9,901 MethaManAerospace Comments

  • nothing is confirmed 11 months ago

    Though it would make more sense to update SP massively to 2.0 rather than create a stand alone SP2...

    +6
  • nothing is confirmed 11 months ago

    • Proper simulation of radar/any avionic system
    • Realistic and procedural weaponry (linking in with the avionics)
    • Better implementation of aerodynamics (+ more aerofoil types)
    • concave parts
    • Multiplayer
    • Campaign?

    But! Do not overcomplicate it! As @jamesPLANESii said, the main advantage that SP has over SR2 is it's easy to use. So I would say keep the same GUI, just improve the rest of the game mechanics.

    Though personally, idk why Jundroo didn't merge SP and SR2 when making SR2. It seemed more logical to me...

    +6
  • Simple changes (fixes) in SP that will greatly improve the game one month ago

    Sad thing is that most of these problems and features demanded for SP have been/are being fixed/introduced in SR2.
    In that respect why even bother to play SP?
    Well, because SP has a simpler GUI and goal. I am now starting to play SR2 only because these features aren't being added/fixed in SP. Not because of the space element; which is the only different fundamental game mechanic...
    TLDR: Please give SP as much attention as SR2, it deserves it...

    +5
  • Why do people always ask such “dumb” questions? 11 months ago

    It's to avoid any drama like we had a month or 2 ago I'd say. I always ask as a form of courtesy. Usually though my mods are not worth uploading. To me, people should only upload the modified plane if the mod is as good as the original.

    +5
  • High Detail, High Mod - Mig-29 one year ago

    luckily now, most of the modded stuff on this plane can be done stock.
    It just adds loads of parts and requires more effort... (less parts than it used to though)

    +4
  • A Bionic Bird 1.9 years ago

    "Fly Wheel"

    +4
  • An Actual Discrace To The SP Community. 7 months ago

    Now it really is a meme build because of this complaint post!
    XD
    Upvotes only have the personal value you attribute to them. they are just a measure of people thinking "I'm gonna click this big friendly yello button" in relation to a build.
    Heyyyy! People do what they want, whether you think it stupid or not...
    So chillax and ignore it if it bothers you. If not, then enjoy the roller coaster!

    +3
  • High Detail, High Mod - Mig-29 one year ago

    @Falkenwut fair enough, everyone has different need...
    I just wish the devs reworked the wings and weapon system... (and added a few more in flight stats to funky trees)

    +3
  • Project GMC Part 1-1: Building the Piston Engine 1.3 years ago

    not bad!
    I need to get back to piston engines now that I use designer suit it should be quite a bit easier...

    +3
  • New Team Member 1.6 years ago

    yeeeeeeeeee! Well done guys!

    +3
  • Hunter X 'Miss Demeanour' (51 followers too) 3.0 years ago

    @WeSeekANARCHY Wanks!

    +3
  • French Alpines 3 months ago

    Great map! But I was so sad to see that you'd only covered mid Alps!
    Not even the Mt Blanc! A map of the Alps without a Mt Blanc?!
    I noticed because I was looking for my old house near Grenoble, which was just cut out by a few kilometres.
    This also lead me to find that the map wasn't properly oriented... Not even 90 deg out of phase I'm pretty sure... I'm also not sure about the scale, might need a double check...


    So, could the map please be updated to at least be useable with a compass?
    What would be even better is including the northern (more iconic) Alps and maybe even extend to the southern coast? (It's even called Alpes Maritimes in France FYI)
    The north would be most important though...

    +2
  • Possibly the most important game suggestion ever made 4 months ago

    I'd love to record tutorials and other helpful/fun vids for SP.com but for some reason I can't seem to record SP at more than 10fps...

    +2
  • GERMAN CORSAIR 7 months ago

    Yeet boys!

    +2
  • The difference between SP and SR2 and what I think SimplePlanes2 should be (Oppinion) 11 months ago

    SP is great, for what the game lacks in technicality you can compensate by cleaver building and skill like @BogdanX has been doing for a while now.
    Keep in mind that a lot of very useful engineering features were only added to the base game last patch (FT, overload, DS, and the funky trees). Up to now these were all mods except for funky trees which simplified the cleaver engineering tricks you had to pull of for a basic sub-system MASSIVELY.
    I'd the that the only thing that SP needed to level up was the funky trees.
    As I and you mentioned in @RailfanEthan 's post, SP2 is not needed. What I'd advise the devs is to just take time to improve and add more content to SP. To mark SP 2.0 they could add something big like a map or physics revamp, or a complete new set of procedural parts like SR2's.
    That's just my take on the situation.

    +2
  • Emperor's new Plane one year ago

    Su 57

    +2
  • Aves ACS-61 one year ago

    dang, you build surprisingly cool planes!
    Very original designs!
    keep it up!

    +2
  • High Detail, High Mod - Mig-29 one year ago

    A way to modify the spool time of engines is to modify the max input value in the IC.
    bigger than 1: slower acceleration but more fuel consumed.
    vice versa for less than 1

    +2
  • Dassault Super Etendard M 1.3 years ago

    Bel avion! new techniques!

