Sure thing, man. Creative stuff like this is a great way to get a handle on the physics engine. Besides, psyching out the missile launchers at the Ice Base is a total blast with this thing!
If your English skills are strong enough to read this, then you'd better have a description for anything you upload publicly. It doesn't have to be perfect, but it should be there if you expect people to take the time to download, upvote or comment on it.
@UssInvincible Judging by how bad your parts started to glitch, I think you got darn close, you might have even hit it! The game will have trouble working properly around it's limits, things won't rotate properly, parts might lag, that sort of thing.
Every value (Speed, weight, coordinates, whatever) is a piece of data and each data value is stored in a specific way that determines it's min and max values (among other things). I do not know the format for speed, but I'm sure someone on here could tell us, and that would determine the maximum possible speed.
@F4f879 I can't, I don't have access to SP right now, but 9 times out of 10 that's the cause of spontaneous airplane combustion. Gimme a sec to look at pix of your post.
I know you don't want points, but you'll get much more attention if you post a catchy vehicle with a sign announcing the challenge. Very few people read the forums and this post will be buried within a day.
10/10 Car will NOT go back to 1985 but is still totally sweet. Would waste time memorizing old lotto numbers only to gett hit by lightning for nothing again.
This jet looks great, and I really love the cockpit. I really wish you spent a bit more time making it fly more like the real thing, but that's your choice. You've got a LOT of talent!
@Himynameiswalrus Supermarine and Macchi both had some gorgeous planes I think you'll like. I'd post them here but I'm not good with the html tags this site uses. Google image Macchi racer and Supermarine racer if you're interested.
Don't ever mirror moving parts, it's a nightmare picking through everything to find the bugged connection. Doors are tricky, I often control them with the landing gear command because trim controls often make them extend forward AND backward in ways that are undesirable. I can't tell you how many times I've exploded other people's planes by shutting the bomb bay doors too far.
Are you any good at making open cockpits? There's a real lack of pre WW2 aircraft around here, and some of the overlooked planes are extremely graceful. 1930's racers, for instance.
@LowDetail I've been able to mod airbrakes that can bring a 3000 mph craft to a full stop in a few seconds, it's creepy how they hang in the air afterwards. Sometimes I want to create some impossibly fast, futuristic spacecraft with hyper maneuverability, but stuff like that just reminds me of using cheat codes when I was a kid. Too easy ruins the fun.
All you have to do is mod all the parts so that the mass is 1/10 what it should be and ANYTHING becomes super maneuverable. You can even mod the wings to prevent them from wobbling at high speed. The real challenge is making something that handles believably.
Have you done any of the tutorials? The way a plane looks and the way it flies are different things. As Valtsu pointed out, the key is controlling your centers of thrust, mass and lift.
@F4f879 Be careful with mirroring, things do not connect predictably and often don't connect at all. I've had planes that looked great in the builder that fell apart in the game. It's funny to watch your plane scatter itself like a pile of leaves in the wind, but frustrating as hell to fix.
The center console alone is enough to get front page, I don't know what to say about the rest of the cockpit, or the wings for that matter. This is probably the most realistic thing I've ever seen in this entire game. I'm astonished.
@RailfanEthan Mostly I was referring to your single-engine designs, your multi-engined planes are really stable actually. As I said before, I think you have a good eye for detail, and you probably know better than I do about what's important. Anyway, keep on cranking them out, because I like your work a lot.
I'm at work and can't check, but I seem to remember that your aircraft LOOK excellent but handle poorly. This is probably because you're a very advanced builder for ground vehicles, so you've got the eye for detail but need a little more practice with getting planes to feel "right." You'll have to choose for yourself what "right" means, because the game is only realistic up to a point. Some people make planes that are ultra maneuverable, some aim for realistic performance at a certain altitude, some aim for a fun balance. Mind you, I am only saying this because you asked, because visually your builds are VERY good, and bear in mind I could be totally wrong here.
High speed, high angle and big bombs. The little 25's are good for easy to hit stuff like bridges and ships, but it's better to use 50s for the convoys because they have a wider damage area and are more forgiving if you miss a little.
Start your attack up high, above 10,000 feet so you have plenty of time to get your angle and speed right before it's time to release the bombs. When you are over your target, flip over and dive down hard on it, keep your angle STEEP, 70 degrees to 90 degrees is best. Use your gunsight to aim the nose of your plane BELOW your target, that way you can straighten up the direction of your dive and get a good line on the target. If you keep the gunsight directly on the target you won't be able to turn properly and you won't be able to get a nice straight run . A FAST, STEEP dive will ensure the bombs land close to where you aim. Around 3000 feet, put the gunsight on (or slightly above) the target and hold it there untill you're low enough to release the bombs. At 1500 to 1000 feet, release the bombs and IMMEDIATELY pull up. Do not release bombs below 1000 feet, DO NOT TRY TO MANEUVER IN ANY DIRECTION WHILE RELEASING BOMBS OR THEY WILL HIT YOUR OWN PLANE, do not hesitate to pull up at 1000 feet.
