@Chancey21
yeah, I was going to try that too. I was just originally thinking that a puff of smoke from the exhaust when the engine starts would appear and that the gun part could mimic it. Like in FSX when you start up the Cessna 172
@Eagle92Lightning
Also, when used in the context of a challenge, an aircraft being a successor to the challenge means that it is essentially automatically entered into the challenge
@Eagle92Lightning sighs
Ok, a successor is when you post something that is based off someone else's post that you have downloaded. So say someone made a Cessna 172 and posted it, you could download it and make some tweaks to it. Then you post this edited version. When it's posted, credit is automatically given to the original creator. (there is something about this somewhere on the website, just search it up)
@asteroidbook345
ok, as long as it's in at the deadline, max, then you spend as long as you need on it. Saying that though, I can extend the deadline if needed
@randomusername
Well, that is interesting, but because I can, they did try to create a nuclear powered jet engine ages ago, but it was only implemented on the Convair B-36 PeaceMaker, so it didn't seem that successful.
@edensk
no, what I'm talking about is in the DesignerSuite options, you can scale an image. What I mean is that would: 1 be 1 meter, 2 be 2 meters, etc...
@randomusername
I know what you mean. I really want more electric aircraft IRL, but not only is that not many people are actually trying, but that current batteries in bulk are too heavy for one thing, and aircraft that can successfully run off just electricity can really only fly for up to an hour as said batteries don't have a good enough power/weight ratio
Jet fuel (which isn't actually gasoline, it's typically kerosene-based, mixed with other things) is much more common than electrically powered aircraft, thus making it cheaper.
@ACEPILOT109
Ok, I can allow all those ideas, I'm just a little finicky on the Inflatoplane as it says it's primary (and only) user was the united states army, but I will allow it, along with the other two ideas
@Shippy456
Do you want me to try and help?
@Shippy456
Do you mean what is going on with this challenge?
@SimplyPlain
I know that, I was just wondering HOW you did the suspension without wheel suspension as I can't seem to find any shock absorbers
@SimplyPlain
How did you do the suspension, cause I can't land this thing, no joke
Ok, how THIN is that wing!?
It looks even thinner than the wing of the F-104 StarFighter
(btw, just name it an F-16 as that is what it is)
Really nice looking.
And it's a good change for the Mustang on SP to be in a different livery
@Chancey21
yeah, I was going to try that too. I was just originally thinking that a puff of smoke from the exhaust when the engine starts would appear and that the gun part could mimic it. Like in FSX when you start up the Cessna 172
@randomusername
same, I have no idea how to do more in-depth coding
@randomusername
+1ok, I will test it
@Eagle92Lightning
to make it a successor, just download this challenge and build from there
@Eagle92Lightning
And no, you could go with contra-rotating propellers, but it's not really a protocol thing in General aviation
@Eagle92Lightning
Also, when used in the context of a challenge, an aircraft being a successor to the challenge means that it is essentially automatically entered into the challenge
@Eagle92Lightning
sighs
Ok, a successor is when you post something that is based off someone else's post that you have downloaded. So say someone made a Cessna 172 and posted it, you could download it and make some tweaks to it. Then you post this edited version. When it's posted, credit is automatically given to the original creator. (there is something about this somewhere on the website, just search it up)
@Chancey21
@jamesPLANESii
@asteroidbook345
hmm, same here I guess
@asteroidbook345
ok, I am too, trying to figure out the problem in my design for that challenge
@asteroidbook345
ok, as long as it's in at the deadline, max, then you spend as long as you need on it. Saying that though, I can extend the deadline if needed
@randomusername
+1Well, that is interesting, but because I can, they did try to create a nuclear powered jet engine ages ago, but it was only implemented on the Convair B-36 PeaceMaker, so it didn't seem that successful.
@edensk
+1hmmmmm...
@edensk
no, what I'm talking about is in the DesignerSuite options, you can scale an image. What I mean is that would: 1 be 1 meter, 2 be 2 meters, etc...
@edensk
But is one unit, e.g: '1' a single meter?
@edensk
oh ok
Also, i vote for Electric, even though it's quite difficult right now to make electric aircraft
+1@randomusername
+1I know what you mean. I really want more electric aircraft IRL, but not only is that not many people are actually trying, but that current batteries in bulk are too heavy for one thing, and aircraft that can successfully run off just electricity can really only fly for up to an hour as said batteries don't have a good enough power/weight ratio
@Brields95
And how big is '1:1' scale?
@SimplyPlain
no I get it, i'm just putting it out there because I can >:3
@Random40
+2Yeah, the 'up' arrow on a comment is to upvote it
And if you need any more help, I could help you :3
@randomusername
I wouldn't say that.
Jet fuel (which isn't actually gasoline, it's typically kerosene-based, mixed with other things) is much more common than electrically powered aircraft, thus making it cheaper.
As to being easier to maintain, maybe....
I'm not going to lie, the bomb to me looks a bit like the Fritz X bomb, but regardless, well done :3
@mikoyanster
Just to confirm, but is a twin fuselage aircraft with one cockpit allowed?
(it's a jet btw)
@enzoBoeing757
ok, good to know
@enzoBoeing757
is there any other controls other than the standard SP controls that I need to know about?
@enzoBoeing757
it's ok
@Numbers
ok then...
not sure what you want
@ACEPILOT109
Ok, I can allow all those ideas, I'm just a little finicky on the Inflatoplane as it says it's primary (and only) user was the united states army, but I will allow it, along with the other two ideas
@robloxweponco
well, this is definitely something, keep it up :3
@edensk
+1that's ok, you do you ;3
@edensk
Ok, you at least tried :3
@edensk
ok, so I need the aircraft to be manoeuvrable especially in the pitch axis.
The link sends you to the plane. I just removed the structural wing parts from the wings, horizontal stabilisers, tail fins and the control surfaces
+1@edensk
Could you maybe help me now?
@edensk
+1Ok, thanks :3
Ok, so I don't think I need help as I'm getting it from Mustang51, but I will comment here if I need more help
@Mustang51
I would also recommend making the challenge as a build post, like an aircraft, in future
@mikoyanster
Just to let you know, I think my build is coming along nicely :3
@Armyguy1534
Well, it was a great coincidence then, lol :3
@Khanskaya
You have to have a higher amount of points then the person you are trying to give a spotlight too
@Armyguy1534
Just a question, but was the thumbnail inspired by @randomusername?
By the way engineers, you don't need to include the name of this challenge in your entry's name.
This looks really cool and is a great idea. Thanks for entering
+1