@randomusername The sea monster is immortal. Be thankful it is not the Great Sleeper, for his awakening would herald the undoing of all you know. Humanity, the Earth, even reality itself would unravel like digesting meat in the belly of a great beast.
@KerlonceauxIndustries SR is the best maker on this site. The F-104 was the most innovative plane on earth when they built it, but Lockheed was corrupt and bribed officials to buy Starfighters for roles it wasn't designed for. The Germans alone lost 115 officers to accidents. Overall, one out of every 3 F-104's built was destroyed in an accident.
@Dimkal I've developed a pretty effective extreme range camera guided missile as a stand-in for an air-launched anti ship cruise missile. The problem is that it requires slow motion to make final adjustments just before impact. Is this acceptable or would you prefer I just use modified fire-and-forget cleavers instead?
By your criteria, some of the most iconic maritime patrollers would be disqualified. The Martin PB6-M Marlin and even the first half of all PBY Catalinas lacked retractable landing gear. Almost all WW2 patrol bombers and even many post war designs sported guns and even cannons.
Are these rules in place to emphasize aircraft that are currently in service? Or just quality concerns?
@RailfanEthan That is an excellent film, I wish more movies were about portraying things as they actually happened instead of Michael Bay idiocy people flock to.
Supersonic wings are tricky. When you're just cruising below the speed of sound it's almost like it's a separate set of rules than when you break the sound barrier.
One of the earliest solutions was the delta wing. A big, symmetric wing that gave no lift at all in level flight, but could give adjustable amounts of lift depending on trim settings.
In other words, if you set the main wings to "symmetric" and the elevators to "trimmable" you can make a plane that flies perfectly level at almost any speed as long as you set the trim properly.
@RamboJutter You always go a little further to recreate something. Not just detail, but details that make that plane unique. Plus, you do really great camo.
Are you making these planes because you like making them, or because you like upvotes?
You've been making extremely similar planes for over a year now, stretching the nose here, adding a new feature there. Nothing is wrong with that, one of my favorite builders only makes one plane, over and over again. But if you keep making the same thing, you can't expect people to stay interested.
Your planes are not bad. They work pretty good, and you've developed a style. If you want to continue doing that, great! But bear in mind that you are doing that for you, not for your audience.
If you want to get more upvotes, take a look at the work people put in to get them. Check out the "highest rated" for a month or a year. It's a lot of work, and you may prefer to stick with things as they are rather than change everything to impress people you will never meet.
@JangoTheMango Most of the time. There are sad examples of quality overlooked and lazy builders getting more than their share. But mostly it evens out.
@denialofservice Hmmmm, an anonymous system by which players can see how popular their creations are? You mean like the download count? We have that.
If unregistered users could vote on stuff, the mods couldn't do anything about it, by definition.
I've said my piece about this. Run some google searches, this isn't the first time somebody's had a wave of inspiration about this stuff. The best way to get upvotes is to step up your game.
@denialofservice Anonymous voting would lead to abuse, even without it, people have tried to abuse the voting system. As for the rest of the site, there are already plenty of ways for people to see what has been made.
@Solarisaircraft Most players have never posted planes. Ever look at the number of downloads vs number of upvotes? It's not uncommon for a plane with 90 votes to get over 4,000 downloads. The vast majority of players do not create accounts on the website and never upload.
Between the spotlight system and mods featuring 3 builds on the front page, I'd say this sort of thing is covered. People can be surprisingly apathetic about certain kinds of creations, it's messed up but you can't force them to upvote stuff. Sci-fi and non-aircraft builds are a bit harder to score a hit, but tge good ones do make it to the front page.
New players tend to get upvotes if they put time and energy into something. If I see a bronze, paper or silver player who built something that looks remotely realistic or interesting, I give an upvote and so do most other experienced players. The people who get left out are usually gold and platinum builders that never bothered to improve their skills. It might be easier to get attention with a platinum tag, but if you lack the skill to back it up, people are less forgiving.
@EternalDarkness It wasn't as successful as the trainer challenge, but that one was close to best-ever. Anyway, I'm sure there's more to come. I got some ideas.
Regardless of the turnout, your challenge did inspire quite a few good vehicles and brought some attention to the under-appreciated armor builders of the SP community.
You can tear the landing gear off of one of my planes if you want. You'll probably need to reshape it to fit yours, but it shouldn't be too much trouble.
@Minecraftpoweer It might help him, I only mentioned it because I was never sure untill a few weeks ago, and figured you'd like to know. You seem more interested in the physics of this game than most people.
@Ethological It would be wise to fear The Great Old Ones. That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die.
@randomusername The sea monster is immortal. Be thankful it is not the Great Sleeper, for his awakening would herald the undoing of all you know. Humanity, the Earth, even reality itself would unravel like digesting meat in the belly of a great beast.
+3@KerlonceauxIndustries SR is the best maker on this site. The F-104 was the most innovative plane on earth when they built it, but Lockheed was corrupt and bribed officials to buy Starfighters for roles it wasn't designed for. The Germans alone lost 115 officers to accidents. Overall, one out of every 3 F-104's built was destroyed in an accident.
+1@BoeyingOfficial Steal some landing gear off of one of my planes if you want to make stuff that can go through your fuselage. Also, nice work.
Use closed air inlets for control surfaces, the "inlet angle" allows you to countour the trailing edge to the shape of the wing.
+1K, bye.
@Awsomur He is not the true Great Old One who sleepeth in R'leyh!
Does it have a "based on" tag? Because those often hurt upvotes.
70's Italian concept cars are very flat, few curves. Lots of wedges and wannabe countaches.
