@Zaineman
That's how I learn FT too, just make changes to other people code and observe until I can do it on my own.
And Snowflakes's FT guide do clarified a lot in term of code syntax.
Nice touch of details.
I can't remember who but they attached piston to each individual jet nozzle and program those pistons to move up and down in overlapping pattern to each other creating pistons combusting sequence.
The effect will be like this build of mine but I use blinking lights instead.
@Zaineman
Hey, I've noticed that you tagged me on some sort of "need help" posts but those posts were deleted, am I missing something cool?
lol
I was away at the moment.
When R2 have had enough of Luke's flying skill.
lol
Actually R2 have so many years of combat experience and giving R2 heavy weapons will be too overpowered for the Sith.
@Ryuki
A bit hard to do that I think, when speed is low the plane will prioritize aoa and sacrifice some yaw stability so the plane will behave differently but keep you from flipping.
@Zaineman
Nice, I saw you've improved little by little each build.
I think "Modern Frame" is an all in one solution, it have room for pilot, room for stick and throttle, instruments dashboard and for your plane it'll provide a nice dashboard without much effort lol.
If I want difference dashboard, I'll still use the "Modern Frame" block but build my own dashboard on top of it.
Also, I've never noticed R2 head moving to throttle command lol, I thought it just spin.
Your R2 idea is a nice touch to the plane and I suggest you to take a look at these:
- TargetSelected
- TargetHeading
- TargetElevation
- TargetDistance
They are FT variable about targeting which if done right, R2 will look at your target, it's maybe too complicated but I think it's cool.
@Zaineman
Nice.
You get the mechanics really fast.
What you've done is an equivalence of pilot looking down a bit lol, as long as it doesn't change the camera position it'll be fine.
Due to the nature HUD/camera set up it'll have some misalignment but it barely noticeable anyway.
@Zaineman
You are so close to making an actual lcd screen lol.
Just need a pitch black piece behind the text label and a slightly tinted glass (color of your choice) on top of te label and a frame.
@SkyJayTheFirst
No no no.
It's just little things people not noticed but will make a difference if they are missing.
For example, inverting control surfaces control when the plane fly backward, when your plane fly backward the airflow reversed and pulling up will result in nose down, you'll find this useful at high aoa and it'll make some certain maneuver seamless.
Comparing how high g the plane can pull is not something I looking for anyway, it's just too easy to make 100g capable plane.
@SkyJayTheFirst
lol
To be honest, no.
There are a lot of "quality of life" code that you didn't have but if comparing just basic PSM, I think it's really good.
@ZoaMiki
Use both control surface and differential thrust, I'd say but if you can only have one, go with control surface.
Control surface is useless at low speed and tvc is useless at low engine power so they complete each other.
@ZoaMiki
So it's differential thrust then, it behave like gyro so no wonder why my first though was gyro.
And I think control surface will be more useful because when landing, the power setting will be low and differential thrust can potentially be less effective.
For me I'd use AngleOfSlip code for wing tips airbrake.
I have some suggestions for you.
I thinks railgun need some cover, so it'll look sick when deploying and be more sleek when retracted.
And I think it should be switch instead of buttons to stay true to the vintage jet theme.
Alternatively, just replace those analog instruments with digital one lol.
Also, if this get upvotes, the original get half of the point as well so I'll do it anyway.
If I were to make this version, I'd change code in the weapons bay to open with AG2 and maybe add dummy missiles instead, also replacing COPRO device with disco ball.
Not bad.
For yaw, I suggest you play with AngleOfSlip Funky tree, I assume you using gyro for yaw and if the gyro have AngleOfSlip correction code the plane will act like it actually have rudder.
And you can disable AngleOfSlip by AG1 to go completely yaw unstable like it is of now.
Constantly have to adjust for angle of slip manually is not a nice thing to have in fighter this high-tech anyway.
@SnoWFLakE0s
That's make sense, trapezoidal method without clearing integral value was my first prototype lol, went well until the flight data change dramatically (which will required very difference trim setting for example) and it take a while fir integral to catch up.
Now I'm using variable activators to clear integral, it work for now but still need more tuning to be really work with the rest of my code.
Speaking of which, why and how using integral clearing excessively has negative effect, I have little experience in this kind of stuff.
