When the mouse is held over the "Craft Instructions" button in the menu panel, the tooltip is the same as for the "3D Print / Export" button (Export a 3D model of your design.), instead of having its own tooltip.
Check the part connections manually, rather than just hitting "Disconnect All" and "Auto Reconnect". (vertical stabilizer to rudder, vertical stabilizer to design, design to rudder, rudder to fuselage, etc.). Parts get connected in weird ways sometimes.
...Probably, at least to some extent. Kind of like SimplePlanes itself, Blender will need more processing power and memory the more complicated and details-heavy the model gets.
You should be able to do at least some things with it, though.
The "new" Sea Plane is based on the Lake LA-4, but the "old" Sea Plane, from my research, appears to be an original design. (And a rather weird one at that. A low-wing radial-engine plane with pontoon floats?)
Probably because they have more powerful PCs. Performance is dependent on a combination of three main factors: Part count, game settings, and device power. If you have a lower-spec device like a laptop (or just are on a phone or something), you will have lower performance than if you were on, say, a desktop PC with a dedicated graphics card. The part count/performance cost of a specific craft also comes into consideration (bigger numbers = less frames, basically), as do the settings of the game itself (running everything on High will take more processing power than on Medium or Low).
If you want higher performance, I'd suggest either picking a craft with less parts, removing some nonessential parts (detailing, etc.) from the craft you want to use, or to turn down your settings. Buying a better device is technically also an option but you probably aren't going to want to do that.
@TheFlightGuySP I've only seen missiles and bombs work properly so far. Cannons don't (probably for the same reason as guns, since the projectiles aren't already existing "parts" when the plane is loaded, and therefore aren't shared over MP). I have yet to see a definitive verdict on rockets and rocket pods, though, since they could technically be categorized either way.
I think torpedos will show as being dropped, but I'm not sure if they'll actually run on the surface for everyone or not.
I'd go and test them but the server seems to be down again.
The green line and ring you see when a bomb, torpedo, or cannon is selected? That's the predictor. The predictor setting controls whether the predictor is just the ring, the ring and the line, or nothing at all.
Well, you can already read the "Fuel" value, which is why fuel gauges already work. With regards to individual fuel tank blocks, I don't believe that their values are individually calculated once the simulation loads, so it wouldn't be possible to say "okay, as of this point in time, this 20gal tank now has 14gal in it, and this other one has 17gal".
@TheFlightGuySP Mostly correct, but the jet engine does actually have a "Thrust" output variable that could be used as a sort of pseudo-RPM reading, if adjusted properly.
Due to the way wind is simulated, using it to climb in a glider is a bit difficult. Essentially, you need to fly directly into the wind while also maintaining enough forward speed to avoid stalling or getting blown backwards. In practice, this essentially means you'll end up going in a big spiral, and you may have to frequently adjust the wind direction until you get the hang of it.
If you think about it, obliterating digital devices is technically within the realm of intended functions for this. Artillery is supposed to make things go boom, after all.
@Aviator01 Probably not. It's essentially the original Helikillia but with a bunch of fixes after some things got broken with the 1.8 update, as well as a pretty janky (by today's standards) gyro system. The Firebird is essentially a "modernized" version of it, built to take advantage of all of the updates and new features since the original was posted sometime in 2016.
Cue P-63-vs-P-39 debate
+1He jump pretty good too.
Citation: I flew under him earlier
+1Pretty simple thing I just noticed:
When the mouse is held over the "Craft Instructions" button in the menu panel, the tooltip is the same as for the "3D Print / Export" button (
+1Export a 3D model of your design.), instead of having its own tooltip.Good news: The airport is still there
Bad news: The airport is about a million degrees
+1This is unbelievably smooth. Amazing!
+1This seemed appropriate for a gold special.
+1Okay, this is actually pretty clever
+1@xNotDumb Thank
+1Check the part connections manually, rather than just hitting "Disconnect All" and "Auto Reconnect". (vertical stabilizer to rudder, vertical stabilizer to design, design to rudder, rudder to fuselage, etc.). Parts get connected in weird ways sometimes.
+1@Aviator01 tag requested even though it's already posted
+1T
+1This is terrifyingly smooth
+1If he tells you to leave, he's not deserting you. He's telling you to desert him.
+1Ceremonial Flyby
+1Alternate title: Pigpen but the PSM is actually epic instead of just being kind of difficult.
Nice work!
