@engineerier antennas, custom landing gear and control surfaces, registration, more complex fuselage shape, intake for turbocharger, door outlines and handles, position and landing lights...
Step 1: land on USS Beast;
Step 2: taxi to the catapult to get the new USS Beast location;
Step 3: use the elevator to get to the hangar deck;
Step 4: shield yourself from destroyers. They will shoot you through the holes, including the rear where the collider is missing, but not through the hull.
@Nerfenthusiast there are catapult connector and arresting hook in game files, but they aren't implemented yet. A few of us have tried to add them to the part menu, but they just aren't there yet.
@DPSAircraftManufacturer @ThunderNova xml is allowed. Parts that would require me to use mods are not. Using jets to simulate prop is fine, but I don't see the reason to overcomplicate that much.
@ND40X there are always things to add. Real planes have thousands of parts. Check if you are lacking some antennas, play around with custom landing gear, paint scheme,...
Your entry has been rejected as it doesn't meet the required part count (150 parts). I suggestr trying again with sculpted fuselage, custom wings, details...
@JohnnyBoythePilot what part of "two to ten seats" stated in the challenge requirements is so hard to understand? Every participant so far opted for either a single seater or twenty seater.
@Zippy6 dilapidated one would probably be more difficult if you want to go all out. It would include paint chips and parts where paint and vinyls peeled off. It would also increase part count. Other than that, it's just a matter of 0.8 gloss and 0.2 gloss.
@T8flightcrafts I'll probably upload a list of inspirations tomorrow. It'll include some conventional single and twin engines, as well as some less conventional examples I'd like to see.
@Chancey21 one per category is allowed. And I don't want ultralights and race planes as I am trying to encourage people to build personal transport planes.
@Kimcotupan15 I'm glad you like it. I consider it by best mobile-friendly build. If you decide to make a small plane yourself, consider participating in my upcoming General Aviation challenge. It should be posted today or tomorrow.
Unfortunately, a notification on jet streams will stay visible even if you remove the build. However, thumbnail won't show if the build is removed. There's nothing else that can be done to make your public build inaccessible.
You'll have to wait for a dozen more years for that one. World war three is yet to happen, and we are yet to see what technologies are to be used in it. Tag "futuristic" fits builds that "would be used in WW3 if it happened in 2118".
It is a SimplePlanes-only phenomenon. Due to unbalanced drag, lift or mass, plane rolls to one side. It is actually a product of autoyaw if caused by drag.
There's more to upvote yield than posting time. You seem to be overusing X-ray on thumbnails and often only using one of possible three screenshots per build. You should try to show best features of the build with other two pictures. Custom background mods are also a good option for increasing likeability of your thumbnail.
Main gear should be further forward, half a meter (or roughly two feet) behind CoM. Other than that, very nice build for your level, as far as I can see without downloading. I'll download it tomorrow if I don't forget.
Whip antennas, VLS cells, more communication and sensory equipment (optional, you can say it's inside the superstructure), rudders and props, insignia...
@engineerier antennas, custom landing gear and control surfaces, registration, more complex fuselage shape, intake for turbocharger, door outlines and handles, position and landing lights...
+2@HistoricBirds do it. Devs should be informed of the bug so they can fix it.
+2Have you reported the bug via bug report form in the blog post?
+2Step 1: land on USS Beast;
+2Step 2: taxi to the catapult to get the new USS Beast location;
Step 3: use the elevator to get to the hangar deck;
Step 4: shield yourself from destroyers. They will shoot you through the holes, including the rear where the collider is missing, but not through the hull.
@Nerfenthusiast there are catapult connector and arresting hook in game files, but they aren't implemented yet. A few of us have tried to add them to the part menu, but they just aren't there yet.
+2@DPSAircraftManufacturer @ThunderNova xml is allowed. Parts that would require me to use mods are not. Using jets to simulate prop is fine, but I don't see the reason to overcomplicate that much.
+2@DPSAircraftManufacturer yes, but I don't see a point of that.
+2@RailfanEthan that, and "catapult attach point" for a catapult that is probably to be on USS Beast.
+2@ND40X there are always things to add. Real planes have thousands of parts. Check if you are lacking some antennas, play around with custom landing gear, paint scheme,...