    +2
  • Dassault Mirage 2000C 1.7 years ago

    after testing, I will agree with all the others' comments, in that you could have done a lot better than what it is (same problem with your claims). But you still did a lot of good work, so credits for that... :D

    +2
  • [WEBW] CF-18 1.8 years ago

    Beautiful but flies horribly... Some instability may be realistic as the plane is quite manoeuvrable but this is quite overdone... @BogdanX is totally right... also AG7: why exactly? did you test VTOL up? If you want, I can test it and try to improve just the flight characteristics, it'd be interesting :)

    +2
  • an invention that will change simpleplanes forever 2.1 years ago

    @goboygo1 @Stickman Yes, watching it over and over again only makes us more fixated on incorrect thinking. If you are really that excited about it just tell us... pls...

    +2
  • Old Jokes, Week 1: The doc's receptionnist is completely finished 2.4 years ago

    @InternationalAircraftCompany @randomusername @JunkyardLeader Thanks all by the way!

    +2
  • Old Jokes, Week 1: The doc's receptionnist is completely finished 2.4 years ago

    @Razor3278 @DemonSniper8 @Strikefighter04 Thanks all by the way!

    +2
  • A Come Back?! Not quite... (Wanna Hear A Joke?) 2.4 years ago

    @aircraftarsenal123 @jamesPLANESii @XjayIndustrys Thanks all! disclamers were in there but now enhanced :)

    +2
  • Ho 229 -!- Pure stable flying wing -!- 4 months ago

    @CDRxavier It has drag rudders... so I'm not sure what you are trying to get at...

    To me SR2 is basically SP2 with a bad interface and a few bad things... But a lot of cool stuff, especially in the last update... TBH I ain't done much but programming recently...

    Go ahead and do the hint and share it with me! I'd like to know what you mean...

    +1
  • Ho 229 -!- Pure stable flying wing -!- 4 months ago

    @CDRxavier Bro. This has no V stab and works.

    Also, nice to see you, it's been a while!

    +1
  • I wanna know about the community. 4 months ago

    1 Yes
    2 no I was actually looking for a game exactly like this and found SP
    3 It is a simulator where you build your own plane... It literally is a design tool.

    +1
  • Possibly the most important game suggestion ever made 4 months ago

    On the contrary I think that this feature would create an even bigger divide within the community...
    Better/more tutorials would be better, but I think the problem is that there is not enough community coverage and tutorials... For techniques such as panelling, instruments, Funky Trees, as a few examples of things which can't be taught within the game. The important thing that comes from this is motivating people to learn the features of the game and try them out.


    My question is why hide feature for people who don't use them, when they don't use them?
    The features (to hide) you mentioned are ones that you have to look for. Hiding them wouldn't de-clutter the screen or even the simple fun of building/flying simple planes.


    When I started playing (over 4 ago now), we didn't even have these features. People still managed to make amazingly complex stuff! But it was SOOOOO difficult to do! And these features are SOOO useful even to users who build very minimalist planes.


    TLDR: I don't see the point... ¯_(ツ)_/¯

    +1
  • Hunter X 'Miss Demeanour' (51 followers too) 5 months ago

    @Sovietstrike333 @Tang0five @tsampoy Thank you for making me pass 100!

    +1
  • Vietnam-Era AH-1 Cobra 5 months ago

    @shipster I saw there were only 15 point left, I couldn't resist XD

    +1
  • Flying at mach 2 - Mirage 2000 5 teaser 6 months ago

    @WarHawk95 tres! J'ai aussi un projet de Delta type Mirage... Mon banc d'essais pour FT...

    +1
  • reshade test 2 (release + zero) 7 months ago

    How about making SP track IR compatible?

    +1
  • its coming 8 months ago

    DCS FTW!

    +1
  • Lockheed Martin C-130 Hercules 9 months ago

    @Omel sisi! muchos muchos! XD

    +1
  • Lockheed Martin C-130 Hercules 9 months ago

    @Omel no problemo!

    +1
  • 12th Century Cog "Stella Maris" 9 months ago

    @BeryllCorp no problemo!

    +1
  • F-117 NightHawk 9 months ago

    too round! XD

    +1
  • Coaxial 4 Piston engine plane 9 months ago

    doesn't work for me...

    +1
  • Matra Type 116 rocket pod 9 months ago

    le vautour sert encore!

    +1
  • Vautour II a 10 months ago

    @Sadboye12 thanks!

    +1
  • Vautour II a 10 months ago

    @Evenstsrike333 tanky you!

    +1
  • MIK GA3 JetStar 10 months ago

    Map?

    +1
  • Focke-Wulf Ta 152 H1 10 months ago

    very nice! it's good to finally have a quality 152 H

    +1
  • The difference between SP and SR2 and what I think SimplePlanes2 should be (Oppinion) 11 months ago

    @JohnnyBoythePilot These are the features I would like the most too and I am glad that the SP community is very responsible in general about features and the purpose of the game. And to make it event better the devs have seemed very responsible about it (even though SR2 is ever so slightly higher on the priority, which is fair).
    The only 2 things that limits SP to SP1 I think is the map and physics. Change those and the game feel completely new! It is definitely needed for 2.0 but is IMO not enough to justify a completely new game to sell.

    +1
  • Missiles... 11 months ago

    this can already be manipulated by the partCollisionResponse tag to a certain degree... it just takes time to incorporate it to every part in a design...

    +1
  • Turning away from making fictional aircraft in a game... one year ago

    @FlyingThings also, what books are you using for reference and learning?

    +1