110k GuyFolk Comments

  • Unstable but Stable 2 3.4 years ago

    @Grroro
    lol
    Yeah.
    Physic don't understand those people.

    +1
  • Cursed label 3.4 years ago

    @LubenweiNiuB
    idk can't remember.
    It was default image on the Unity so this is all it has. (Take a look in the label code to know what I mean)

    +1
  • F-300-C2 StarHawk 3.4 years ago

    @SkyJayTheFirst
    It's necessary painful work if you ask me.
    I was in this circumstance before, my nozzles made from wings part, it cause drag and unnecessary lag.

    +1
  • X-02S Strike Wyvern ''Archange'' 3.4 years ago

    @GorillaGuerrilla
    lol
    Stat card is just a rough idea more or less.

  • F-300-C2 StarHawk 3.4 years ago

    More stable than the previous version, good job.
    Folding tail is good idea to get rid of yaw stability but the fact that you use wing piece as nozzle give the plane yaw stability, it might be your intention but I recommend removing nozzles or replace it with fuselage part and see for yourself it's true potential without yaw stability.

    +1
  • X-02S Strike Wyvern ''Archange'' 3.4 years ago

    @GorillaGuerrilla
    That's not counting other drag source.
    Stat card is somewhat lying to you.

  • X-02S Strike Wyvern ''Archange'' 3.4 years ago

    @LubenweiNiuB
    Yeah.
    I don't want to stack multiple of them in one place.
    I want it to look somewhat realistic so I just have to go with the space it have.

    +1
  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @MAXRPM09764
    idk.
    I've never play in mobile.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Kangy
    Yeah.
    The fly testing part is more tedious imo.

    +1
  • JARC Atlantine Mapúa FT-27C Cardinal 3.4 years ago

    @Bernkastel
    Nice.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Astro12
    Not much fps loss apparently.
    It's just some trigonometry equation.
    I've not notice anything difference from my first X-02S.
    At least for me.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Zaineman
    That's make sense.
    I think it is the way to do it, fix the scale now (which take more time) is better than fix all other parts that come after which potentially more difficult to fix.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Zaineman
    oof.
    That happened.
    I think it isn't too bad since the game have scaling tool.
    You can scale it all to size you need.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Astro12
    You might need this 🕶

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @BaconEggs
    I'm sorry, you were right about the wire number, after watching some landing footage that I realized.
    But man... if I'm wrong again please bare with me, I didn't do this on purpose, I really don't know stuff.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Zaineman
    Almost speechless perhaps :P

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Kangy
    I think you're right about the 3rd wire after all.
    They caught 2nd wire from the back a lot but caught 3rd wire from the back even more consistently.
    So that's why it lead me to mix up the wire number not to mention my translation skill.
    But don't worry, re-calibrating my glide path indicator is not as hard as making it in the first place.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Kangy
    That's good enough I think lol.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Kangy
    Not English apparently.
    No where near English.
    lol.

    +1
  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Kangy
    I think I'll go watch some more landing footage.
    Those info I've got was only from words not an actual footage so I think I might translate it wrong.
    Funny how it still make sense when I shuffle the wire number around.

    +1
  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @BaconAircraft
    My apologies.

  • Aircraft SU-35-E-FLANKER 3.4 years ago

    @AVERAGEAVIATIONENJOYER
    Yeah.
    Just make sure that control surfaces actually can keep the plane from stalling in the first place, no amount of FT can help if control surfaces aren't powerful enough.

    +1
  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @rexzion
    Absolutely.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @BaconEggs
    Bro, just chill.
    Wiki also have this.

    ...Pilots aim for the second wire for the three-wire configuration or third wire for the four-wire configuration to reduce the risk of landing short....

    And they always catch the 3rd wire from the front so this conflicted with you.
    I think wiki is no good here, it's conflicting within itself (it was a quick search anyway).
    But you left why most people call it 3rd wire unexplained.
    Your last 2 lines didn't help either.

    +1
  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @BaconEggs
    What?
    You clearly not doing any research.
    No fact to spit anymore?

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @BaconEggs
    No.
    You get from what source?
    I've clearly told you what I've got 3rd wire from. (not ape combat, ape combat never mention it anyway)
    Just a quick google search give 3rd wire answer.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @AWESOMENESS360
    Wait till you can try it lol.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @Kangy
    How come I've heard from pilot, documentaries, DCS, wiki, etc. that's it called the 3rd wire?
    Please show me if I'm missing something.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @BaconEggs
    Third wire.
    They count from the front.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    @BaconEggs
    Hmm...
    I think it's 3rd wire since I've seen many people call it as such (Pilot, documentary, DCS and what not) but some call it 2nd wire too.
    Those wires are suspicious.

