@randomusername it does seem to meet the requirements. I've already given some feedback to some competitors. Just make sure description says it's an e-fan and not a jet, and have realistic performance for that.
@TheDestroyer818 there's usually not quite a lot of activity on the site during the winter. Also, I'm not posting as much as I used to. Btw, you should join a few Discord servers to more easily chat with other members of the community. You can find some in my bio.
Your entry has been rejected as its part count is below the required 150. I suggest upgrading your entry with detail you would find on the real plane (antennas, doors, canopy frame...) and posting again.
@ThePilotDude indeed, that plane matches requirements in everything but propulsion. However, if I start making exceptions, the challenge could become a complete mess.
@JediWolf that's how you pass the qualification. However, that's not how you win against a well-made 999 part entry with interior, custom control surfaces, every detail in place...
@randomusername eh, it's full of very skilled builders, and we chill. You know, discuss things like how can you build a windshield of a GA plane and whose mom is more gay...
@Bradford there's this XML guide and my simple airfoil. To connect control surfaces, optimally use hinge rotators, and set min input on flaps rotators to "0" so flaps can't extend the wrong way. Use scaled down wings inside those custom surfaces, as fuselages don't generate lift. Also, use Overload mod to take the full advantage of XML editing.
@WrightAirCo . Not link to the page containing image. Open image in the new tab and then take the link.
@Chancey21 it depends. You can buy it with a simpler instrument panel, or, as stated in description, with just half of the instrument panel. You don't need to go for $100,000 full G1000. Airframe is more expensive than Cessna 172 due to intensive use of composites, but shouldn't be much more expensive, as technologies of manufacturing composites are constantly bringing their price lower. The rest aren't expensive components, and are fairly standard among modern GA planes.
USS Beast is lacking a collider on the rear wall of the hangar deck. Elevators work great though, and sinking the USS Beast and watching it fill with water is fun :)
+1@randomusername it does seem to meet the requirements. I've already given some feedback to some competitors. Just make sure description says it's an e-fan and not a jet, and have realistic performance for that.
+1@The3Box6With0AXOnIt @randomusername no problem.
+1Thanks for the entry.
+1@Chancey21 that's still a modification. Intended purpose of Twin Otter is commercial transport.
+1@The3Box6With0AXOnIt yes, it's basically a small civilian plane.
+1You can find a link to the biggest SP Discord server in my bio. It's Builders Chat.
+1@ND40X I've seen it and commented on it. Not a winner material, but I'll accept it.
+1@BlackhattAircraft well, he did ask for it. Challenges are meant to inspire users to build things of certain kind.
+1@Deboss311 it would make it a bit complicated for me to track your entry if it is not a successor and you already have a successor entry.
+1@Chancey21 if one is a single and one a twin, you can enter both.
+1@Shippy456 no. It has to be intended for personal transport. It may be capable of aerobatics.
+1@8bitgamer33 it would realistically take at least half an hour to reach that speed.
+1@TheDestroyer818 oh. That sucks.
+1@TheDestroyer818 there's usually not quite a lot of activity on the site during the winter. Also, I'm not posting as much as I used to. Btw, you should join a few Discord servers to more easily chat with other members of the community. You can find some in my bio.
+1@TheDestroyer818 I get fewer notifications than you'd expect actually. Also, I have a lot of spare time lately.
+1Your entry has been rejected as its part count is below the required 150. I suggest upgrading your entry with detail you would find on the real plane (antennas, doors, canopy frame...) and posting again.
+1@DaKraken a number of your comments has been removed as spam.
+1@randomusername that's great.
+1@Chancey21 eh?
+1@LKAF1 is reading the description really that difficult? "Intended purpose of your design must be personal transport."
+1@ThePilotDude indeed, that plane matches requirements in everything but propulsion. However, if I start making exceptions, the challenge could become a complete mess.
+1@JediWolf that's how you pass the qualification. However, that's not how you win against a well-made 999 part entry with interior, custom control surfaces, every detail in place...
+1@Chancey21 it's a part of being a member of the community. I answered very comment I could before I was a moderator.
+1@TheDestroyer818 why not?
+1@RamboJutter for every build, of course. I have to rate every one, so why not post apl notes and results?
+1@CustomAircraftMods Hey, wait a second... You already requested that! Still waiting for one more user to request RG version :)
+1@Spacedoge12345plane no problem.
+1@Easypete you have been issued a strike for foul language and insult.
+1Your post has been removed as spam. Please use a proper tag. This doesn't seem to be a game-related announcement.
+1Thanks for the entry.
+1@randomusername eh, it's full of very skilled builders, and we chill. You know, discuss things like how can you build a windshield of a GA plane and whose mom is more gay...
+1@Kimcotupan15 sure. If you find one matching the requirements. For example, Tecnam P2006T.
+1@Bradford there's this XML guide and my simple airfoil. To connect control surfaces, optimally use hinge rotators, and set min input on flaps rotators to "0" so flaps can't extend the wrong way. Use scaled down wings inside those custom surfaces, as fuselages don't generate lift. Also, use Overload mod to take the full advantage of XML editing.
+1@switdog08 yes. It says in requirements that XML editing is encouraged.
+1@WrightAirCo . Not link to the page containing image. Open image in the new tab and then take the link.
+1It's a Dyke Delta. There is information on it online.
+1Thanks for the entry.
+1You can design your own, smaller DHC-6-like plane.
+1@PointlessWhyshouldi you should use mass editing. If you are on iOS, you can steal my parts with edited mass and drag.
+1@jamesPLANESii yeah, I could accept it. Although, a bigger plane would be better.
+1@Kimcotupan15 excellent. Just make sure it follows the requirements.
+1@switdog08 I'm not expecting many interiors on this challenge. Can't wait to see your entry. Make sure to stick to requirements.
+1@BaconAircraft thanks. Yeah, I've noticed that wings are a bit thin, bu by that time it was too late to remake them.
+1@Chancey21 it depends. You can buy it with a simpler instrument panel, or, as stated in description, with just half of the instrument panel. You don't need to go for $100,000 full G1000. Airframe is more expensive than Cessna 172 due to intensive use of composites, but shouldn't be much more expensive, as technologies of manufacturing composites are constantly bringing their price lower. The rest aren't expensive components, and are fairly standard among modern GA planes.
+1@Chancey21 price would be higher than the price of Cessna 172, but still lower than Beechcraft Bonanza.
+1@randomusername that constant is the same for all planes? If not, how is it derived?
+1@randomusername where did you find 3.17? Yeah, I'm aware that stall speed is ridiculously low.
+1@ThomasVc I'm glad you like it.
+1@flyingsteve88 @Dllama4 thanks guys.
+1