It’s evident that the people who have visited this forum post have the sufficient intellect to resist the primal temptation to click the upvote button, and I applaud them.
@SasuValentin2 as long as you added something to the original craft (even a livery), it’s still within the rules.
Also, an airline having a private army? Interesting concept…
@AlivePan I’m almost done with my entry, but I used the cockpit interior from the Wasp (the exterior is still completely made by me), is it still allowed?
Oh, and if you want to know how to make it fly better, that's a whole other story, and I don't know how to teach that, so go search for some tutorials online.
@PuckusAirplanesAndMore to open the blueprint tool, press the buttons circled in red in this image, and take note of the sequence, because you'll only be able to see the "eye" button at first.
Cockpit looks workable, but other than that, yeah it doesn't look good. This is because the proportion of width to length is incorrect, and the primary wings are too small.
Here's one thing you can do: use the blueprint tool.
It can be found by expanding the "eye" icon and looking at the top left. When you open the blueprint tool, you can upload side and top-view blueprints of the aircraft that you're making. And these blueprints can be found on the internet, so it'll be easy.
Using the blueprint tool really helps you get the length and wingspan of the plane right, and as a result it doesn't look ugly.
Oh, and by using the blueprint tool, you can upload your own custom screenshots, and you won't need to post with views of the ugly designer anymore. It'll help you get a lot more upvotes.
Hope I helped you, and if you have any (non-FT related) questions, just ask me.
@LonelyAustrianUhlan the fatigue was indeed highest at the windows (and doors), but my point is that it wasn’t the shape that was the problem.
From this article:
”Many readers familiar with the Comet disasters might be wondering why, with this article drawing to its close, I have yet to utter the phrase “square windows.” But the truth is that “square windows” never had anything to do with the Comet crashes. The windows were not and never were square — in fact, you can see for yourself in the above image, which shows a Comet 1 window next to a modern Boeing 737 window. Can you tell which is which? You probably can, but not because one is any more “square” than the other.
The cause of the Comet’s difficulties was not the shape of its windows, but de Havilland’s failure to predict the complex load pathways and stress concentrations in the material. And in terms of fundamental design deficiencies, the most significant fact was that the fuselage skin was simply too thin, leaving it unable to withstand the local stresses generated around its perfectly normal-shaped windows. The lessons of the twin disasters were therefore much more profound than the oft-repeated concluding line, “and no one ever built a jet with square windows again.” In reality, no one was ever that stupid! But the Comet crashes did fundamentally alter the process of designing airliners, bringing about a more thorough and regimented approach to the problem of metal fatigue. And the inquiry was a milestone of its own, establishing many of the techniques which form the basis of modern investigative practice, from mathematical modeling to underwater recovery. The story of the Comet, then, is a tale of firsts, both the positive kind, and the dangerous kind — the perils of pushing into the unknown. The solution to the Comet mystery was not reckoned in money or manpower, but neither was its creation. The only thing that would have saved the Comet was knowledge, but in the history of human innovation, seldom have we learned what we must do without first learning what we must not.”
Contrary to popular belief, the Comets didn’t crash because they had square windows; their windows weren’t even square, and actually have the exact same shape as those on modern airliners. Instead, the crashes happened because the engineers had underestimated the amount of load tha the metal used would experience, leading to metal fatigue in the Comet occurring at a much higher rate than initially anticipated.
Just a fun fact! :) And also T
@ApplePies74 I remember that you asked me if I could make this a long time ago, and even though I didn't build this because of your request, here you go
@DatRoadTrainGuy19 this challenge
It’s evident that the people who have visited this forum post have the sufficient intellect to resist the primal temptation to click the upvote button, and I applaud them.
+2From the models, this plane looks like an A330 with the capacity of a 777
+1You could technically do all 3 and just make a 20-minute long video…
Soon we gonna have monsters fighting each other in this war challenge
+1@SasuValentin2 as long as you added something to the original craft (even a livery), it’s still within the rules.
Also, an airline having a private army? Interesting concept…
@Scrugy51 nice
@CL125 and just when I finished making a submission for his challenge…
+1Also did you get a strike or something? I get redirected to the homepage when I click on your profile.
+1@AlivePan I’m almost done with my entry, but I used the cockpit interior from the Wasp (the exterior is still completely made by me), is it still allowed?
Oh, and if you want to know how to make it fly better, that's a whole other story, and I don't know how to teach that, so go search for some tutorials online.
@PuckusAirplanesAndMore to open the blueprint tool, press the buttons circled in red in this image, and take note of the sequence, because you'll only be able to see the "eye" button at first.
Word of advice, it'd be better if you made the plane before you post a teaser
+1Next time, please consider your name choices more carefully…
Ok this is actually amazing
This is why you play SP, you get to enjoy both games at once!
+3@teddyone02 i fixed it
+1@Ductwind589 true
+2T@LieutenantSOT Da Nang, Hue and Phong Nha
+1Me who's going to North Vietnam in 2 weeks:
+1We are constantly being reminded that Juno is better than SP; our only advantage is the community (and maybe AI traffic)
Cockpit looks workable, but other than that, yeah it doesn't look good. This is because the proportion of width to length is incorrect, and the primary wings are too small.
+1Here's one thing you can do: use the blueprint tool.
It can be found by expanding the "eye" icon and looking at the top left. When you open the blueprint tool, you can upload side and top-view blueprints of the aircraft that you're making. And these blueprints can be found on the internet, so it'll be easy.
Using the blueprint tool really helps you get the length and wingspan of the plane right, and as a result it doesn't look ugly.
Oh, and by using the blueprint tool, you can upload your own custom screenshots, and you won't need to post with views of the ugly designer anymore. It'll help you get a lot more upvotes.
Hope I helped you, and if you have any (non-FT related) questions, just ask me.
that's not nice... airplanes deserve respect and equal rights you know
@KoreanAircraftliner sure, but remember to link the original posts in your forum, and tag me on it
Did you change anything on the aircraft?
@LonelyAustrianUhlan the fatigue was indeed highest at the windows (and doors), but my point is that it wasn’t the shape that was the problem.
+1From this article:
In my opinion, the only fruit that goes well on pizza is pineapple (I'm a hawaiian pizza lover btw)
+5But an attack helicopter isn't meant to be an interceptor-
Oh, and strictly no comments targeting other races. I will remove every one of such comments.
Contrary to popular belief, the Comets didn’t crash because they had square windows; their windows weren’t even square, and actually have the exact same shape as those on modern airliners. Instead, the crashes happened because the engineers had underestimated the amount of load tha the metal used would experience, leading to metal fatigue in the Comet occurring at a much higher rate than initially anticipated.
Just a fun fact! :) And also T
Or you could just copy the “Direct Link”, but whatever
Oh look, I’ve gone back to the past again!
@Dragoranos you can refer to this tutorial. I know it’s for a bomb bay, but the principle is more or less the same.
Interesting colour scheme
+1I don't know, maybe?
Now, make it Mach Ten
@IndoMaja HK-600, since your previous aircraft was the HK-500
kurger bing
+1@HoshimachiSuiseiMyBeloved uhh then press FireGuns (i don’t know what the button for that is on mobile)
Ok I’ll try fixing this
+1@HoshimachiSuiseiMyBeloved press space to simulate it
@Aarav
P.S. For some reason, the website actually exists, but it's really weird
@ApplePies74 I remember that you asked me if I could make this a long time ago, and even though I didn't build this because of your request, here you go
Interesting
I mean he's already gold so not exactly "underrated"
This… could actually work…
@Dogedogebread13 yeah I saw the heliplane