@MEERKAT978
No, there aren't any single seat trainers that exist, and a trainer being a single seater kind of defeats the purpose of it being a trainer.
If you're using the default canopy part, I'd suggest either just using Overload to xml mod the proportions of it and make the fuselage fit to it, or better, try and learn to make a canopy out of fuselage blocks, which is the better way in the end if you want someone more quality.
Hi, I will be deducting points as your part count is below the minimum and allowed margin.
Also, are those weapons designed for training purposes? If not and are regular weapons, there will be a point deduction for that too.
@Mikemike123
Only for the sake of training purposes.
Bombs for example, should only be training ones, meaning they shouldn't explode when they impact the ground since they don't have any explosive filler.
@16
And look, you can claim your build is fictional, but when the only visual difference to the real thing is the shape of the canopy, it's a replica, not a fictional build based on something.
@16
No....? Pretty much all planes aren't based off another. The only close example of that is aircraft of the same family, like the Spitfire and all 24 Marks of it.
Yeah, uh, buddy, if you're going to make an aircraft and say it's built by a fictional company, actually make it a fictional aircraft, not one that exists irl and was built by a different company.
At the very least, make it more unique then a seemingly exact replica of the real thing.
I've seen Black Jack in-person at the Old Buckenham air show in 2022, and I love the livery so much, it's one of my favourite aerobatic liveries.
You've done a pretty excellent job of replicating it. The two main things missing though is the part of the Union Jack sitting on-top of the roundel of the tail fin (which I understand would be very difficult to do), and the rest of the detail on the squadron roundel.
29 Squadron's roundel is quite simple as all you have to do is outline the white boxes on the sides of the RAF roundel with red, and add 3 red X's to each.
@Graingy
We are talking about the guy with the Toothbrush moustache here, he loved his wonder weapons, which the Maus looks a lot more like (on paper).
@Robomo00119
Simply a matter of performance. Whilst a Drop tank is good for general flying, mainly over long distance, they aren't desirable in air combat. Their added fuel capacity is outweighed by all the cons they bring, namely the excess weight through the the fuel and the tank itself and the extra drag is causes.
So naturally, you want to get rid of that in combat to give yourself the best possible chance against the enemy.
I don't know about other people, but I don't think the main thumbnail is that good...
The Foxhound is on the same colour scale as the background, which hasn't got a DOF. This just makes it blend in too much, especially when the thumbnail is viewed as its scaled-down version on the homepage, and is hard to make out.
@llDeadboyll
First, I don't know why you're posting this comment on a forum post about a logo redesign.
Second, I'm by no means a modder. I can not make a mod to save my life.
@AlivePan
More just pointing out how this isn't really language that belongs here as it is really quite rude in general, to put it lightly.
And I'm not offended by the overdone stereotype, just annoyed by it.
@Real08
...what?
@MEERKAT978
No, there aren't any single seat trainers that exist, and a trainer being a single seater kind of defeats the purpose of it being a trainer.
If you're using the default canopy part, I'd suggest either just using Overload to xml mod the proportions of it and make the fuselage fit to it, or better, try and learn to make a canopy out of fuselage blocks, which is the better way in the end if you want someone more quality.
Hi, I will be deducting points from this as the part count is below the stated minimum and allowed margin.
Hi, I will be deducting points as your part count is below the minimum and allowed margin.
Also, are those weapons designed for training purposes? If not and are regular weapons, there will be a point deduction for that too.
@Mikemike123
Only for the sake of training purposes.
Bombs for example, should only be training ones, meaning they shouldn't explode when they impact the ground since they don't have any explosive filler.
Hi, I will be deducting points as this entry is below the minimum part count and respective margin.
Hi, I will be deducting points as the part count is below the minimum amount and the allowed margin.
@72
Only for training purpose.
@HelloX
2
There will be a deduction in points since you've gone below the minimum part count and the respective 50 part margin.
@Hahahahaahahshs
Fictional or a replica, just added it to the rules and regulations.