I know you said "no bombs" but I hope this helps anyway.
Probably has something to do with flexing, wing loading or angle of attack. I changed the airfoil to flat bottom and that helped a bit, but I think the elevators are too strong. It's not so bad when you consider that ground attack planes like the AD1 were rarely ever nimble enough to mix it up with dedicated fighters, and the oversized elevators make pulling out of a divebombing run a LOT easier, which is the most important design consideration in my opinion.
@TexJohnston Not a problem! I played around this thing a bit and had a little trouble with evasive maneuvering but NO trouble demolishing whole convoys. Fun stuff!
@SajabAerospace Yeah, it doesn't really seem right to compare the Blackbird to this thing. Lockheed only made a handful of Sr-71's, the pilots were super-duper special picked for the job and they operated with a TON of support. Foxbats were mass produced and even exported, operated under desolate, primative conditions, and the pilots they flew them were picked from the regular pool of available jocks. This Jalopnik article is old, but I really enjoyed it, maybe you will too http://jalopnik.com/a-requiem-for-the-original-soviet-rat-rod-1534150327
@SajabAerospace I always felt bad for interceptor pilots from this time period. So much extra work trying to fiddle with all this analog radar gear and fly a jet at the same time!
I think I read somewhere that the "Smerch" was so powerful that activating it close to the ground was illegal, it was actually hazardous to people and animals. Unfortunately, it wasn't very sophisticated, and had trouble targeting anything below the horizon at any altitude. Nice build here, good attention to detail!
@WalrusAircraft I see you made your own exhaust nozzles! I tried that on my Foxbat back before I learned about modding tools, had to type the whole thing out in notepad to xml rotate all the parts, it took FOREVER. You really put a lot of time into this thing, huh?
Anything for the Pope!
Sure thing, man. Creative stuff like this is a great way to get a handle on the physics engine. Besides, psyching out the missile launchers at the Ice Base is a total blast with this thing!
The Internet!
If your English skills are strong enough to read this, then you'd better have a description for anything you upload publicly. It doesn't have to be perfect, but it should be there if you expect people to take the time to download, upvote or comment on it.
Excellent build, comrade!
If sci fi has taught me anything, it's that you're lucky you didn't XD
Doom, HPLovecraft, Hellraiser etc.
@UssInvincible Judging by how bad your parts started to glitch, I think you got darn close, you might have even hit it! The game will have trouble working properly around it's limits, things won't rotate properly, parts might lag, that sort of thing.
I thought General Dynamics made the F16.
Every value (Speed, weight, coordinates, whatever) is a piece of data and each data value is stored in a specific way that determines it's min and max values (among other things). I do not know the format for speed, but I'm sure someone on here could tell us, and that would determine the maximum possible speed.
https://www.simpleplanes.com/Forums/View/655503/HINTS-to-build-more-FUNCTIONAL-planes
@EpicPigster1 Solid!
@F4f879 I can't, I don't have access to SP right now, but 9 times out of 10 that's the cause of spontaneous airplane combustion. Gimme a sec to look at pix of your post.
You probably have moving parts colliding with each other. Flexible wings, for example.
Time travel, no question.
@Oski LOL, Sweden too.
I know you don't want points, but you'll get much more attention if you post a catchy vehicle with a sign announcing the challenge. Very few people read the forums and this post will be buried within a day.
"Symptom of the Universe" by Black Sabbath
Poland is home to some of the best metal of our time, in my opinion.
10/10 Car will NOT go back to 1985 but is still totally sweet. Would waste time memorizing old lotto numbers only to gett hit by lightning for nothing again.
This jet looks great, and I really love the cockpit. I really wish you spent a bit more time making it fly more like the real thing, but that's your choice. You've got a LOT of talent!
@Himynameiswalrus Supermarine and Macchi both had some gorgeous planes I think you'll like. I'd post them here but I'm not good with the html tags this site uses. Google image Macchi racer and Supermarine racer if you're interested.
Physics settings?
Don't ever mirror moving parts, it's a nightmare picking through everything to find the bugged connection. Doors are tricky, I often control them with the landing gear command because trim controls often make them extend forward AND backward in ways that are undesirable. I can't tell you how many times I've exploded other people's planes by shutting the bomb bay doors too far.
Are you any good at making open cockpits? There's a real lack of pre WW2 aircraft around here, and some of the overlooked planes are extremely graceful. 1930's racers, for instance.
Georgeous, just like my old Minmatar Hurricane. You ever been to Rens?
@CDRxavier It's because you're on IOS.
@EpicPigster1 Humor is so easily lost with text. Thankfully there's enough hilarious stuff online to make up for it.
@EpicPigster1 Binary question. One or the other.
I prefer to think of them as senpai.
@LowDetail I've been able to mod airbrakes that can bring a 3000 mph craft to a full stop in a few seconds, it's creepy how they hang in the air afterwards. Sometimes I want to create some impossibly fast, futuristic spacecraft with hyper maneuverability, but stuff like that just reminds me of using cheat codes when I was a kid. Too easy ruins the fun.
