Damn.....
I was working on a helicopter yesterday...now I don't whether I should continue or not
You , Sadboye12, normalpioneer, Thomas and MIK are the best plane builders on the entire web
And who I always look up to you guys (but ya'll also spoil my big dreams XD)
I was also really not expecting such efficiency in part count, This thing has a full-blown cockpit, guns and cannons. Yet here we are sitting at 157 parts
@Tsuchiisan Twin booms just have this aura for some reason. (When done right)
I've always had an obsession with it, that is why the A40 exists. Although that's the only mention of it I'll make here. If you want to see it; you know what to do
@LieutenantSOT Hey you might want to check your discord. Also try to get whoever your friends where to not scan any codes, or their acc will get opened to a bot.
You may also have to refriend everyone and most likely unblock them
@ThomasRoderick You're in luck, I'm taking all iterations to a point where at least the exterior is complete, this one is a legacy one... so rest assured I'm making it
@ZoaMiki @GuyFolk How about making it dependent on speed then? Something like this? : pow(GS(clamp(AngleOfSlip/x, y,z))) and also shit, I forgot I can't use your real name anywhere else, sorry.
@GuyFolk You can also just keep the TVC independent on the power though, hell that is how it works normally... You'd have to actually write extra code just to make it so that the Tvc has to depend on. I think you're referring to nozzle redirection where your point will stand, but ZoaMiki used engine thrust directly to change yaw, so that point of low engine power is obsolete because in this case, I can yaw regardless of engine power, but the angle of slip advice is good. This thing likes to slip around A LOT and having to manually correct AoS in such an advanced fighter is a downside
@GuyFolk yep
And yes, I am overhauling it... for the... idk... 11th time now? but I have a feeling since @ThomasRoderick is helpin me now that this may be the iteration that will work. I HEAVILy doubt it will be a relaxed stability aircraft though.... Here, Have a bit of a peak.
@Walvis Looking back at this.. Can't believe i did not a throw a chair in excitement after noticing you commented on my post. Big fan of yours! Excited for more war thunder stuff as well.
@jamesPLANESii ill try to make a comprehnsive guide late april on atleast the basics of how you piece together funky trees in efficient ways. Believe me when I say that with the help of operators such as sin, complicated tasks can be typed in short amounts.
@jamesPLANESii now that you elaborated, I understand exactly what you mean. FT was made because the community asked for it... unfortunately I don't think its in the power of the devs to explain it... and as forthe long syntax part... well.. That not much can be done about it... equations are equations, and computers are stupid, we must teach the the exact way to do such calculations step by step. That said... yeah no there isn't many tutorials explaining how to piece FT together.
@GenrichTitov like it or not, Vizzy or FT will be the same amount of difficulty in SP... the concepts are the same, the maths is same, physics is same, the only difference is one is a visual programer, the other is A proper goddamn Language. In bith there are ste terms and operators that you need to remember... and honestly .. esp. For the cockpit part purpose, FT is much more superior as it allows for mixing multiple different physical attributes and then add them out for inputs, again, you jave a great day as well.
I believe there is nothing the devs can or will do about this, funky trees is literally a coding language.. it's honestly efficient in it purpose. I believe that making a highly realistic aircraft will be painful no matter what. As for the tutorials part, there are tutorials... they are just 4 hour long courses of calculus concepts and such. There is no real way to just know everything at a glance. And Vizzy doesn't allow for calculating and then displaying anythingm@GenrichTitov so using it for instruments is an invalid move. Maybe a advenced form of vizzy would work better... Oh look! Its Funky trees!... you are making a bloody plane, and then coding complicated physics into it... I really doubt you can expect that to be a 2 day process. Even vizzy takes a good week to understand and even still your blocks are going to be huge when you start designing flight systems...
Ill keep mentioning it. We engineers go through 4 years of work before we understand laws of physics of aircraft enough to be able to do such things, even in a game... like it or not @Jamesplanesii , physics is physics, and coding is coding. As for how to implement physics to code.. IIRC there is a whole bloody post dictating what variables work made bY snowflake, That post is more than enough to learn the funky trees language. Lastly, booleans are a switch between 0 and 1, make the button a variable and add 2 values to it, 0 and 1, when button is given input, toggle the output between the 2 defined variables which were 0 and 1.
