@asteroidbook345 I downloaded the same plane a couple years ago and decided to post it unlisted. No successors. The account was probably banned/deleted. link If it was SR then the successor might pop up once he's unbanned. Again, it's out of his control.
@asteroidbook345 @UFNNICF5TF The absolute least you two can do is help find the original creator and ask this dude to link it up and give credit where it is due. Instead your first course of action was to try and shut him down even though they admitted to not knowing who made it or why the predecessor post isn't linked up.
@asteroidbook345 No intentional circumvention of the successor system and no traces of the original craft. He isn't taking credit for the original build either and searched for the original creator. I don't know what else you're asking for. And what rule does this break anyways? it's not like they expected the predecessor to not be there when they posted. Unless you can find the original post I see no reason why it isn't allowed.
@BagelPlane The tail, nose section, exhaust tubes, and armament (in terms of cannons) vary with pretty much every new version. It's a lot to keep up with and it gets kinda murky researching one specific type or version.
@CrushburnHQ You can layer the fuselage parts. One layer would be attached to the main fuselage while the other would be connected to a hinge rotator. (Example) As long as the piece sits flush with the fuselage you can use this technique.
Upon request, here is your 'harsh' critique.
You used a lot of good techniques here, but there are some parts of this plane that are not proportionate to the real thing. (Ex. the leading edge of the main wing leaves too big of a gap between the wing and the front fins, the cockpit/fuselage sections are too thin, the arrestor hook does not sit flush with the fuselage, and the back end of the main wings are slanted too far back) There is a fix for this when making replicas. I recommend using Designersuite if you aren't already using it, it's a lot easier to make accurate replicas without having to eyeball it. The flight model is smooth, and the details are nice to look at. The airbrakes need work, though. You can use thin fuselage pieces to create a curved airbrake piece. (Retracted vs. Extended)
Here's an example of how this works.
Looks really nice and it flies great. I also love the folding wings. However there are some places on the wings where you could've used fuselage pieces instead of inlets to prevent weird shading effects on the wings.
@Shadow17 Yep. This isn't your build. The only thing you did to edit this aside from the cockpit piece was repainted it. This build isn't yours. No matter how much you claim you did more, it's evident that you didn't. You haven't even given credit, and you circumvented the successor system.
Why was I tagged?
welcome
Imagine being excited by quick links to profiles in 2020
this post was made by SP dark theme gang
No pictures?
WHAt
ok then
Alright boys who’s got the list
@asteroidbook345 I downloaded the same plane a couple years ago and decided to post it unlisted. No successors. The account was probably banned/deleted. link If it was SR then the successor might pop up once he's unbanned. Again, it's out of his control.
@asteroidbook345 @UFNNICF5TF The absolute least you two can do is help find the original creator and ask this dude to link it up and give credit where it is due. Instead your first course of action was to try and shut him down even though they admitted to not knowing who made it or why the predecessor post isn't linked up.
@asteroidbook345 No intentional circumvention of the successor system and no traces of the original craft. He isn't taking credit for the original build either and searched for the original creator. I don't know what else you're asking for. And what rule does this break anyways? it's not like they expected the predecessor to not be there when they posted. Unless you can find the original post I see no reason why it isn't allowed.
@BagelPlane The tail, nose section, exhaust tubes, and armament (in terms of cannons) vary with pretty much every new version. It's a lot to keep up with and it gets kinda murky researching one specific type or version.
How do I delete another person's comment
If anything this thread is pretty entertaining. Just wanted to pop in and say hi before this thread gets thanos snapped :)
hi
ok
we really out here exchanging comments on forum posts for upvotes
Wow. Absolutely atrocious statement. Please stay very far away from this community before you ruin it.
whoa I like the part where it's grey.
The grey part is cool too tho
ok
How to turn your computer into an IED with 3 easy steps
@EternalDarkness I was joking. I know the superior nation of Cyprus will not get a tag :(
@DeathStalker627 @EternalDarkness The almighty nation of Cyprus doesn't need a military industry
@EternalDarkness Can you please add Cyprus pls and thank
ℙ𝕃𝔸𝕐𝕊𝕋𝔸𝕋𝕀𝕆ℕ
@CrushburnHQ You can layer the fuselage parts. One layer would be attached to the main fuselage while the other would be connected to a hinge rotator. (Example) As long as the piece sits flush with the fuselage you can use this technique.
@CrushburnHQ Oh, I see, my mistake for thinking it was a replica. Overall this is a job well-done.
Upon request, here is your 'harsh' critique.
You used a lot of good techniques here, but there are some parts of this plane that are not proportionate to the real thing. (Ex. the leading edge of the main wing leaves too big of a gap between the wing and the front fins, the cockpit/fuselage sections are too thin, the arrestor hook does not sit flush with the fuselage, and the back end of the main wings are slanted too far back) There is a fix for this when making replicas. I recommend using Designersuite if you aren't already using it, it's a lot easier to make accurate replicas without having to eyeball it. The flight model is smooth, and the details are nice to look at. The airbrakes need work, though. You can use thin fuselage pieces to create a curved airbrake piece. (Retracted vs. Extended)
Here's an example of how this works.
Looks amazing. Can’t wait to see what you do with this build :)
Awesome guide! There is also a way for people to change the FOV ingame without installing the freecam mod, since it's pretty buggy.
(For ex. if you want an FOV of 15)
Open the dev console and type:
//MainCamera>Camera.set_fieldOfView 15
Then:
//CameraPlane>Camera.set_fieldOfView 15
Looks really nice and it flies great. I also love the folding wings. However there are some places on the wings where you could've used fuselage pieces instead of inlets to prevent weird shading effects on the wings.
@BaconAircraft Thanks, I wasn't aware how pronounced those bumps were in comparison
I already have a two seater built, no worries. @WarHawk95
@TrislandianAlliance The version you are seeing right now is the RF-101.
@Shadow17 Delete the post. It's stolen. Not one bit of this is yours and you shouldn't be rewarded for it either.
@Shadow17 You don't need to tell me you didn't copy it. This is the exact same plane posted by johndfg. You didn't build a single piece of this plane.
bruh moment
@Shadow17 Yep. This isn't your build. The only thing you did to edit this aside from the cockpit piece was repainted it. This build isn't yours. No matter how much you claim you did more, it's evident that you didn't. You haven't even given credit, and you circumvented the successor system.
@Shadow17 why'd you delete my comment
The only part you added was a cockpit piece. Stop lying.
I usually just use discord, you can DM a bot and copy the image link
ok
poggers
J2M
Oh no it's starting, bye bye forum thread
The flight model on this thing is amazing. Keep up the good work!
I have the Ned for sped
@Cobrahuey OV-10 bronco :)
You should check your priorities. All that time spent on War Thunder is gonna amount to nothing when you’re older.
Why not both?
Looks nice physically, but the weight balance needs some serious work. Your fuel tanks are extremely heavy and make takeoff/flight really difficult.
My pleasure, it’s nice to find a person who also uses the P-61 in WT, it’s pretty much always underestimated :) @ShootsPlanes
@TheBroadside Much appreciated :)