  • Almost blind carrier landing 3.4 years ago

    I've been developing glide slope for carrier landing that actually guide the plane to the 3rd wire so that's what took me so long.
    Take almost 2 weeks but it was so satisfying when I land.
    But this plane still missing some feature so it'll not be released soon :P

  • Aircraft SU-35-E-FLANKER 3.4 years ago

    This plane actually quite nice.
    I suggest move CoM forward, the plane is too unstable the canard can't limit aoa.
    The plane try to flip over and fly backward while I'm doing Cobra, that's the sign of the plane is so unstable it's better fly backward.

    +1
  • JARC Atlantine Mapúa FT-27C Cardinal 3.4 years ago

    I think landing gear could be further apart, it'll be harder to land in crosswind. (and also while taxi)
    Also, interesting cannon placement, it seems to be really small cannon and it remind me of German mk-108 cannon.

  • Despair 3.4 years ago

    @BeastHunter
    lol
    Now my name will be a household name.

    +2
  • Despair 3.4 years ago

    @BeastHunter
    It's like free advertisement of shame if you ask me.

    +2
  • Despair 3.4 years ago

    @BeastHunter
    I can't.
    I think Raid put more money in advertisement than into an actual game development.

    +2
  • Finally Spinning Radar ! ! ! 3.4 years ago

    @Zaineman
    "remove the text and see that it worked." > That's half the "programming" anyway lol.
    The other half is knowing what to google search.
    * got change to star trek icon lol, I believe the dev put it there as Easter egg.
    And thanks again for your kind words.
    The cockpit I've built is based on real image can find but I have to remove a lot of details for simplicity, I always ask my self "can you use this layout even when you're sleepy or while you are drunk?".
    I've been flying flight sims for quite sometimes but not as long as you lol. (My first sim was Novalogic F-16 and F/A-18 Korea gold)
    So I kinda know what I want for my cockpit instruments.

    +3
  • Despair 3.4 years ago

    @Aviator01
    lol
    I might sponsor this but it got beaten byyyyyyy
    RAID SHADOW LEDEND!!!!!!!!!
    free mobiles mmo rpg game with something somthing somthing

    +3
  • T-113 Helios (thrust vectoring + supermanovrability capable) 3.4 years ago

    @Ihavesnowball
    Thanks.
    This is around the time I start learning Funky Tree.
    And no, physic is not sold separately, physic is just more submissive lol.

  • SuKhoi-Su-57 3.4 years ago

    @Ihavesnowball
    The shape looks way better than mine if anything.

    +5
  • Finally Spinning Radar ! ! ! 3.4 years ago

    @Zaineman
    Hey thanks.
    I appreciate your honestly.
    I just want to clear things up a bit because my work functionality is kinda lost-in-translation. (I can't find a better word)
    It's a mixed feeling tbh, I'm happy that I saw my work spread like a wild fire but sad because it is not at it's full functionality.

    +3
  • SU-57 'Felon' 3.4 years ago

    @CallMeGen
    It is a little wonky on low physic.

    +1
  • SuKhoi-Su-57 3.4 years ago

    @ypaypa
    You build this on Android?
    That's already impressive.

    +4
  • F-300-B3 StarHawk 3.4 years ago

    @SkyJayTheFirst
    Good luck.

    +1
  • SU-57 'Felon' Update 1.11 3.4 years ago

    @SkyJayTheFirst
    lol that's also possible imo.

    +1
  • SuKhoi-Su-57 3.4 years ago

    No fully digital camo?
    I'm sad now.
    Hope some midnight espresso will heal me.

    +1
  • SU-57 'Felon' Update 1.11 3.4 years ago

    @SkyJayTheFirst
    Interesting.
    And the Raptor?
    It'll be T-Rex I'm sure.

    +1
  • SU-57 'Felon' Update 1.11 3.4 years ago

    @Questionmark
    Yes, but please install it correctly otherwise it'll look terrible.

  • F-300-B3 StarHawk 3.4 years ago

    I think this plane flight model is good.
    But yaw rate need more tuning, I saw you use YawRate*0.05 in code, nothing wrong but the value could be lower because the tvc oscillating due to too much control correction.
    I suggest you use YawRate/xx instead, it produce same result but the number is more intuitive, YawRate/40 is really mean if the plane yaw at 40 deg/sec the entire (YawRate/40) will be equal 1 which will cancel out the Yaw input and the plane will be limited to roughly 40 deg/sec rate.
    For comparison, YawRate*0.05 is YawRate/20 which is too sensitive and that's why it oscillate non-stop.
    Same goes for all axis.

    +2
  • Finally Spinning Radar ! ! ! 3.4 years ago

    @SkyJayTheFirst
    I appreciate it.
    If you want to take someone's part, make sure you take from the original lol.