+1Fabulous! I've flown on these several times out of Portland/Seattle and this is spot-on, inside and out.
+1...Probably, at least to some extent. Kind of like SimplePlanes itself, Blender will need more processing power and memory the more complicated and details-heavy the model gets.
You should be able to do at least some things with it, though.
+1Scale down the wheel with XML and increase the wheel diameter. Might mess with suspension a bit but it should shrink the ball.
+1Why did you post this as public
Now everyone can do what you were doing yesterday
+1Maybe give this a look
+1yay!
+1The "new" Sea Plane is based on the Lake LA-4, but the "old" Sea Plane, from my research, appears to be an original design. (And a rather weird one at that. A low-wing radial-engine plane with pontoon floats?)
+1There's a "Clock" tag. It has a total of 11 things in it.
This is not one of them.
why
+1Probably because they have more powerful PCs. Performance is dependent on a combination of three main factors: Part count, game settings, and device power. If you have a lower-spec device like a laptop (or just are on a phone or something), you will have lower performance than if you were on, say, a desktop PC with a dedicated graphics card. The part count/performance cost of a specific craft also comes into consideration (bigger numbers = less frames, basically), as do the settings of the game itself (running everything on High will take more processing power than on Medium or Low).
If you want higher performance, I'd suggest either picking a craft with less parts, removing some nonessential parts (detailing, etc.) from the craft you want to use, or to turn down your settings. Buying a better device is technically also an option but you probably aren't going to want to do that.
+1@TheFlightGuySP I've only seen missiles and bombs work properly so far. Cannons don't (probably for the same reason as guns, since the projectiles aren't already existing "parts" when the plane is loaded, and therefore aren't shared over MP). I have yet to see a definitive verdict on rockets and rocket pods, though, since they could technically be categorized either way.
I think torpedos will show as being dropped, but I'm not sure if they'll actually run on the surface for everyone or not.
I'd go and test them but the server seems to be down again.
+1Alaska!
+1The green line and ring you see when a bomb, torpedo, or cannon is selected? That's the predictor. The predictor setting controls whether the predictor is just the ring, the ring and the line, or nothing at all.
+1Well, you can already read the "Fuel" value, which is why fuel gauges already work. With regards to individual fuel tank blocks, I don't believe that their values are individually calculated once the simulation loads, so it wouldn't be possible to say "okay, as of this point in time, this 20gal tank now has 14gal in it, and this other one has 17gal".
+1Either shrink the size of the wings or set their part type (via Overload) to
+1Wing-2.@TheFlightGuySP Mostly correct, but the jet engine does actually have a "Thrust" output variable that could be used as a sort of pseudo-RPM reading, if adjusted properly.
+1Isn't it just great when a perfectly symmetrical build decides to develop an auto roll for no reason at all?
Maybe check this out, it might help.
+1Due to the way wind is simulated, using it to climb in a glider is a bit difficult. Essentially, you need to fly directly into the wind while also maintaining enough forward speed to avoid stalling or getting blown backwards. In practice, this essentially means you'll end up going in a big spiral, and you may have to frequently adjust the wind direction until you get the hang of it.
+1Would one of these be useful perhaps?
+1T
+1If you think about it, obliterating digital devices is technically within the realm of intended functions for this. Artillery is supposed to make things go boom, after all.
+1@Brayden1981 You must also successfully rickroll @X99STRIKER as a side quest
+1@HydroMoney22 Sure, go for it!
+1Accurate. The asymmetrical thrust provided by the larger port-side main cabin door results in a semi-uncontrolled constant gradual roll to starboard.
+1Do you actually have any pitch control surfaces (and/or rotators on the canards)?
+1There are ten LC-130Hs currently in service, I believe.
Nice!
+1Ooh definitely T
+1T
+1D
+1Kind of cursed but also weirdly cool. Nice!
+1Yep
+1maybe because there's a second "u" in "Augusta"
+1@Aviator01 Probably not. It's essentially the original Helikillia but with a bunch of fixes after some things got broken with the 1.8 update, as well as a pretty janky (by today's standards) gyro system. The Firebird is essentially a "modernized" version of it, built to take advantage of all of the updates and new features since the original was posted sometime in 2016.
+1All tags were requested.
+1@AlmostADev
@X99STRIKER
@Kthepersonorguy
Okay, the suspension on this is really cool, and the body is amazing as well! Nice work!
+1Forsooth, thy speaketh admirably, and well.
+1