And thanks again for tips.
@SnoWFLakE0s
I've look at it once and just leave lol.
But that build gave me a glimpse that recursive is possible but I've never proof it to really see for myself until yesterday.
The HUD still contain carrier landing glideslope lol, I can still land with it but no tail hook to catch me.
Also, with those beefy gears, I wish this is carrier borne fighter.
And for HUD targeting accuracy, I noticed you did everything right so it's just as accurate as it can get for this simple FT code, the thing is if the target move while bullets is still on the way they will most likely miss since the target take a new path which is away from predicted path, same goes for in-game sight and irl sight too.
(Also this HUD have problem with accuracy when the plane is at steep angle)
@SnoWFLakE0s
Integral dumping/clearing is exactly what I looking for.
I don't know how to make default SUM function reset it's value either but yesterday I discovered that variable setter can be set recursively as well (SumX = SumX + PitchRate) so I think this is the way I can make my own integral.
@CptLiar
You might have a use for recursive variable setters for integral as well.
@Zaineman
+1Combination of the two I guess.
Looking back to it, my replies was all over the place lol.
@Zaineman
+1That's how I learn FT too, just make changes to other people code and observe until I can do it on my own.
And Snowflakes's FT guide do clarified a lot in term of code syntax.
@Zaineman
Thanks.
Not only me doing that, I guess lol.
Nice touch of details.
I can't remember who but they attached piston to each individual jet nozzle and program those pistons to move up and down in overlapping pattern to each other creating pistons combusting sequence.
The effect will be like this build of mine but I use blinking lights instead.
@Zaineman
+1I see.
You improve really fast.
lol
Case closed.
I guess I'm late, went afk for the moment.
@Zaineman
+1Hey, I've noticed that you tagged me on some sort of "need help" posts but those posts were deleted, am I missing something cool?
lol
I was away at the moment.
@Zaineman
lol
Nice detail.
R2 just made this X-wing go beyond safe rpm.
When R2 have had enough of Luke's flying skill.
lol
Actually R2 have so many years of combat experience and giving R2 heavy weapons will be too overpowered for the Sith.
@Ryuki
A bit hard to do that I think, when speed is low the plane will prioritize aoa and sacrifice some yaw stability so the plane will behave differently but keep you from flipping.
@Zaineman
No problem.
And congratulation on hitting plat btw.
@TRD6932
+1lol
Thanks.
AI will make good shot if you fly often enough.
@LaughingMissile
lol
@LaughingMissile
+1I think you need to start with this.
I think it is the first of a kind.
My auto aim is a modified version.
@Zaineman
Nice, I saw you've improved little by little each build.
I think "Modern Frame" is an all in one solution, it have room for pilot, room for stick and throttle, instruments dashboard and for your plane it'll provide a nice dashboard without much effort lol.
If I want difference dashboard, I'll still use the "Modern Frame" block but build my own dashboard on top of it.
Also, I've never noticed R2 head moving to throttle command lol, I thought it just spin.
Your R2 idea is a nice touch to the plane and I suggest you to take a look at these:
- TargetSelected
- TargetHeading
- TargetElevation
- TargetDistance
They are FT variable about targeting which if done right, R2 will look at your target, it's maybe too complicated but I think it's cool.
@UmbrellaCorporation
Yeah, maybe on some unlisted post since I rarely use Discord.
I think "modern frame" part from cockpit interior tab will suit your cockpit dashboard more.
@Zaineman
Nice.
You get the mechanics really fast.
What you've done is an equivalence of pilot looking down a bit lol, as long as it doesn't change the camera position it'll be fine.
Due to the nature HUD/camera set up it'll have some misalignment but it barely noticeable anyway.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1There is no exact input but you can use something like this.
@Blitzgamer334
+1idk
I guess it's low fps or low physic.
@Blitzgamer334
Thanks.
@Zaineman
You are so close to making an actual lcd screen lol.
Just need a pitch black piece behind the text label and a slightly tinted glass (color of your choice) on top of te label and a frame.
@Quichenic
+1No, not now.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1No no no.
It's just little things people not noticed but will make a difference if they are missing.
