@Kerbango In no way do I think you were being rude, I was just explaining how I personally approach this.
Anyway. The way I see it is like this: 1/15th of the people who play the game actually log in, so only 1/15th could upvote. I almost never download anything, but I upvote stuff all the time. If it looks like someone really spent some time on it, then I upvote. But I only download stuff that I really want to fly, and if it's good I might download it a couple times before I finally save it to my hard drive.
I think this is not unusual. If you look at someone who consistently makes stuff that works well and is fun to use, you will notice that downloads outnumber upvotes by a wide margin. Bogdanx is a great example. This Catalina has 155 votes, but over 10,000 downloads.
@Kerbango They matter. If the plane sucks, people won't bother downloading again. That's the problem on here. People make pretty planes that fly like garbage because "pretty" will get the votes. Sure, any high rated build will get a few downloads, even a stupid meme-post. But only quality stuff that works properly and is fun to use will get hundreds or thousands of downloads. Treat people right, and they come back.
@CSP27 Fighter bombers are usually designed to be relatively stable. That allows for solid aiming and good low altitude performance and speed. But not always, the A-4 Skyhawk was quite aerobatic and used by stunt teams for quite a while.
The closer the blue COL is to the red COM, less stable your plane will be. The less stable it is, the easier it is to turn but it will be more difficult to fly straight. If the COM and COL get too close, the plane will be too unstable to control at all.
Wing loading also affects agility. A lighter plane turns easier and accelerates faster.
@tsampoy A number of people spent a long time building these trucks for your contest and you derived quite a few points from their work. The least you can do is link their builds and bring them a little appreciation.
@RamboJutter Until recently, there were different planforms. Usually engine placement was the biggest difference (Tail mounted engines, etc.). But it seems the Boeing style (first seen in the B-47 Stratojet) is the only one in use these days for large planes. Older airliners had almost as much variety as millitary planes, especially during the 1940's through the 1960's.
@Oski That sounds pretty bad, but what I meant was a totally new plane using a fresh missile from the toolbar. Ideally you make the plane out of fresh parts also from the toolbar, reason being is your xml files could be messed up.
Traffic goes up and down. My newest planes get less upvotes than some of my older ones, by I get much more downloads. I prefer it like that, I make planes that I love and think are important so as to get people to learn about them.
You shall name it
FAILURE
@lancelot3340 The most important part is xml modding the parts to disableAircraftCollisions = true
You can "borrow" modified parts from other planes and reshape them to fit yours or use the wonderful Overload modding tool.
@Physoman Speed?
@Physoman Did you actually manage that?! I always assumed she was immune to bullets
Clickable link here
Nice job, Han.
@tsampoy Oh, sorry. Were we posting too much? Does that bother you?
@Kerbango lol
@Kerbango In no way do I think you were being rude, I was just explaining how I personally approach this.
Anyway. The way I see it is like this: 1/15th of the people who play the game actually log in, so only 1/15th could upvote. I almost never download anything, but I upvote stuff all the time. If it looks like someone really spent some time on it, then I upvote. But I only download stuff that I really want to fly, and if it's good I might download it a couple times before I finally save it to my hard drive.
I think this is not unusual. If you look at someone who consistently makes stuff that works well and is fun to use, you will notice that downloads outnumber upvotes by a wide margin. Bogdanx is a great example. This Catalina has 155 votes, but over 10,000 downloads.
@Kerbango They matter. If the plane sucks, people won't bother downloading again. That's the problem on here. People make pretty planes that fly like garbage because "pretty" will get the votes. Sure, any high rated build will get a few downloads, even a stupid meme-post. But only quality stuff that works properly and is fun to use will get hundreds or thousands of downloads. Treat people right, and they come back.
Must be rare indeed! The P-38 was the "Lightning"
You're probably thinking P-39
Plan A) copy the engine, snap the copy to the belly near first engine, nudge the copy up into the plane so the it's even with the first one.