@16
And look, you can claim your build is fictional, but when the only visual difference to the real thing is the shape of the canopy, it's a replica, not a fictional build based on something.
@16
No....? Pretty much all planes aren't based off another. The only close example of that is aircraft of the same family, like the Spitfire and all 24 Marks of it.
Yeah, uh, buddy, if you're going to make an aircraft and say it's built by a fictional company, actually make it a fictional aircraft, not one that exists irl and was built by a different company.
At the very least, make it more unique then a seemingly exact replica of the real thing.
I've seen Black Jack in-person at the Old Buckenham air show in 2022, and I love the livery so much, it's one of my favourite aerobatic liveries.
You've done a pretty excellent job of replicating it. The two main things missing though is the part of the Union Jack sitting on-top of the roundel of the tail fin (which I understand would be very difficult to do), and the rest of the detail on the squadron roundel.
29 Squadron's roundel is quite simple as all you have to do is outline the white boxes on the sides of the RAF roundel with red, and add 3 red X's to each.
Everyplay was also responsible for the replay function SP had till they went kaput.
I like how you use whippersnappers like you're at least in your 40's
😁
What the hell is up with the weight? The loaded weight is in the same ball park as the max takeoff weight of the Mustang
Huh, seems like it goes quite a distance from Duxford
Here's a Tip.
If you have to ask, it's probably not a good idea.
Relatable, just not as old.
@LoneSpaceGaming
This one
@LoneSpaceGaming
Mod.
@FlirBlitz
Yeah, I know. Still existed irl.
@FlirBlitz
You do know that Krasnovia already exists in real life, right..?
@Graingy
We are talking about the guy with the Toothbrush moustache here, he loved his wonder weapons, which the Maus looks a lot more like (on paper).
The second thumbnail picture. Without zooming in, I can believe it to be a photo of a real aircraft, not an SP one. That's how good this is.
Kind of unrelated I guess, but Minecraft Education edition is used for a bit more then just Engineering education.
@FedexGuy
It's paint......
There isn't a way,
This rings true.
What's the coordinates?
@Robomo00119
Simply a matter of performance. Whilst a Drop tank is good for general flying, mainly over long distance, they aren't desirable in air combat. Their added fuel capacity is outweighed by all the cons they bring, namely the excess weight through the the fuel and the tank itself and the extra drag is causes.
So naturally, you want to get rid of that in combat to give yourself the best possible chance against the enemy.
I remember the quote in the title and it's always very fun to read it myself.
Seen your progress on the SPBC Discord and it turned out really well.
Personally, I think the camo is one of the best parts and it looks so well done.
@ZeroWithSlashedO
Not a good idea I think. That would be very processor-heavy, as cool as it would be.
I think you mean 'Westland'.
And you need to shorten the wingspan, but not a bad start.
[Nose needs editing too.]
@ollielebananiaCFSP
You what.....?
Well, 1 is quite easy, they get into a lot of a trouble.
@HSFCiaobella
Depth of Field.
I don't know about other people, but I don't think the main thumbnail is that good...
The Foxhound is on the same colour scale as the background, which hasn't got a DOF. This just makes it blend in too much, especially when the thumbnail is viewed as its scaled-down version on the homepage, and is hard to make out.
@UnidentfiedOneUser
Well, we know it's supposed to be an Su-24 now.
@F14FANATIC
Have I even talked to you before...just curious.
@FirstFish83828
Hm?
'#FixTheUndoButton'
(Honestly though, I can see how annoying this can be.)
@llDeadboyll
First, I don't know why you're posting this comment on a forum post about a logo redesign.
Second, I'm by no means a modder. I can not make a mod to save my life.
@BaconEggs
Question, how do you go about doing the Landing scenes?
@GrandPrix
Didn't really sound like a joke..
@GrandPrix
I think the fact it has a Nose wheel is a pretty obvious reason.
@AlivePan
More just pointing out how this isn't really language that belongs here as it is really quite rude in general, to put it lightly.
And I'm not offended by the overdone stereotype, just annoyed by it.