is there any way i can customise the secondary exhaust scale? i have ft to make the throttle more powerful in certain situation but the ab flame size is not what i wanted
thats the difficulty of having a ruddervator.
when u have a slight roll while pitching the inner ruddervator is effectively a full elevator while the outer ruddervator is effectively a rudder. u might need to work extra hard on the codes to mitigate the issue
@GuyFolk @WojakArgento i have seen a good gyro sight u requested somewhere on sp on a yak-3, and a perfect one on a spitfire. u might want to look up one of those decently build spitfire to find it. meanwhile i made a "half" FUNNEL SIGHT for myself if u are interested here with just 3 lines of code (i probably got lazy). it works quite well with the camera reticle, just use the "grappy hands" on the sight and try to catch the target lead (+) given to you by SP with those hands. unfortunately the guns on SP do not provide an output variable from the gun's muzzle velocity otherwise i could've probably code it to become accurate with most guns, given the builder copy my variable table. i might probably upgrade it later so it reads the target distance and light up the correct hand to use to grab the reticle with.
i have this one tracking camera that tracks target. but i found out that it changes the chase camera to chase the incoming missiles especially the ones that are about to hit, i am still wondering how that happens.
i just found a typhoon somewhere and slap in the codes on the elevators and the wing controls, thats it. couldve been even better if i touched the nozzole rotators. click below to see how it turns out changes are minimal
excellent plane build, but i wished it could turn 10x times harder because of the low wing loading, i mean with that wing loading it should be able to do anything even at low speeds
i think your plane is actually quite good if u fixed the physical errors (ie: your left rudder is connected to the fuselage not the rotator etc). just some simple coding can turn this thing into an excellent plane. you have tvc, the plane will handle well quite easily
@FoneMaidPlain well his CoL and CoM placement isnt that bad, his plane doesnt have any coding to started at all. his placement seems all good for a canard. it ok for a canard to share load between front and back wings and to improve front wing responsiveness
the nozzles are rubbing against each other. this will make them off grid. try to make them collision free or u can do it in ft. this is the first thing, i think u also need to do more coding on the control surfaces. unstable plane is a good way to start making ultra responsive and maneuverable plane tho, my torpedo trainer started off with an extremely unstable design
@ZeroWithSlashedO it used to say explicitly "1.4 t//w ratio" &
that rule is no longer there anymore so i dont have anything numerical to make reference when i build. only "just no crazy accelerations." is the t/w limit lifted
@ZeroWithSlashedO will this one be auto-disqualified? if so i am gonna remove this one to make room for the other. btw i dont see the thrust weight ratio requirement listed on the rules anymore, what is it now
@Aldriech just look at my plane here. u can download it and then remove the vertical stabilizers and leave the plane with only the wings and front elevrons and some how it still seems to be stable at the yaw axis. click here
is there any way i can customise the secondary exhaust scale? i have ft to make the throttle more powerful in certain situation but the ab flame size is not what i wanted
@OrderlyHippo i wouldve kept the same flight computer for my 14million planes to see how things evolve if i werent entering challenges lol
@Kthepersonorguy yes, this man has made a good fix of yours.
wow nice fix, really
wasnt expecting no codes required
thats the difficulty of having a ruddervator.
when u have a slight roll while pitching the inner ruddervator is effectively a full elevator while the outer ruddervator is effectively a rudder. u might need to work extra hard on the codes to mitigate the issue
@GuyFolk @WojakArgento i have seen a good gyro sight u requested somewhere on sp on a yak-3, and a perfect one on a spitfire. u might want to look up one of those decently build spitfire to find it. meanwhile i made a "half" FUNNEL SIGHT for myself if u are interested here with just 3 lines of code (i probably got lazy). it works quite well with the camera reticle, just use the "grappy hands" on the sight and try to catch the target lead (+) given to you by SP with those hands. unfortunately the guns on SP do not provide an output variable from the gun's muzzle velocity otherwise i could've probably code it to become accurate with most guns, given the builder copy my variable table. i might probably upgrade it later so it reads the target distance and light up the correct hand to use to grab the reticle with.
great
i have this one tracking camera that tracks target. but i found out that it changes the chase camera to chase the incoming missiles especially the ones that are about to hit, i am still wondering how that happens.
i remember those eyes
u can try to have a heavy tail to pull that tail down while the high mounted props want to push your head down
i like this one feels just like home after my favorite f104 in war thunder
@OrderlyHippo thanks
gotta love this plane
R3
aka the most hated vehicle in WT
beautiful design
i just found a typhoon somewhere and slap in the codes on the elevators and the wing controls, thats it. couldve been even better if i touched the nozzole rotators. click below to see how it turns out
changes are minimal
excellent plane build, but i wished it could turn 10x times harder because of the low wing loading, i mean with that wing loading it should be able to do anything even at low speeds
i think your plane is actually quite good if u fixed the physical errors (ie: your left rudder is connected to the fuselage not the rotator etc). just some simple coding can turn this thing into an excellent plane. you have tvc, the plane will handle well quite easily
@FoneMaidPlain well his CoL and CoM placement isnt that bad, his plane doesnt have any coding to started at all. his placement seems all good for a canard. it ok for a canard to share load between front and back wings and to improve front wing responsiveness
yea i set the engines not to react when touching each other. it gets a lot better, then u only need to work on the ft codes
the nozzles are rubbing against each other. this will make them off grid. try to make them collision free or u can do it in ft. this is the first thing, i think u also need to do more coding on the control surfaces. unstable plane is a good way to start making ultra responsive and maneuverable plane tho, my torpedo trainer started off with an extremely unstable design
BUTTER SMOOTH
sleek!
@WinsWings thanks!
rest in peace
@Betovenoob21 just steer to balance before take off after take off everything gets easier
technically a double delta. nice flying characteristics
this looks like the f-19 i played as a kid in the early 90s
i like this
mind if i make a successor to this as a f-19 after the challenge?@Grroro
@GuyFolk thanks!
& all the strange control surfaces made it possible! ;)
roll seems to be good
but really needs stronger pitch control
by looking at the design i think the controls are easy to lock up at high speed
great looks
@GuyFolk i mean if the cannon has high speed i think theres a code for guaranteed hit, at least i think i can write one...
@MTakach @AverroesIndustries @MechWARRIOR57
none of them listened to u so here you go, let me know if my half assed funnel sight works for you
@Sezercu1 i am always a big fan of expensive kamikaze...
i like this plane. a bit too stable but i like it.
@AceMcCloud mind if i work on the redo version of this one for you?
@ChichiWerx this is the plane i was talking about, its almost done, will get it more polished later, meanwhile enjoy.
just plain, awesome.
also love the low parts. thanks!
@TatsuTheOtaku
@DameTheMobileFriendly
@Suubk27
@FlyRaker
@Aviator01
@HornetRaptor its acceptable for short man like me
i like how the seat lifts up with the canopy. and the low canopy profile.
@ZeroWithSlashedO it used to say explicitly "1.4 t//w ratio" &
that rule is no longer there anymore so i dont have anything numerical to make reference when i build. only "just no crazy accelerations." is the t/w limit lifted
@ZeroWithSlashedO will this one be auto-disqualified? if so i am gonna remove this one to make room for the other. btw i dont see the thrust weight ratio requirement listed on the rules anymore, what is it now
@FalcoOne sounds like a fun project i will do it
@iloveworld4723 thanks!
@Aldriech just look at my plane here. u can download it and then remove the vertical stabilizers and leave the plane with only the wings and front elevrons and some how it still seems to be stable at the yaw axis. click here