@BOSKnight I think you misunderstood my question. I asked about evaluation criterias.
By the way I only see one other challenge on your profile. So no, lying doesn't makes you experienced.
@Blackmyer808 Well on your aircraft the center of mass (CoM) is too much pushed forward, you have to reduce the gap between the center of lift (CoL) and the CoM, but keep the CoM at the front of the CoL. It will make it more maneuverable.
Putting slats have no useful aerodynamic effect in SP, you can forget them, or you can make them only for "looks".
For the control surfaces, don't deflect them at an angle greater than their stall angle (Flat bottom: max 27°, semi: max 17°, symetrical: 14°).
And if you use control surfaces integrated to wings, add the control surfaces on your main wing, not with a separate wing, it's more efficient.
What are the judgment criterias ?? Looks like you don't have much experience in the game so I wonder how you will be able to judge...
I mean, it doesn't mean that a 100k user is making a very good build that it should be first...
I really like the startup procedure on this build, which looks accurate. However it doesn't simulate the RPM when the engines are started so you don't know their status.
The exterior looking is good. But the flight model is kinda poor ; the engines are too much powerful, the brakes too. It can fly slower than an airliner which is not really possible with this type of wing.
@Solent Just report him, he did the same thing on one of my builds.
Anyway, nice build there, If I'm not wrong one of the spoilers is moving in the wrong direction, probably because mirroring. And one suspension tend to be less strong, maybe for the same reason. But it flies well otherwise.
Good looking build, however it is quite heavy on the roll axis but still maneuverable, the Trim for pitch axis is not very appropriate for low speeds. The flaps seems to have no aerodynamic effect. But eh, it flies.
Also next time you could edit the brake force of the wheels so it doesn't project the pilot on the dashboard lol.
Looking very nice, but controls with the sort of gyro makes it kinda hard to fly like a real helicopter.
Next time think about making gyro settings of the rotor 0 !
Nice build, too bad the wings parts are oversized compared to the fuselages wings. For info, if you rescale the wing parts (for example 0.1,0.1,0.1), they keep their original virtual wing area.
Really nice build, I really like how it fits in this livery. Flight performance is almost perfect there. I would just say that it breaks a bit too hard. But overall, nice job !!
This is a great looking plane, nicely done, I really like it.
Because this is an unfinished project, I will share my thoughts on this build:
For me flight characteristics are not bad, but it has a lot of inertia on the roll axis, I don't really know why. The flaps doesn't seem to do anything though. And It can't glide far (glide ratio around 4, drag issue)...
Gears are inverted with the Landing Gear input. In addition, the main gear gets out before the gear doors are open.
If I remember correctly, the sort of paddles at the back of the floats can be lowered (by rotation) when you're on the water, so they're fully underwater and have a great yaw authority. But I don't think it's synced with the gear. You could put wings in them so they will provide a good force in the water I think, as it is denser than air.
The flight computer or something is maybe located a bit too low, which gives a weird orbit view...
But overall it's good, I'm looking forward for the finished product !
Nice looking build, however flight performance is poor. Ailerons only get their max efficiency around 70% instead of 100%, and elevators are too much effective. The aircraft has too much power and too much drag.
Looks cool !
I think you can make "false headlights" which will not produce lighting in place of the real ones, and put some sorts of rally lights or light bar on the front or on the roof...
I mean, with SP you can cheat, you can make engines with little consumption (reduced input) but with tons of power which will still make the aircraft fly.
What would be interesting though, is to calculate the consumption per passenger of a such flight with a standard airliner, and do the same with a regional turboprop aircraft, and compare...
@jamesPLANESii Of course but why would you measure a glide ratio with wind ?
I'm talking about his formula because yours counts the airspeed on the 3 axes, but you need only one for the glide ratio.
@BOSKnight So If my seaplane float I earn ten ?
@BOSKnight What criteria will you look at to evaluate the creations?
@BOSKnight I think you misunderstood my question. I asked about evaluation criterias.
By the way I only see one other challenge on your profile. So no, lying doesn't makes you experienced.
This is a cool design, but the maneuverability is poor, also it can't glide
Not bad, just a question, why using standard prop engine instead of the turboprop engine ?
@Blackmyer808 Well on your aircraft the center of mass (CoM) is too much pushed forward, you have to reduce the gap between the center of lift (CoL) and the CoM, but keep the CoM at the front of the CoL. It will make it more maneuverable.
Putting slats have no useful aerodynamic effect in SP, you can forget them, or you can make them only for "looks".
For the control surfaces, don't deflect them at an angle greater than their stall angle (Flat bottom: max 27°, semi: max 17°, symetrical: 14°).
And if you use control surfaces integrated to wings, add the control surfaces on your main wing, not with a separate wing, it's more efficient.