Have a G'day!
@GuyFolk ikr... some of these things such as instable stability doesnt even need maths or lots of research, its already done before.. your planes are a great example. All people need to do is stay more active and learn new things. There are so many people I've known who priorly thought artificial instability is not possible in simple planes. They never knew that all they had to do was incorporate and AoA limiter or G-Limiter into their designs. Its really easy to make a plane fly the way you want as long as you understand it well.
And there are still people who think simpleplanes' physics system can't allow this Stop being stupid guys and get out there! Do some crazy shenanigans!
@colldude @Mikuisaboi when you'd actually download the damn mod and use it on you're planes you will realize that there are still instruments that are missing, this makes up for it, it also takes away the pain of making that throttle control...
@EternalDarkness pretty sad news to me. I just want to say that for the time that you had your mod, it was really fun asking you to remove or add succesors XD Thank you for everything you did as a mod for the community.
AHUSAM
+2@Greggory005 BUT this drawing isn't
+2@CrimsonOnigiri true
+2Damn.....
+2I was working on a helicopter yesterday...now I don't whether I should continue or not
You , Sadboye12, normalpioneer, Thomas and MIK are the best plane builders on the entire web
And who I always look up to you guys (but ya'll also spoil my big dreams XD)
Whats this? A wasp re-upload?
+2Eternal darkness has been summoned
@rexrexThezion holy shoot i thought I was the only nerr into that shiz lol
+2Thanks @Gluck , @F104Deathtrap , @rexrexThezion for the help!
+2It did help quite a bit
I was also really not expecting such efficiency in part count, This thing has a full-blown cockpit, guns and cannons. Yet here we are sitting at 157 parts
+1@Tsuchiisan Twin booms just have this aura for some reason. (When done right)
+1I've always had an obsession with it, that is why the A40 exists. Although that's the only mention of it I'll make here. If you want to see it; you know what to do
@ThomasRoderick
+1@CheckOneTwo It may be because of the twin-boom design... or perhaps because of the sleekness. Sorry for not spotlighting it earlier
+1@LieutenantSOT Hey you might want to check your discord. Also try to get whoever your friends where to not scan any codes, or their acc will get opened to a bot.
+1You may also have to refriend everyone and most likely unblock them
@ThomasRoderick You're in luck, I'm taking all iterations to a point where at least the exterior is complete, this one is a legacy one... so rest assured I'm making it
+1@GuyFolk Great, now fly through mountain isles. And backward.
+1@ZoaMiki @GuyFolk How about making it dependent on speed then? Something like this? : pow(GS(clamp(AngleOfSlip/x, y,z))) and also shit, I forgot I can't use your real name anywhere else, sorry.
+1@GuyFolk You can also just keep the TVC independent on the power though, hell that is how it works normally... You'd have to actually write extra code just to make it so that the Tvc has to depend on. I think you're referring to nozzle redirection where your point will stand, but ZoaMiki used engine thrust directly to change yaw, so that point of low engine power is obsolete because in this case, I can yaw regardless of engine power, but the angle of slip advice is good. This thing likes to slip around A LOT and having to manually correct AoS in such an advanced fighter is a downside
+1@AnderWorks It's a scuffed way to say "Welcom to top gun maverick mates"
+1T for all
+1@TatsuTheOtaku liks hell i'll forget my dear copycat! And also... wow you got far!
+1@TatsuTheOtaku Tatsu????? That was you this whole time!? i was wondering where the Hiro I know went!
+1@GuyFolk yep
+1And yes, I am overhauling it... for the... idk... 11th time now? but I have a feeling since @ThomasRoderick is helpin me now that this may be the iteration that will work. I HEAVILy doubt it will be a relaxed stability aircraft though.... Here, Have a bit of a peak.
@Walvis Looking back at this.. Can't believe i did not a throw a chair in excitement after noticing you commented on my post. Big fan of yours! Excited for more war thunder stuff as well.
