacher. You can also mod the missile for better/different performance by using these inputs that work in Overload.
@jamesPLANESii all of your heavy components (engine, shaft, gesrs, probably tank) are behind or exactly at CoL. I've tried hard to be fair to everyone. I do like your build, and it's really good, but there are better ones and I had to adjust my rating scale in every area to cover the best possible as 10 and worst as 0. Also, these are short reviews, and I didn't state everything I like and dislike about every build, just what I found to be the most mention worthy.
+2@Chancey21 @Zippy6 @BRuthless congrats, you won.
+2You need to remove "s" from "https" when using Imgur as a host. Otherwise, only you can see your pictures, and only while you're logged into Imgur. I fixed it for you here.
+2@DankDorito you build a ship first, then worry about buoyancy. Otherwise, you might exceed planned mass, have different CoM location...
+2Finally, an option to stop the rotor shake. This will be very useful in designs using helicopter rotors for things other than helicopters, like ground effect vehicles and hovercraft.
+2No problem, @Sgtk .
+2@Sgtk no problem. It is not often that I see Fouga Magister. Very rare bird.
+2Results will be delayed as site glitch also deleted most of the ratings. Expect them sometime next week.
+2First again XD
+2@aerodummy it does have a gyro to make flying easier, but it is very weak and you can fly without it with a bit of experience.
+2@Vidal99977 @grizzlitn @Chancey21 thanks guys.
+2I suggest using this in combination with this and this. It'll let you do wonders (including accurate rotation and positioning and very advanced things normally impossible with stock parts.
+2@Notaleopard here.
+2Will this help?
+2@Chancey21 ok, deadline extended.
+2Barrel has incredibly thin walls. It wouldn't endure a single shot. Edit the inlet thickness. Also, what's with the headlights on the frame? Other than that, it looks nice.
+2No problem. It's a great replica. I like how you used different deflections of elevator segments to simulate wing warping. Performance seem to be spot on.
+2There is a new location on USS Beast. Taxi to the catapult to discover it.
+2Thanks for the entry.
+2Bad image. Doesn't have Utva/Jugoimport Pegaz :(
+2Will it have the ability to turn on the spot now? Previous one only had turning with brakes I think.
+2You can tag people in a comment to send them notification. If the build is a joint project, you should keep your plane a successor to their unlisted version.
+2@ThunderNova oh. I'll comment a link to it on the challenge so I don't miss it while judging :)
+2