@C47skytrain for now, the PEA Project is officially on halt until further notice; like i said lol, engines in sp is weird in a way, i try to replicate the weight as close as i can but engines in SP is just... they just have too much acceleration, you dont notice it as much on slow aircrafts but for faster aircrafts, its a headache and kind of.. a weird experience? like as Ive mentioned before, i use the smooth function so the engine gradually spools up to speed, but the problem with that is that it goes both ways, spooling down takes time, and the longer you spools up, the longer you have to spool down and such, great example i have is my B-17 which, well, kek
electric engine's are fun to play with XD; you either get no thrust, or a lot, maybe that's just me but i usually get it like that lmao(also noted that i barely mess with electric engines if ever at all, on my previous account of course)
@C47skytrain ik lol, though to limit acceleration typically i use the smooth function and.. for jets that means a very slow throttle response and such which is why i rarely make jets lmao
@LunarEclipseSP lmao; used to had a ship called "Regina Elena" which is basically just offbrand Caio Duilio with MW logic too, it had mostly russian-based armaments save for the 3x 76mm cannons XD
a little problem(can be easily fixed), pitch authority(a.k.a rating/rate) is a bit too much, it turns on a dime like its a fighter, so for now, i cant approve it, however, hot damn 62 parts w.out the bombs? sweeeeet; now you know how i feel making the one-two days planes XD
@noob101ALT your F-4 has been evaluated, and was deemed to be unrealistic performing; speed is okay-ish, but take-off and maneuver needs some work, you may also arm it with weapons; it also has autoroll issue
@LunarEclipseSP on the other hand, i would argue they're rather easy to land... with the correct brake torque, stock landing gear's an arse when it comes to that; though tbf, i rarely fly tricycle landing gear setups anyway lmao
@Graingy hmmm.. i guess there is a point in what you said, interesting... hmm.... i kinda have a base idea from kind of an old build Ive made, either Catamaran or Trimaran but basically a large carrier eitherway, i wont make it useable by Players but as something to land on rather which might be doable hopefully, the design itself... is what i'm stumped with-ish, hm.
@Graingy well, atleast in my eyes, something that big is inherently problematic in the way that to shorten it, a lot; its a logistical nightmare, its an easy target(with or without sonar pinging, a submarine could just launch a torpedo at your general direction and home in to the sound, granted, sound decoys do exist), and.. idk, i guess i may, but i will still not commision one into my navy, because for a ship that size i could have more of the smaller ones and that's more versatile
@Graingy shush
+1@Majakalona toot
+1@Majakalona doot
+1@Mousewithamachinegun122 @Graingy dootdoot!
+1@Majakalona yes
+1@Mousewithamachinegun122 dootdoot
+1@Majakalona yes
+1@TTL yeah, Ive erased it out of.. well, a lot of things id rather not say
+1poggers
@TheUltimatePlaneLover
+1sand
+1poggers
+1poggers car
+1@TTL *cough*
Tsuchiisan/Minichiisan
--> Monarchii
chii is my moniker pretty much everywhere lmao
also you archived my Hansen lmao so that's poggers cause i can use the Para-chan system' onboard it for my CIWS lmao
+1@LunarEclipseSP Ive noticed yes, poggers
+1@Speedhunter Fuselage rotat forward 90° XD
+1@C47skytrain for now, the PEA Project is officially on halt until further notice; like i said lol, engines in sp is weird in a way, i try to replicate the weight as close as i can but engines in SP is just... they just have too much acceleration, you dont notice it as much on slow aircrafts but for faster aircrafts, its a headache and kind of.. a weird experience? like as Ive mentioned before, i use the smooth function so the engine gradually spools up to speed, but the problem with that is that it goes both ways, spooling down takes time, and the longer you spools up, the longer you have to spool down and such, great example i have is my B-17 which, well, kek
+1@GabrielSatori yea lol
+1@ThomasRoderick yea lmao, good catch XD
+1poggers
+1electric engine's are fun to play with XD; you either get no thrust, or a lot, maybe that's just me but i usually get it like that lmao(also noted that i barely mess with electric engines if ever at all, on my previous account of course)
+1@Rjenteissussy the lada would win lmao
+1poggers lmao epik
+1@ShinyGemsBro i will steal your kneecaps
+1beeg lmao XD
+1lmao
+1@Mousewithamachinegun122 yeah, i said it before i upvoted lol; thus changing the comment lmao
+1chii was here lol
+1@C47skytrain ik lol, though to limit acceleration typically i use the smooth function and.. for jets that means a very slow throttle response and such which is why i rarely make jets lmao
+1@PrussianAirlines Schleswig-Holstein
+1@Graingy ahh, the loving community of leaking classified document XD
+1@PrussianAirlines school
+1@LunarEclipseSP now that you mention it, you make a lot of bombers, there's three already XD
+1@LunarEclipseSP lmao; used to had a ship called "Regina Elena" which is basically just offbrand Caio Duilio with MW logic too, it had mostly russian-based armaments save for the 3x 76mm cannons XD
+1@LunarEclipseSP much better, still somewhat bordering on semi-realistic territory but its hella fun; i'll list it soon, brb
+1a little problem(can be easily fixed), pitch authority(a.k.a rating/rate) is a bit too much, it turns on a dime like its a fighter, so for now, i cant approve it, however, hot damn 62 parts w.out the bombs? sweeeeet; now you know how i feel making the one-two days planes XD
+1@DatTrainAndCarGuy19 poggers ( ^▽^ )
+1@noob101ALT your F-4 has been evaluated, and was deemed to be unrealistic performing; speed is okay-ish, but take-off and maneuver needs some work, you may also arm it with weapons; it also has autoroll issue
+1@DatTrainAndCarGuy19 do tag then lmao
+1@DatTrainAndCarGuy19 poggers, sounds like a dreamland XD
+1@DatTrainAndCarGuy19 (is the biking infrastructure good there?)
+1foom
+1@LunarEclipseSP on the other hand, i would argue they're rather easy to land... with the correct brake torque, stock landing gear's an arse when it comes to that; though tbf, i rarely fly tricycle landing gear setups anyway lmao
+1@DatTrainAndCarGuy19 must be a good company you're working on, hot damn, can i get a recommendation lmao
+1@Graingy 9 baka cirno wa
+1@Graingy hmmm.. i guess there is a point in what you said, interesting... hmm.... i kinda have a base idea from kind of an old build Ive made, either Catamaran or Trimaran but basically a large carrier eitherway, i wont make it useable by Players but as something to land on rather which might be doable hopefully, the design itself... is what i'm stumped with-ish, hm.
+1@Mousewithamachinegun122 THOSE COCKROACHES 🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳🪳
+1much wow, i don't know (i am that person lmao)
+1@Graingy sweet
+1@Mousewithamachinegun122 OH SO ITS YOU WHO STOLE MY M
+1LOW-MOISTURE MOZZARELLA AND CHEDDAR
@Graingy well, atleast in my eyes, something that big is inherently problematic in the way that to shorten it, a lot; its a logistical nightmare, its an easy target(with or without sonar pinging, a submarine could just launch a torpedo at your general direction and home in to the sound, granted, sound decoys do exist), and.. idk, i guess i may, but i will still not commision one into my navy, because for a ship that size i could have more of the smaller ones and that's more versatile
and yes, a nightmare that one is.
+1