I really appreciate all the time you put into that mod, it makes a huge difference for most of us. Even people who can't use mods get other people to fix parts for them.
@Mostly The Spitfire was notoriously labor intensive to build, wheras the North American plant that built Mustangs was famously modern and efficient. While it may have cost more American money to build a Mustang, they could be produced with greater ease than the Spitfire.
As a dogfighter, the Spitfire is a wonderful tool in the hands of a skilled officer. But that's it. It was short ranged and overly expensive. It's a defensive weapon because as soon as you take it over enemy land, your allotment of fuel for combat is very small. It was an excellent early war design, and will always be among the most agile things to fly, but it is incomparable to the long range aircraft.
The P-51 ravaged Germany in ways the Spit never could. From its massive numbers to its amazing speed and range to its handling. Everyone knows about how it completely changed the strategic bombing campaigns with its ability to escort the heavies all the way to Berlin. But did you know what truly nailed the ciffin shut on the Luftwaffe? On the way back from their missions, P-51's were "cut loose" to roam for targets of opportunity. Thousands upon thousands of German aircraft were perforated on the ground by roaming Mustangs. You just couldn't do stuff like that in a Spitfire, she wasn't designed for it.
@ChiChiWerx It's silly. The Spitfire was a really maneuverable plane, but compared to the Mustang? Forget it. You can't win a war with Spitfires, they couldn't even win the Battle of Britain with them because they were too costly to make and had to rely on Hawkers.
I love the Spitfire, but it is designed to fill an extremely narrow role.
@AikoFoxNeko If you use the wings off of my 105, the wings will not flex or break at any speed. You might wanna steal the engine too. No need to give credit.
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.
@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.
@DPSAircraftManufacturer Thats the right speed for it to happen at low altitude. Airliners climb to great height before accelerating to cruising speed.
@Chancey21 Well, maybe this is some new kind of slat? Something to aid with the transition from vtol to regular flight or something. Perhaps its for low speed roll control, like a spoiler.
A couple points. First, I'm sorry your cars and trucks don't turn more heads. Second, the most recent one is cool, but the pic is kinda bad because it makes the details look blocky (the details are fine, it's just a very close up pic). It's an awesome car, and I think the rising sun hood is very cool, just not a great pic.
Ok, no more numbers. Beyond that, they key to upvotes is getting on the front page. Its hard for land vehicles, especially stuff that isnt millitary or racing. I usually upload in the morning (EST) during the week, that seems to give enough people a chance to see what I've made.
@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.
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.
This looks great, but I have a few questions. Why WWII tag? Why the split-elevators? Are you aware that the mod means most people can't use this plane? Did you know you can use XML to scale wings so that they are bigger than they look?
@JangoTheMango Try them out. I won't name anyone in particular, but there are plenty of awesome looking planes that are utterly uncontrollable in flight. Aside from typical issues like bugged rotators, duplicated parts and collision issues, plenty of people just never bothered to learn how to properly balance the COM COL and COT.
I'm not picky, I'll upvote whatever looks like someone spent time on, but I do wish people would take advantage of physics engine.
@ThePrototype You'd think upvote criteria like "must be able to take off, fly around for a few minutes and land safely" would be setting the bar a little low. But that would probably kill off half the planes that get to the front page.
Kinda torn. On the one hand, I really don't want the RP guys to feel unwelcome, some of them are great builders, on the other hand that "Cobra" thing had my eyelid twitching.
I really appreciate all the time you put into that mod, it makes a huge difference for most of us. Even people who can't use mods get other people to fix parts for them.
+1@Mostly The Spitfire was notoriously labor intensive to build, wheras the North American plant that built Mustangs was famously modern and efficient. While it may have cost more American money to build a Mustang, they could be produced with greater ease than the Spitfire.
As a dogfighter, the Spitfire is a wonderful tool in the hands of a skilled officer. But that's it. It was short ranged and overly expensive. It's a defensive weapon because as soon as you take it over enemy land, your allotment of fuel for combat is very small. It was an excellent early war design, and will always be among the most agile things to fly, but it is incomparable to the long range aircraft.
The P-51 ravaged Germany in ways the Spit never could. From its massive numbers to its amazing speed and range to its handling. Everyone knows about how it completely changed the strategic bombing campaigns with its ability to escort the heavies all the way to Berlin. But did you know what truly nailed the ciffin shut on the Luftwaffe? On the way back from their missions, P-51's were "cut loose" to roam for targets of opportunity. Thousands upon thousands of German aircraft were perforated on the ground by roaming Mustangs. You just couldn't do stuff like that in a Spitfire, she wasn't designed for it.