All you have to do is mod all the parts so that the mass is 1/10 what it should be and ANYTHING becomes super maneuverable. You can even mod the wings to prevent them from wobbling at high speed. The real challenge is making something that handles believably.
@F4f879 Nice!
I pay most attention to replicas, I guess I'm just boring like that. But I do try to support people who have really good imaginary builds.
Have you done any of the tutorials? The way a plane looks and the way it flies are different things. As Valtsu pointed out, the key is controlling your centers of thrust, mass and lift.
Do both. If you enjoy how your Bulldogs look, keep making them but also remember to take on projects that stretch your skills so you learn new things.
@F4f879 Be careful with mirroring, things do not connect predictably and often don't connect at all. I've had planes that looked great in the builder that fell apart in the game. It's funny to watch your plane scatter itself like a pile of leaves in the wind, but frustrating as hell to fix.
The center console alone is enough to get front page, I don't know what to say about the rest of the cockpit, or the wings for that matter. This is probably the most realistic thing I've ever seen in this entire game. I'm astonished.
@RailfanEthan Mostly I was referring to your single-engine designs, your multi-engined planes are really stable actually. As I said before, I think you have a good eye for detail, and you probably know better than I do about what's important. Anyway, keep on cranking them out, because I like your work a lot.
I'm at work and can't check, but I seem to remember that your aircraft LOOK excellent but handle poorly. This is probably because you're a very advanced builder for ground vehicles, so you've got the eye for detail but need a little more practice with getting planes to feel "right." You'll have to choose for yourself what "right" means, because the game is only realistic up to a point. Some people make planes that are ultra maneuverable, some aim for realistic performance at a certain altitude, some aim for a fun balance. Mind you, I am only saying this because you asked, because visually your builds are VERY good, and bear in mind I could be totally wrong here.
High speed, high angle and big bombs. The little 25's are good for easy to hit stuff like bridges and ships, but it's better to use 50s for the convoys because they have a wider damage area and are more forgiving if you miss a little.
Start your attack up high, above 10,000 feet so you have plenty of time to get your angle and speed right before it's time to release the bombs. When you are over your target, flip over and dive down hard on it, keep your angle STEEP, 70 degrees to 90 degrees is best. Use your gunsight to aim the nose of your plane BELOW your target, that way you can straighten up the direction of your dive and get a good line on the target. If you keep the gunsight directly on the target you won't be able to turn properly and you won't be able to get a nice straight run . A FAST, STEEP dive will ensure the bombs land close to where you aim. Around 3000 feet, put the gunsight on (or slightly above) the target and hold it there untill you're low enough to release the bombs. At 1500 to 1000 feet, release the bombs and IMMEDIATELY pull up. Do not release bombs below 1000 feet, DO NOT TRY TO MANEUVER IN ANY DIRECTION WHILE RELEASING BOMBS OR THEY WILL HIT YOUR OWN PLANE, do not hesitate to pull up at 1000 feet.
I know you said "no bombs" but I hope this helps anyway.
+1Probably has something to do with flexing, wing loading or angle of attack. I changed the airfoil to flat bottom and that helped a bit, but I think the elevators are too strong. It's not so bad when you consider that ground attack planes like the AD1 were rarely ever nimble enough to mix it up with dedicated fighters, and the oversized elevators make pulling out of a divebombing run a LOT easier, which is the most important design consideration in my opinion.
@TexJohnston Not a problem! I played around this thing a bit and had a little trouble with evasive maneuvering but NO trouble demolishing whole convoys. Fun stuff!
@WalrusAircraft Finetuner is the best thing EVER.
Wow, I had expected something so futuristic from an airship! Nice.
@SajabAerospace Yeah, it doesn't really seem right to compare the Blackbird to this thing. Lockheed only made a handful of Sr-71's, the pilots were super-duper special picked for the job and they operated with a TON of support. Foxbats were mass produced and even exported, operated under desolate, primative conditions, and the pilots they flew them were picked from the regular pool of available jocks. This Jalopnik article is old, but I really enjoyed it, maybe you will too http://jalopnik.com/a-requiem-for-the-original-soviet-rat-rod-1534150327
@SajabAerospace I always felt bad for interceptor pilots from this time period. So much extra work trying to fiddle with all this analog radar gear and fly a jet at the same time!
Holy crap, you're doing the entire Foxbat line! Are you gonna do the Mig-31?
I think I read somewhere that the "Smerch" was so powerful that activating it close to the ground was illegal, it was actually hazardous to people and animals. Unfortunately, it wasn't very sophisticated, and had trouble targeting anything below the horizon at any altitude. Nice build here, good attention to detail!
Jack Northrop would be pleased!
@WalrusAircraft I see you made your own exhaust nozzles! I tried that on my Foxbat back before I learned about modding tools, had to type the whole thing out in notepad to xml rotate all the parts, it took FOREVER. You really put a lot of time into this thing, huh?