+1@KerlonceauxIndustries It's like they said in Germany: the cheapest way to get a 104 is to buy a few acres of countryside and wait for one to crash.
@Dimkal I've developed a pretty effective extreme range camera guided missile as a stand-in for an air-launched anti ship cruise missile. The problem is that it requires slow motion to make final adjustments just before impact. Is this acceptable or would you prefer I just use modified fire-and-forget cleavers instead?
@KidKromosone Just for you a video featuring europop and one of the coolest J-cars of all time: the MR2.
+1Europop? That thing looks Japanese to me.
Use a vertical stabilizer along the length centerline of the underside of the boat to prevent sideslip.
@Stellarlabs Do you have an example I could look at? Or a place where it's explained?
@CRJ900Pilot It works great! Now if only we could improve how it looks.
@Wargamerstev63 keep up the good work!
@Dimkal Understood, thanks!
+1By your criteria, some of the most iconic maritime patrollers would be disqualified. The Martin PB6-M Marlin and even the first half of all PBY Catalinas lacked retractable landing gear. Almost all WW2 patrol bombers and even many post war designs sported guns and even cannons.
Are these rules in place to emphasize aircraft that are currently in service? Or just quality concerns?
+4@RailfanEthan That is an excellent film, I wish more movies were about portraying things as they actually happened instead of Michael Bay idiocy people flock to.
Supersonic wings are tricky. When you're just cruising below the speed of sound it's almost like it's a separate set of rules than when you break the sound barrier.
One of the earliest solutions was the delta wing. A big, symmetric wing that gave no lift at all in level flight, but could give adjustable amounts of lift depending on trim settings.
In other words, if you set the main wings to "symmetric" and the elevators to "trimmable" you can make a plane that flies perfectly level at almost any speed as long as you set the trim properly.
+2There used to be quite a bit of interest in ornithopters on here, and some pretty good creations, too! I can't wait to see what you come up with.
This is getting tiresome, please stop it.
+1@JetFighter No, actually. What do you mean?
@RailfanEthan lololol
@JetFighter Hey, you feeling ok? Your plane looks very promising.
Why did you post this?
Yup, no airliners at all. I can't even.
+2@RamboJutter You always go a little further to recreate something. Not just detail, but details that make that plane unique. Plus, you do really great camo.
Very nice.
Are you making these planes because you like making them, or because you like upvotes?
You've been making extremely similar planes for over a year now, stretching the nose here, adding a new feature there. Nothing is wrong with that, one of my favorite builders only makes one plane, over and over again. But if you keep making the same thing, you can't expect people to stay interested.
Your planes are not bad. They work pretty good, and you've developed a style. If you want to continue doing that, great! But bear in mind that you are doing that for you, not for your audience.
If you want to get more upvotes, take a look at the work people put in to get them. Check out the "highest rated" for a month or a year. It's a lot of work, and you may prefer to stick with things as they are rather than change everything to impress people you will never meet.
+2Offtopic.
+1@Solarisaircraft You feel you deserve more upvotes?
@JangoTheMango Most of the time. There are sad examples of quality overlooked and lazy builders getting more than their share. But mostly it evens out.
@denialofservice Hmmmm, an anonymous system by which players can see how popular their creations are? You mean like the download count? We have that.
If unregistered users could vote on stuff, the mods couldn't do anything about it, by definition.
I've said my piece about this. Run some google searches, this isn't the first time somebody's had a wave of inspiration about this stuff. The best way to get upvotes is to step up your game.
+5@denialofservice Anonymous voting would lead to abuse, even without it, people have tried to abuse the voting system. As for the rest of the site, there are already plenty of ways for people to see what has been made.
+2@Solarisaircraft Most players have never posted planes. Ever look at the number of downloads vs number of upvotes? It's not uncommon for a plane with 90 votes to get over 4,000 downloads. The vast majority of players do not create accounts on the website and never upload.
+2Between the spotlight system and mods featuring 3 builds on the front page, I'd say this sort of thing is covered. People can be surprisingly apathetic about certain kinds of creations, it's messed up but you can't force them to upvote stuff. Sci-fi and non-aircraft builds are a bit harder to score a hit, but tge good ones do make it to the front page.
New players tend to get upvotes if they put time and energy into something. If I see a bronze, paper or silver player who built something that looks remotely realistic or interesting, I give an upvote and so do most other experienced players. The people who get left out are usually gold and platinum builders that never bothered to improve their skills. It might be easier to get attention with a platinum tag, but if you lack the skill to back it up, people are less forgiving.
+1@EternalDarkness It wasn't as successful as the trainer challenge, but that one was close to best-ever. Anyway, I'm sure there's more to come. I got some ideas.
Regardless of the turnout, your challenge did inspire quite a few good vehicles and brought some attention to the under-appreciated armor builders of the SP community.
When you see something impressive, tear it apart to see how it works.
+1You can tear the landing gear off of one of my planes if you want. You'll probably need to reshape it to fit yours, but it shouldn't be too much trouble.
+2@danman12 Over the weekend, yes. You might wanna find an android user if you want it sooner.
@danman12 I can answer questions, but I don't have access to my PC right now.
@Minecraftpoweer It might help him, I only mentioned it because I was never sure untill a few weeks ago, and figured you'd like to know. You seem more interested in the physics of this game than most people.
@ChiChiWerx Yeah, no problem. This thing is a real beauty!
THE HUN LIVES!
@Minecraftpoweer Damper is the 'friction' of the thing. It slows down flex and smoothes out wobble.
@Sarin Images have to be direct links to image files, I think only .jpg .png and .gif work.
@Rodrigo110 Don't confuse the new guy, Rod.