Sadly, @BACconcordepilot is right. Xml modding is the most effective way and IOS users don't have access to XML.
There is an easier but less powerful way to go faster: fly higher. At high altitudes (above 45,000ft), jet planes in SP go much faster but burn the same amount of fuel.
Planes stall in different ways, depending on the plane and how you're flying it. At higher altitudes, the plane will stall at lower speeds because the air is thinner, eventually the planes stall speed and top speed converge. This is called the "coffin corner" and it represents the maximum altitude of the plane in real life. In SP, this rarely happens.
Anyway, the best place to test stall speed in SP is at low altitude, around 3,000 feet. Enough room to recover, but low enough to give a good feel for landing conditions. After all, stall speed has a big effect on how you land.
So fly around 3,000 feet. LEVEL. Not nose-level (artifical horizon) but level so that the altitude stays exactly the same. Now carefully slow down. The nose should feel heavier and you'll have to pull up more and more to maintain altitude. That's ok. Keep slowing down untill you're pulling all the way up, but still holding 3,000ft. Holding her steady? Pulling all the way back on pitch? Now slow down a tiny bit more. You should start to slowly lose altitude, that's your stall speed.
Now start over and do the whole thing with your flaps out. That's your stall speed with flaps extended.
The visible wings are fake. A mixture of fuselage blocks form the leading edge, top and bottom, then fuselage inlets (flipped so so that the inlet faces backwards and is sideways, inlet angle is used to determine trailing edge sweep, open end set to zero-height) form the trailing edges of the wing, ailerons and flaps. The control surfaces are attached to hidden rotators set to the various controls (roll, vtol, etc.) and often use pistons to extend slotted flaps out from the wing.
If you are really interested in learning how to make this stuff, the best way is to find one you like and take it apart.
Looks great. I really cannot praise the looks of this plane enough, very faithful to Johnson's design. I do wish you'd put the same amount of effort into making it fly like a Starfighter, though.
@asteroidbook345 Itvis a lengthy process, and not always fair either. Replica planes get the most attention, followed by replica tanks. Cars, ships and Sci-fi builds get some attention, but not as much. Fictional aircraft struggle to get any attention at all unless they're extremely well done.
Aside from cynically "gaming" that heirarchy, the best way to win attention is to become a highly skilled modeler. I really do hope this helps.
Your attempts at getting attention are already beginning to backfire. I recommend you reevaluate your situation before you are heaped with more social setbacks. I understand you need an outlet for your feeling and that you've lost some friends but you will have to be patient, perhaps you can join additional social networks that may be more suitable to your needs.
@ChiChiWerx Nah, I just thought it would be satisfying to discuss. We aren't always permitted to voice our displeasure with other peoples posts and this seemed like a productive way to blow off some steam.
Considering the quad-50's, I'd say this is closest to where the 'G' model was in the early 90's (Operation Desert Storm). It's got the turbofans of an H model, and you included ailerons as if it were a D.
If you disabled the ailerons and smoothed out the nacelles, this would match an 80's G-model perfectly.
All that aside, this thing looks very, very good. You clearly spent a lot of time getting the looks just right, especially the wing and the spoilers. Very impressive work.
@PhantomBladeCorp I'm not prepared for a literary debate regarding the methods of constructing a decent analogy. But your line of reasoning is sound, in my opinion. I think a cooldown timer of an hour or two could help.
@PhantomBladeCorp Thank you for your further participation in the ongoing discussion! While a two letter response was more than enough, your robust explanation gives all of us a better glimpse into your processes and motivations.
I must point out that it is possible to have common sense and disagree with you at the same time, however impossible that may seem to you. For instance, common sense reveals that your insultingly simplistic analogy regarding thoughtcrime has little bearing in reality (how could one quantify thought, much less prevent it from occurring?). This becomes excessively glaring when considering that people can continue to make comments, private posts and up to 3 uploads per day.
However, the gist of your argument is pristinely clear. Limiting posts to once per day would be unreasonablly draconian. And on that point you may be correct.
@Tully2001 I do not want to see less participation. It's important to make the place welcome. But I think it will encourage better posting. People will have to consider "Is this worth mentioning?" before they punch the button.
@randomusername @CSP27 Three is too many. With three, only a handful of users could completely wipe the front page clean of posts, subjecting everyone else to much less attention.
Make moving parts last. If it has a rotator, piston or detacher then add it after everything else is finished. You are wasting time if you do it sooner because you'll just end up having to do it again later.
Sadly, @BACconcordepilot is right. Xml modding is the most effective way and IOS users don't have access to XML.
There is an easier but less powerful way to go faster: fly higher. At high altitudes (above 45,000ft), jet planes in SP go much faster but burn the same amount of fuel.
Try disabling all your mods, restarting the game, then re-enabling the mods. I know that sounds cliche, but I think I recall it working.
Planes stall in different ways, depending on the plane and how you're flying it. At higher altitudes, the plane will stall at lower speeds because the air is thinner, eventually the planes stall speed and top speed converge. This is called the "coffin corner" and it represents the maximum altitude of the plane in real life. In SP, this rarely happens.
Anyway, the best place to test stall speed in SP is at low altitude, around 3,000 feet. Enough room to recover, but low enough to give a good feel for landing conditions. After all, stall speed has a big effect on how you land.
So fly around 3,000 feet. LEVEL. Not nose-level (artifical horizon) but level so that the altitude stays exactly the same. Now carefully slow down. The nose should feel heavier and you'll have to pull up more and more to maintain altitude. That's ok. Keep slowing down untill you're pulling all the way up, but still holding 3,000ft. Holding her steady? Pulling all the way back on pitch? Now slow down a tiny bit more. You should start to slowly lose altitude, that's your stall speed.