@Blackmyer808 Do you want some advices for your future builds ?
+1The exterior looking is not that bad but the flight model makes it almost impossible to fly, and not capable of gliding.
+1What are the judgment criterias ?? Looks like you don't have much experience in the game so I wonder how you will be able to judge...
I mean, it doesn't mean that a 100k user is making a very good build that it should be first...
@Solent I'm on high physics settings, maybe it has to do something with it...
I really like the startup procedure on this build, which looks accurate. However it doesn't simulate the RPM when the engines are started so you don't know their status.
+1The exterior looking is good. But the flight model is kinda poor ; the engines are too much powerful, the brakes too. It can fly slower than an airliner which is not really possible with this type of wing.
@Solent Just report him, he did the same thing on one of my builds.
Anyway, nice build there, If I'm not wrong one of the spoilers is moving in the wrong direction, probably because mirroring. And one suspension tend to be less strong, maybe for the same reason. But it flies well otherwise.
Good looking build, however it is quite heavy on the roll axis but still maneuverable, the Trim for pitch axis is not very appropriate for low speeds. The flaps seems to have no aerodynamic effect. But eh, it flies.
+1Also next time you could edit the brake force of the wheels so it doesn't project the pilot on the dashboard lol.
Looking very nice, but controls with the sort of gyro makes it kinda hard to fly like a real helicopter.
+1Next time think about making gyro settings of the rotor 0 !
"This 777-300 has remained on the ground at Wright International Airport since several months, departure date is unknown"
Very nice build, good job.
+1Nice build, too bad the wings parts are oversized compared to the fuselages wings. For info, if you rescale the wing parts (for example 0.1,0.1,0.1), they keep their original virtual wing area.
+1@Mitterbin Don't want to be bad but there is certainly a lot of fighters which are looking better
@N5 SP in SP
what
A Typhoon that wants to compete with the N.1500 Griffon.
Does it have play store ?
.....
..
you see where I'm going with this
Really nice build, I really like how it fits in this livery. Flight performance is almost perfect there. I would just say that it breaks a bit too hard. But overall, nice job !!
Imagine if you have a random chance of shifting bad
+1The dacia sandero !!!
Racing forklift
what about running SP on this old computer ?
I still have one of these from the 60s
@SemedianIndustries it feels like it destabilize the craft in some situations...
+2Great ornithopter though.
How to disable the tail movement ?
This is a great looking plane, nicely done, I really like it.
+1Because this is an unfinished project, I will share my thoughts on this build:
For me flight characteristics are not bad, but it has a lot of inertia on the roll axis, I don't really know why. The flaps doesn't seem to do anything though. And It can't glide far (glide ratio around 4, drag issue)...
Gears are inverted with the Landing Gear input. In addition, the main gear gets out before the gear doors are open.
If I remember correctly, the sort of paddles at the back of the floats can be lowered (by rotation) when you're on the water, so they're fully underwater and have a great yaw authority. But I don't think it's synced with the gear. You could put wings in them so they will provide a good force in the water I think, as it is denser than air.
The flight computer or something is maybe located a bit too low, which gives a weird orbit view...
But overall it's good, I'm looking forward for the finished product !
Nice looking build, however flight performance is poor. Ailerons only get their max efficiency around 70% instead of 100%, and elevators are too much effective. The aircraft has too much power and too much drag.
Nice build
Nice looking build. Maybe Roll is too much sensitive ?
+1You can choose the AI status only when spawning one.
+1Maybe... That would be better to make your planes stable ?
Looks cool !
+1I think you can make "false headlights" which will not produce lighting in place of the real ones, and put some sorts of rally lights or light bar on the front or on the roof...
I remember reading your first post. By the way I guess that you are french ?
no
+1I mean, with SP you can cheat, you can make engines with little consumption (reduced input) but with tons of power which will still make the aircraft fly.
+1What would be interesting though, is to calculate the consumption per passenger of a such flight with a standard airliner, and do the same with a regional turboprop aircraft, and compare...
P-40 Warhawk
@GeneralCorpInc Yes, you didn't have read right. Anyway you have edited your comment
+1@GeneralCorpInc No. Only front axis for airspeed, not front and vertical.
+1@jamesPLANESii Of course but why would you measure a glide ratio with wind ?
+1I'm talking about his formula because yours counts the airspeed on the 3 axes, but you need only one for the glide ratio.
@jamesPLANESii Can I suggest you to use
+1-sqrt(pow(rate(Latitude),2) + pow(rate(Longitude),2))/rate(Altitude)(credits WNP78)Strokemaster
+1@Graingy This is the variable for the rate of change of the Yaw axis of the vehicle
Why not keeping it for yourself ?
@Planemodder1911 (YawRate>x)|(YawRate<y)
x is a value > 0
y is a value < 0
@32 same