Plan B) Steal the engine off this plane and use it instead.
I appreciate your use of off topic, but this post would be some much less inane if involved aircraft.
@QuickNils I googled how to format text in simpleplanes, that's how. lol
Use hashtag.
@CSP27 Yup
@CSP27 Fighter bombers are usually designed to be relatively stable. That allows for solid aiming and good low altitude performance and speed. But not always, the A-4 Skyhawk was quite aerobatic and used by stunt teams for quite a while.
@lowenbrau This is quality work. Detailed, but not with too many parts.
@CSP27 Its just something to consider when building. A design choice.
The closer the blue COL is to the red COM, less stable your plane will be. The less stable it is, the easier it is to turn but it will be more difficult to fly straight. If the COM and COL get too close, the plane will be too unstable to control at all.
Wing loading also affects agility. A lighter plane turns easier and accelerates faster.
Sounds kinda braggy, docha think?
Wasn't Albacore a submarine?
@Irobert55 You should definitely check it out. Thoroughly. Not only is it hilariously clever, but it also covers a huge amount of content.
@Mostly ChiChi is not a fanboy. It's okay to disagree with him, but people should be grateful he takes the time to share what he knows.
@Irobert55 Have you considered becoming active on the TV Tropes website? Conversations like this are much more successful there.
@AviownCorp More than this?
I hate that movie but I am upvoting this anyway because it looks great.
Your planes look good from above. It might be tine to consider how they look from other angles.
@tsampoy Very good. Thank you, and congratulations on a successful challenge. You've inspired some good builds here.
@RailfanEthan Yes sir, I do recall the effort you put into those fenders. Very nice work.
@tsampoy A number of people spent a long time building these trucks for your contest and you derived quite a few points from their work. The least you can do is link their builds and bring them a little appreciation.
@Oski Good man
@Oski Here, I'll link you to something I'm working on. Big time destruction. But you can't repost it, ok?
@DerekSP Move, sure! Control? Maybe.
@DerekSP It doesn't make the plane move, it amplifies any movement the plane has. Use a Blasto 50, youll see what I mean.
@Ajforever51 Many years of art class.
@Ajforever51 But constructive criticism is useful, if made carefully. Especially in a game where few people understand the underlying mechanics.
@Phoza I was into the 5th sentence of my response to you calling me a... when I re-read it and realized you actually gave a pretty good summary. lol
Clickable Youtube link
@RamboJutter Until recently, there were different planforms. Usually engine placement was the biggest difference (Tail mounted engines, etc.). But it seems the Boeing style (first seen in the B-47 Stratojet) is the only one in use these days for large planes. Older airliners had almost as much variety as millitary planes, especially during the 1940's through the 1960's.
TLDR
@BoganBoganTheMan This is a very impressive looking plane. The cockpit is especially stunning.
I've been working on a "Backfire-C" for several weeks now and I must say that I'm a little jealous how well yours turned out!
The best time to upload is after you've tested how it takes off, flies and lands.
@Oski That sounds pretty bad, but what I meant was a totally new plane using a fresh missile from the toolbar. Ideally you make the plane out of fresh parts also from the toolbar, reason being is your xml files could be messed up.
@AverageFishface It is a Sunderland, and he didn't do the hull. Always check the Auto Credit.
@Oski Try replacing them with fresh ones from the tool bar. Just in case.
@Oski What kinds of changes did you make in order to create the TOW missile?
You guys are always hyper-fixated on upvotes! Planes continue to get a slow but steady flow of downloads if they're any good.
@klm747klm747 That's why I posted the link for you! :)
Anyway, you just [type some words in some brackets](and paste the link in some parenthesis). Easy peasy.
You built this whole thing yourself?
Very nice!
Traffic goes up and down. My newest planes get less upvotes than some of my older ones, by I get much more downloads. I prefer it like that, I make planes that I love and think are important so as to get people to learn about them.