Now start over and do the whole thing with your flaps out. That's your stall speed with flaps extended.
The visible wings are fake. A mixture of fuselage blocks form the leading edge, top and bottom, then fuselage inlets (flipped so so that the inlet faces backwards and is sideways, inlet angle is used to determine trailing edge sweep, open end set to zero-height) form the trailing edges of the wing, ailerons and flaps. The control surfaces are attached to hidden rotators set to the various controls (roll, vtol, etc.) and often use pistons to extend slotted flaps out from the wing.
If you are really interested in learning how to make this stuff, the best way is to find one you like and take it apart.
Looks great. I really cannot praise the looks of this plane enough, very faithful to Johnson's design. I do wish you'd put the same amount of effort into making it fly like a Starfighter, though.
Do a Thunderchief. Not nearly enough of those. Besides, it was the most successful of the "Century Series" planes.
OV-1
Reminds me of a Lavochkin La-7
@asteroidbook345 I am here to help if you want it. Also, you can and should tear apart highly rated builds to learn how they were made.
@asteroidbook345 Itvis a lengthy process, and not always fair either. Replica planes get the most attention, followed by replica tanks. Cars, ships and Sci-fi builds get some attention, but not as much. Fictional aircraft struggle to get any attention at all unless they're extremely well done.
Aside from cynically "gaming" that heirarchy, the best way to win attention is to become a highly skilled modeler. I really do hope this helps.
+3@Rodrigo110 Link me to it.
Improve.
+1Plane is fat, but strong. Like bull.
+1Pros
Good attention to detail
Impressive interior
Cons
Can't fly
3/5
Further comments: Y U NO MAEK ARPLAEN?
Your attempts at getting attention are already beginning to backfire. I recommend you reevaluate your situation before you are heaped with more social setbacks. I understand you need an outlet for your feeling and that you've lost some friends but you will have to be patient, perhaps you can join additional social networks that may be more suitable to your needs.
+7Congratulations on saving your computer and on being a PC user in the first place.
Belt fed isn't it? Should fire non stop until ammo runs out.
OFF TOPIC
+3Just slap the default gyro on it.
+4Another great list! You should add the Tupolev Blinder to one of these.
@RamboJutter I cannot comment on these allegations.
+1@ChiChiWerx Nah, I just thought it would be satisfying to discuss. We aren't always permitted to voice our displeasure with other peoples posts and this seemed like a productive way to blow off some steam.
Considering the quad-50's, I'd say this is closest to where the 'G' model was in the early 90's (Operation Desert Storm). It's got the turbofans of an H model, and you included ailerons as if it were a D.
If you disabled the ailerons and smoothed out the nacelles, this would match an 80's G-model perfectly.
All that aside, this thing looks very, very good. You clearly spent a lot of time getting the looks just right, especially the wing and the spoilers. Very impressive work.
+1@ChiChiWerx How about a cooldown of a couple hours?
@tsampoy Pssst, don't give away your next build.
No wings, landing gear too short. No visible means of propulsion. Questionable weight distribution. Good detail. 2/5
+3@PhantomBladeCorp I'm not prepared for a literary debate regarding the methods of constructing a decent analogy. But your line of reasoning is sound, in my opinion. I think a cooldown timer of an hour or two could help.
@PhantomBladeCorp Thank you for your further participation in the ongoing discussion! While a two letter response was more than enough, your robust explanation gives all of us a better glimpse into your processes and motivations.
I must point out that it is possible to have common sense and disagree with you at the same time, however impossible that may seem to you. For instance, common sense reveals that your insultingly simplistic analogy regarding thoughtcrime has little bearing in reality (how could one quantify thought, much less prevent it from occurring?). This becomes excessively glaring when considering that people can continue to make comments, private posts and up to 3 uploads per day.
However, the gist of your argument is pristinely clear. Limiting posts to once per day would be unreasonablly draconian. And on that point you may be correct.
@tsampoy Have faith, brother.
@tsampoy The Great One is always building. He shall return.
@Tully2001 I do not want to see less participation. It's important to make the place welcome. But I think it will encourage better posting. People will have to consider "Is this worth mentioning?" before they punch the button.
+1@tsampoy Lies!
@Jetpackturtle Well said!
+2@GeneralOliverVonBismarck "with testing I have found the post limit"
No surprise there. Was it necessary to post all that crap in 4 separate comments?
+4Look for other planes with colors you like, download it, check out the hex-value.
@tsampoy
HERESY!
Just because you aren't platinum doesn't mean Zhou was ever not.
@jamesPLANESii Sensible.
She's pretty
LIES! Zhou was always platinum.
@StallFlight Unlisted posts aren't an issue and aren't affected by this.
@randomusername @CSP27 Maybe a 12 hour cooldown? That would be 2 per day.
@PhantomBladeCorp Would you care to elaborate? A simple "no" is fine, but an explanation might be more convincing.
@randomusername @CSP27 Three is too many. With three, only a handful of users could completely wipe the front page clean of posts, subjecting everyone else to much less attention.
Make moving parts last. If it has a rotator, piston or detacher then add it after everything else is finished. You are wasting time if you do it sooner because you'll just end up having to do it again later.
+2Literally no one cares.
+1Listen to @RailfanEthan
He is wise in all things, except stuff that isn't trains
+1@RailfanEthan Troof
Absolutely beautiful, but I wish you had made working ailerons. Seeing moving parts poke out of the wings makes me cringe every time.
Can't people just see that from your "posts" list?