+1@ChiChiWerx It's silly. The Spitfire was a really maneuverable plane, but compared to the Mustang? Forget it. You can't win a war with Spitfires, they couldn't even win the Battle of Britain with them because they were too costly to make and had to rely on Hawkers.
I love the Spitfire, but it is designed to fill an extremely narrow role.
+1@AikoFoxNeko If you use the wings off of my 105, the wings will not flex or break at any speed. You might wanna steal the engine too. No need to give credit.
+1REALISM
+1Improve.
+1Plane is fat, but strong. Like bull.
+1@RamboJutter I cannot comment on these allegations.
+1Considering 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@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.
+1Literally no one cares.
+1Listen to @RailfanEthan
He is wise in all things, except stuff that isn't trains
+1@WNP78 If you could link me when the mod is released, I'd be grateful.
+1@Adlerkrieg "Aint my fault, Oddball. I've done nothing but have good thoughts about that bridge ever since we left!"
+1KNOCK IT OFF WITH THEM NEGATIVE WAVES!
+1@RailfanEthan Do not cry, there will be others. HERE help yourself to a happy old railroad tune.
+1That is not a proper image link.
+1@diegoavion84 I usually keep SFX all the way up, old habit from shooters. Sometimes the sounds give clues in SP as well.
+1@Nerfenthusiast Holy necromancers, Batman! This post died 10 months ago.
+1@DPSAircraftManufacturer Cruise altitude is 30,000 ft. You're probably safe above 25,000ft. Below that, the air is too thick.
"Structural" is not a scientific term, they only mean "it does not flex"
+1@DPSAircraftManufacturer Thats the right speed for it to happen at low altitude. Airliners climb to great height before accelerating to cruising speed.
+1@Chancey21 Well, maybe this is some new kind of slat? Something to aid with the transition from vtol to regular flight or something. Perhaps its for low speed roll control, like a spoiler.
+1A couple points. First, I'm sorry your cars and trucks don't turn more heads. Second, the most recent one is cool, but the pic is kinda bad because it makes the details look blocky (the details are fine, it's just a very close up pic). It's an awesome car, and I think the rising sun hood is very cool, just not a great pic.
Ok, no more numbers. Beyond that, they key to upvotes is getting on the front page. Its hard for land vehicles, especially stuff that isnt millitary or racing. I usually upload in the morning (EST) during the week, that seems to give enough people a chance to see what I've made.
+1@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.
+1Use closed air inlets for control surfaces, the "inlet angle" allows you to countour the trailing edge to the shape of the wing.
+170's Italian concept cars are very flat, few curves. Lots of wedges and wannabe countaches.
+1@KidKromosone Just for you a video featuring europop and one of the coolest J-cars of all time: the MR2.
+1@Dimkal Understood, thanks!
+1This is getting tiresome, please stop it.
+1Offtopic.
+1Between 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.
+1When you see something impressive, tear it apart to see how it works.
+1@danman12 You've got a lot of talent, keep it up!
+1How'd you get that amazing firing effect?
+1This looks great, but I have a few questions. Why WWII tag? Why the split-elevators? Are you aware that the mod means most people can't use this plane? Did you know you can use XML to scale wings so that they are bigger than they look?
+1@vonhubert Can't wait to get home and fly it. Good luck IRL.
+1@JangoTheMango Try them out. I won't name anyone in particular, but there are plenty of awesome looking planes that are utterly uncontrollable in flight. Aside from typical issues like bugged rotators, duplicated parts and collision issues, plenty of people just never bothered to learn how to properly balance the COM COL and COT.
I'm not picky, I'll upvote whatever looks like someone spent time on, but I do wish people would take advantage of physics engine.
+1Wonderful to see you back in action on here. The plane looks great!
+1@ThePrototype You'd think upvote criteria like "must be able to take off, fly around for a few minutes and land safely" would be setting the bar a little low. But that would probably kill off half the planes that get to the front page.
+1@Awsomur The worst are the words with unrelated definitions. Like bore (to be disinteresting) vs bore (to drill into something).
+110/10 would use to smuggle [classified] again.
+1Congratulations on getting featured. You put in a lot of time on this one and it clearly shows.
+1I like it, kind of a F-4 / Mirage hybrid.
+1Coffin not included.
+1Use the force, Luke.
Wait, no to hell with the force, use the search tool.
+1They introduced an xml value that allows you to customize wind resistance. Could be a really powerful tool.
+110/10 Would hit the blinkers just to blow through a stoplight again.
+1Kinda torn. On the one hand, I really don't want the RP guys to feel unwelcome, some of them are great builders, on the other hand that "Cobra" thing had my eyelid twitching.
+1You earned it. Well, except for the memes. But mostly you earned it.
+1