+2Is this for the challenge? It ain't a successor.
+2Thanks for the entry :)
+2@Winstonlharambe I need to test entries on my laptop. Sorry.
+2Your entry has been rejected as it doesn't meet the required part count (150 parts). I suggestr trying again with sculpted fuselage, custom wings, details...
+2@ND40X that's great. I'm looking forward to your entry.
+2@JohnnyBoythePilot what part of "two to ten seats" stated in the challenge requirements is so hard to understand? Every participant so far opted for either a single seater or twenty seater.
+2@Zippy6 dilapidated one would probably be more difficult if you want to go all out. It would include paint chips and parts where paint and vinyls peeled off. It would also increase part count. Other than that, it's just a matter of 0.8 gloss and 0.2 gloss.
+2@T8flightcrafts I'll probably upload a list of inspirations tomorrow. It'll include some conventional single and twin engines, as well as some less conventional examples I'd like to see.
+2@Chancey21 a floaty biplane? Excellent choice. I was already afraid I'll get 172 Cessna 172s.
+2@BogdanX keep quiet, you'll scare away other participants. Nobody wants you as an opponent :)
+2@Chancey21 one per category is allowed. And I don't want ultralights and race planes as I am trying to encourage people to build personal transport planes.
+2@Chancey21 @Kimcotupan15 you've expressed interest in the challenge. Here it is.
+2@Kimcotupan15 I'm glad you like it. I consider it by best mobile-friendly build. If you decide to make a small plane yourself, consider participating in my upcoming General Aviation challenge. It should be posted today or tomorrow.
+2@BlackhattAircraft you've upvoted this post, and yet you keep tagging me to remove copies...
+2You should do sharp edges on elevators of that Heinkel.
+2Unfortunately, a notification on jet streams will stay visible even if you remove the build. However, thumbnail won't show if the build is removed. There's nothing else that can be done to make your public build inaccessible.
+2@RamboJutter I'm not allowed to answer that :)
+2@DemonSniper8 true that. And user posting it would be immediately permanently banned.
+2I'm more of a beer person, but thanks all the same :)
+2That's quick. It's one of the best looking engines I've seen on the site.
+2This engine looks amazing. How long did it take you to make it?
+2I've heard of real planes that were developed more quickly than this one :)
+2You'll have to wait for a dozen more years for that one. World war three is yet to happen, and we are yet to see what technologies are to be used in it. Tag "futuristic" fits builds that "would be used in WW3 if it happened in 2118".
+2@Squirrel snitches to Andrew
+2It is a SimplePlanes-only phenomenon. Due to unbalanced drag, lift or mass, plane rolls to one side. It is actually a product of autoyaw if caused by drag.
+2Now that's what I call a proper successor build / edit. Can't wait to see it done.
+2There's more to upvote yield than posting time. You seem to be overusing X-ray on thumbnails and often only using one of possible three screenshots per build. You should try to show best features of the build with other two pictures. Custom background mods are also a good option for increasing likeability of your thumbnail.
+2I-16 is already an eggplane. No need to modify it. Try Po-2. I've never seen an egg biplane.
+2Click here. I have already explained the only way to edit the gun sound without using mods.
+2@Mod here's a good chance to get back into it :)
+2Just 50 parts?! Ok, I might be able to fit inside that range, but I might also quadruple it with M.Corp coat of arms.
+2Main gear should be further forward, half a meter (or roughly two feet) behind CoM. Other than that, very nice build for your level, as far as I can see without downloading. I'll download it tomorrow if I don't forget.
+2I'm upvoting for the build quality. I still hold that real Zumwalt class is a failure.
+2Whip antennas, VLS cells, more communication and sensory equipment (optional, you can say it's inside the superstructure), rudders and props, insignia...
+2What kind of mods? Maps, parts, editor tools...?
+2SP isn't anywhere near dead. I just got 64 upvotes on a build.
+2Great job. This is one of the best flying helicopters I have used so far. Best vertical landing I have ever performed.
+2Nice plane. However, diameter of the prop is too large, forcing the upper wing to be too high.
+2JamusPlanesII
+2It seems to be Jundroo-ed Nimitz class carrier.
+2lol, you need less money to produce Po-2 than to produce a wheel for the Airbus.
+2