For example, inverting control surfaces control when the plane fly backward, when your plane fly backward the airflow reversed and pulling up will result in nose down, you'll find this useful at high aoa and it'll make some certain maneuver seamless.
Comparing how high g the plane can pull is not something I looking for anyway, it's just too easy to make 100g capable plane.
@shipfinder568
lol
Easy.
Just AG1 + low speed + pull up.
@SkyJayTheFirst
+1lol
To be honest, no.
There are a lot of "quality of life" code that you didn't have but if comparing just basic PSM, I think it's really good.
@Zaineman
Nice.
Or you could going all analog cold war style.
idk
Cats are top priority anyway.
@Lachlan2240
No worry, the plane has tail hook.
@TRD6932
+2That's look sick.
lol
@ZoaMiki
+1Use both control surface and differential thrust, I'd say but if you can only have one, go with control surface.
Control surface is useless at low speed and tvc is useless at low engine power so they complete each other.
@ANWD
I don't mine that.
But now I just wonder how the tvc is bugged.
@ZoaMiki
+1So it's differential thrust then, it behave like gyro so no wonder why my first though was gyro.
And I think control surface will be more useful because when landing, the power setting will be low and differential thrust can potentially be less effective.
For me I'd use AngleOfSlip code for wing tips airbrake.
@TRD6932
+1lol
Do it nowwww.
I have some suggestions for you.
I thinks railgun need some cover, so it'll look sick when deploying and be more sleek when retracted.
And I think it should be switch instead of buttons to stay true to the vintage jet theme.
Alternatively, just replace those analog instruments with digital one lol.
Also, if this get upvotes, the original get half of the point as well so I'll do it anyway.
If I were to make this version, I'd change code in the weapons bay to open with AG2 and maybe add dummy missiles instead, also replacing COPRO device with disco ball.
+1@Beifenglenglong
+1They just work, I don't know why lol.
@gonglingfeng233
It's right tail angle when it's fold.
So this is somewhere between full parts and low part count version of my Wyvern.
Also, you messed up my tvc big time.
@IceCraftGaming
+1lol
I don't blame you.
Lets keep the magic number.
Not bad.
+1For yaw, I suggest you play with AngleOfSlip Funky tree, I assume you using gyro for yaw and if the gyro have AngleOfSlip correction code the plane will act like it actually have rudder.
And you can disable AngleOfSlip by AG1 to go completely yaw unstable like it is of now.
Constantly have to adjust for angle of slip manually is not a nice thing to have in fighter this high-tech anyway.
@SnoWFLakE0s
Thanks.
This help clarify a lot of things for me.
@Gro
+1That's good enough I think.
@DwiAngkasaAeronautics
lol
Understandable.
I'm surprised it still work on difference plane.
@SnoWFLakE0s
+1That's make sense, trapezoidal method without clearing integral value was my first prototype lol, went well until the flight data change dramatically (which will required very difference trim setting for example) and it take a while fir integral to catch up.
Now I'm using variable activators to clear integral, it work for now but still need more tuning to be really work with the rest of my code.
Speaking of which, why and how using integral clearing excessively has negative effect, I have little experience in this kind of stuff.
And thanks again for tips.
@SnoWFLakE0s
I've look at it once and just leave lol.
But that build gave me a glimpse that recursive is possible but I've never proof it to really see for myself until yesterday.
The HUD still contain carrier landing glideslope lol, I can still land with it but no tail hook to catch me.
+2Also, with those beefy gears, I wish this is carrier borne fighter.
And for HUD targeting accuracy, I noticed you did everything right so it's just as accurate as it can get for this simple FT code, the thing is if the target move while bullets is still on the way they will most likely miss since the target take a new path which is away from predicted path, same goes for in-game sight and irl sight too.
(Also this HUD have problem with accuracy when the plane is at steep angle)
@ZoaMiki
Ok, go ahead.
@Beifenglenglong
+2I don't know, it's been just 9 days.
@SnoWFLakE0s
Integral dumping/clearing is exactly what I looking for.
I don't know how to make default SUM function reset it's value either but yesterday I discovered that variable setter can be set recursively as well (SumX = SumX + PitchRate) so I think this is the way I can make my own integral.
@CptLiar
You might have a use for recursive variable setters for integral as well.
You really push the limit of the plane.
+1Nice job.