+1@KDnotSpy Cool with me
+1@spefyjerbf also this post is beautiful to aerospace engineers :))))))))
+1@spefyjerbf I wonder who taugyt you that sin and cos are just noice
+1@jamesPLANESii ill try to make a comprehnsive guide late april on atleast the basics of how you piece together funky trees in efficient ways. Believe me when I say that with the help of operators such as sin, complicated tasks can be typed in short amounts.
+1@jamesPLANESii now that you elaborated, I understand exactly what you mean. FT was made because the community asked for it... unfortunately I don't think its in the power of the devs to explain it... and as forthe long syntax part... well.. That not much can be done about it... equations are equations, and computers are stupid, we must teach the the exact way to do such calculations step by step. That said... yeah no there isn't many tutorials explaining how to piece FT together.
+1Woah holy cow,mthis thing can do High alpha surprisingly well...
+1@GenrichTitov like it or not, Vizzy or FT will be the same amount of difficulty in SP... the concepts are the same, the maths is same, physics is same, the only difference is one is a visual programer, the other is A proper goddamn Language. In bith there are ste terms and operators that you need to remember... and honestly .. esp. For the cockpit part purpose, FT is much more superior as it allows for mixing multiple different physical attributes and then add them out for inputs, again, you jave a great day as well.
+1I believe there is nothing the devs can or will do about this, funky trees is literally a coding language.. it's honestly efficient in it purpose. I believe that making a highly realistic aircraft will be painful no matter what. As for the tutorials part, there are tutorials... they are just 4 hour long courses of calculus concepts and such. There is no real way to just know everything at a glance. And Vizzy doesn't allow for calculating and then displaying anythingm@GenrichTitov so using it for instruments is an invalid move. Maybe a advenced form of vizzy would work better... Oh look! Its Funky trees!... you are making a bloody plane, and then coding complicated physics into it... I really doubt you can expect that to be a 2 day process. Even vizzy takes a good week to understand and even still your blocks are going to be huge when you start designing flight systems...
+1Ill keep mentioning it. We engineers go through 4 years of work before we understand laws of physics of aircraft enough to be able to do such things, even in a game... like it or not @Jamesplanesii , physics is physics, and coding is coding. As for how to implement physics to code.. IIRC there is a whole bloody post dictating what variables work made bY snowflake, That post is more than enough to learn the funky trees language. Lastly, booleans are a switch between 0 and 1, make the button a variable and add 2 values to it, 0 and 1, when button is given input, toggle the output between the 2 defined variables which were 0 and 1.
Have a G'day!
@WinsWings apologies for pingin you back here.. but I got around adding lore which I believe may contribute to my score.
+1@WinsWings thank you!
+1My Lord... Finally someone made it!
+1@GuyFolk ikr... some of these things such as instable stability doesnt even need maths or lots of research, its already done before.. your planes are a great example. All people need to do is stay more active and learn new things. There are so many people I've known who priorly thought artificial instability is not possible in simple planes. They never knew that all they had to do was incorporate and AoA limiter or G-Limiter into their designs. Its really easy to make a plane fly the way you want as long as you understand it well.
+1And there are still people who think simpleplanes' physics system can't allow this
+1Stop being stupid guys and get out there! Do some crazy shenanigans!
@Cyblox11 well maybe you did not read the comments, this looks much cooler and doesn't destroy you're laptop/pc/mobile while doing so
+1@Ardhito absolutely wrong, the mod provides screens, something that would take hour of FT code mastering normally
+1@colldude @Mikuisaboi when you'd actually download the damn mod and use it on you're planes you will realize that there are still instruments that are missing, this makes up for it, it also takes away the pain of making that throttle control...
+1@Beefy Check out my previous 2 builds :-)
+1@Beefy Dude, no, the circuit race.
+1@SussyBreadBoi I WILL
+1@SussyBreadBoi ILL BEAT IT
+1@ThomasRoderick tonks m8
+1@EternalDarkness pretty sad news to me. I just want to say that for the time that you had your mod, it was really fun asking you to remove or add succesors XD Thank you for everything you did as a mod for the community.
+1Im glad i found this before anyone else could, awesome job btw.
+1When a supercar and a truck fall in love :
+1@ShiroNeko Very dangerous
+1@Thunderhawk Thanks man!
+1@ThomasRoderick hmm yes
+1@LieutenantSOT thanks man!
+1