A simple Il-76 when looking far away, but then.... I noticed it has a crane. I think it's a really great feature, and if I'm not wrong, I think there are only a very few helicopters or transport aircraft builds with a crane on the website.
One flaw, though ; it would have been nice to put an AG on the ramps, because when using the crane, you can't get very close to the object you want to take.
But otherwise well done.
With this type of propulsion, there is almost no torque created by the main rotor. You could almost remove the tail rotor. The french did that in the 50s, with the SO.1221 Djinn ; The turbine was producing compressed air which was injected at the tip of the rotor blades, and for yaw control, they kept some residual thrust from the turbine which was directed on a rudder. A complicated system, which is why we don't see a lot of examples.
You did an amazing work with this livery !
However flying the aircraft is quite disappointing ; Roll rate is not proportionnal to the input, ground steering is reversed, wheels are braking too much, despite the presence of water paddles they don't steer the aircraft... And finally this aircraft could easily have 2 times less parts but that's not very important. Overall, you still have a lot to learn ; this still deserves an upvote.
This is a beautiful truck, however there is a lot of things which could be better ;
- No instructions ; what Throttle does ? What about VTOL, AG2, AG3 switches on the dashboard ?
- Mobile / PC controls: with a custom variable used in wheels you could easily switch the input between Roll and Yaw.
- The braking system block the wheels which makes it stop instantly
- The second back axle suspension is not working
I give you an upvote with the hope that your future builds would fix this issues.
What's your next build ?
@KSB24 You can look about my forum about tires grip. It's not the ultimate solution but maybe it could help.
I don't use a lot of your creations, however I see that you develop a lot of technologies which are really advanced, and most of the time I'm surprised, well done for that
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.
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.
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.
When giving feedback, most of the time I talk about precise points, and I encourage the builder so he know what he could do on his future builds in order to get better.
Sometimes there is just nothing to say. Or sometimes when the build is not playable, I give up. I prefer to spend time on builds which have great potential and in which I feel that the builder want to put efforts in them.
Not bad !
+2Variable Angle Wings ?
+2I had discovered the biber a few years ago, when I saw the name and the submarine I remembered it !
+2Nice Build !
Wtf how can you make a 1000+ parts build on Android...
+2Pas mal du tout ! Par contre les volets des puits de trains d’atterrissage principaux c’est en option ? xD
+2it look nice
+2I like the story behind this
+1Looks like a mini- super frelon
+1The end lmao
+1car
+1A wind turbine in SimplePlanes... not a very popular type of build lol
+1@RGaming00 I see
+1Why especially him ? It's not one guy that will change how active is the website, it's the whole community.
+1The first part has nothing to do with PIDs though... Just FT knowledge
+1@dabestsock No ?
+1A simple Il-76 when looking far away, but then.... I noticed it has a crane. I think it's a really great feature, and if I'm not wrong, I think there are only a very few helicopters or transport aircraft builds with a crane on the website.
+1One flaw, though ; it would have been nice to put an AG on the ramps, because when using the crane, you can't get very close to the object you want to take.
But otherwise well done.
With this type of propulsion, there is almost no torque created by the main rotor. You could almost remove the tail rotor. The french did that in the 50s, with the SO.1221 Djinn ; The turbine was producing compressed air which was injected at the tip of the rotor blades, and for yaw control, they kept some residual thrust from the turbine which was directed on a rudder. A complicated system, which is why we don't see a lot of examples.
+1@dots For the tires
+1@dots You should use the part size attribute instead of the xml scale
+1Great design ! But I'm not sure about the intelligence of using airbrakes as flaps... as they don't have the same goal...
+1You did an amazing work with this livery !
+1However flying the aircraft is quite disappointing ; Roll rate is not proportionnal to the input, ground steering is reversed, wheels are braking too much, despite the presence of water paddles they don't steer the aircraft... And finally this aircraft could easily have 2 times less parts but that's not very important. Overall, you still have a lot to learn ; this still deserves an upvote.
This is a beautiful truck, however there is a lot of things which could be better ;
+1- No instructions ; what Throttle does ? What about VTOL, AG2, AG3 switches on the dashboard ?
- Mobile / PC controls: with a custom variable used in wheels you could easily switch the input between Roll and Yaw.
- The braking system block the wheels which makes it stop instantly
- The second back axle suspension is not working
I give you an upvote with the hope that your future builds would fix this issues.
What's your next build ?
I don't think Gyros are necessary if you know how to tune PIDs with jet engines
+1SP multiplayer moment
+1Luckily, no AI planes were injured in this clip
+1Interesting but.... I mean.... Sometimes there is no axis caption... Even no units - which makes that not very useful
+1The official simple plane
+1This thing is getting 38 upvotes
+1@KSB24 You can look about my forum about tires grip. It's not the ultimate solution but maybe it could help.
+1I don't use a lot of your creations, however I see that you develop a lot of technologies which are really advanced, and most of the time I'm surprised, well done for that
Is it really better than scaled beacon lights ?
+1@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.
+1I 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.
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 !
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.
+1Imagine if you have a random chance of shifting bad
+1Nice looking build. Maybe Roll is too much sensitive ?
+1You can choose the AI status only when spawning one.
+1Looks 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...
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
+1@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
+1When giving feedback, most of the time I talk about precise points, and I encourage the builder so he know what he could do on his future builds in order to get better.
+1Sometimes there is just nothing to say. Or sometimes when the build is not playable, I give up. I prefer to spend time on builds which have great potential and in which I feel that the builder want to put efforts in them.