@MsMuseumJanitor To advise you, I would keep the rotor's scale at 1,1,1. It's not a very good idea to scale rotors or prop engines as it may change their flight properties. it's better to edit the vanilla settings for blades size etc, you can even exceed the normal limits with xml, but not the scale.
@AlexRol05 There is no "direct" attribute which will modify the fuel consumption of an engine. To do that you will have to reduce the max input (which will act like you were flying with less Throttle, which consumes less fuel), and then you will adjust the powerMultiplier attribute (which don't have an impact on consumption) so your engine produce more thrust (example: max input 0.1, so it will consume and produce 10% of the original values, and then powerMultiplier 10 so your engine will produce 0.1*10=1, so the original thrust, but the consumption remains at 0.1).
9:52 & 10:35 in the video, but I could've explained better in the video.
@DoftPack1129 Probably, I didn't analyzed what taken a lot of parts. But Malone builds are very detailed, so if the total part counts is double compared to yours, it means that his wings are built more efficiently
PS: maybe take a look at the gear wells of my Citation V. You will notice that I devide the wing for the wells shape only on the part which is necessary, the rest of the wing takes less parts, also for the wells interior, I used simple parts for the walls ; looks like you did a different building technique on your plane, which takes more parts.
Nice replica ! it is flying very well, and it's looking good (not a fan of those weird shaped roundels tho)... For me the gunner has a quite slow speed, and it's very sensitive, which makes aiming difficult. But apart from that, everything is done nicely.
The problem are the movements. See, when you're driving a truck on a computer, you're clicking on keys, instead of turning a wheel. It's completely different. So maybe you could find a way so your steering wheel can be turned only with a rotating mouvement. But that seems complicated for a such inexperimented player that you are.
@DoftPack1129 The landing gear seems good to me, but you should increase the damper, so it will takes a shorter time to absorb movements and bumps, and it will be more stable.
Also, experiment with different wing airfoils, they have differents lift and drag specifications.
@BaconEggs Thank you for your very deep feedback (maybe a bit too long ? lol). In some cases you stated, I said there was alternative means of calculating things, if people have the data.
Just some questions:
For the load factor, the good method would be to keep the default control surface angle, and putting a FT code so it reduces the input with airspeed ? (which would simulate the increase of pressure on the stick ; some people don't put those limits and prefer to put detachers on the wings etc, but that's not my philosophy... what do you think ?)
For the airfoil yeah I could have gone a little deeper. I would like to add a reference, I know that V (the user) had made a graphic about SP airfoils lift/drag (more accurate than JamesPlanesii ones, plus his is no longer available) but I can't find the SP.com post...
But yeah I kinda keeped this tutorial at medium level, to be accessible for everyone, and experimented players like you probably know how to do their own researchs on aerodynamics etc so the flight model is even more realistic.
@Hooha12 Just so you know, a lot of ww2 fighters were known to ground loop at takeoff (or even at landing), they were demanding precise control. So what I would do is revert them to an acceptable value, maybe even increasing the side traction for the tail wheel, and try to increase the authority of the rudder. Most of the time, if you keep a fighter below 10-20° yaw slip you can save it with rudder, above that the spin is almost inevitable.
But eh, you do what you want, it's your build.
Well, this is an interesting build, there is a lot to say.
First, 1140 parts. I mean, it doesn't looks like it has so much. Where does those parts gone ? for me it's a 600-700 parts build, and it looks a waste of parts. If it's done on purpose, maybe you could explain in the description why it contains so much parts, what were the different stages of the building, so people could understand (and I don't).
Second, flying. It doesn't fly like a normal airplane. On a total of 5 take-off runs, I've succeeded to take-off in one piece only 2 times. It looks like the tail doesn't want to lift whatever you do, and the wings directly stall which puts you in an uncomfortable situation. The landing is probably easier to do. Maybe it's a design flaw ? Anyway, maybe you could use the instructions to give advices to the players which wants to fly this build, because it's not easy.
So yeah this build is quite weird, it seems like you have the capacity of making very good builds, but not doing it the right way.
If you need advices, I can help you.
Nice build, a lot of interesting features, however I wonder if the arcade flying was done on purpose ? it accelerates very fast and does maneuvers which would have probably killed the pilot lol.
For this number of parts, it's not a bad build ! I'm kinda impressed about how it looks.
The only flaws I found is the Roll rate which is maybe a little excessive, and the main gears don't have enough grip to taxi properly. Also the tail gear has brake, which shouldn't be the case.
When building an aircraft with fuselage wings, you can scale the wings down so they don't overlap with fuselage, and they preserve their flight properties as they were not scaled, I've explained that in my flight model tutorial.
Keep it up !
@realSavageMan Just disable the targeting. You know, you have air-to-air, air-to-ground, and targeting disabled. Also I think the marks disappear if you hide the UI (F9).
@RicardoACE Ehh... Problem. Due to the fuselage modifications, the subassembly don't perfectly fit, as you can see on this image. For me, it's a lot of work, and to be honest I don't want to do it. If you want I can give you the project as it is now, and you can do the modifications. I kept the -5F cockpit btw. Also some fuselage modifications would be needed to clear the back seat space.
@RicardoACE I think I can do it, but idk when. I think I can done it relatively quickly by using the parts of this build on yours. If I do the thing before mid-december is it okay ?
@AndiTontrando Yes, as I said, reducing drag points is good to make the aircraft perform much realistically, but here you got too far I think. In the tutorial I will present a maneer to put a specific amount of drag depending on the irl craft performance.
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.
it's a 757 version like the C-32 ?
+2Wish, go to hell
+2Not 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
+2@Jmestes @RSH10Thunderbeam Thanks
+1@MsMuseumJanitor To advise you, I would keep the rotor's scale at 1,1,1. It's not a very good idea to scale rotors or prop engines as it may change their flight properties. it's better to edit the vanilla settings for blades size etc, you can even exceed the normal limits with xml, but not the scale.
+1@AlexRol05 There is no "direct" attribute which will modify the fuel consumption of an engine. To do that you will have to reduce the max input (which will act like you were flying with less Throttle, which consumes less fuel), and then you will adjust the powerMultiplier attribute (which don't have an impact on consumption) so your engine produce more thrust (example: max input 0.1, so it will consume and produce 10% of the original values, and then powerMultiplier 10 so your engine will produce 0.1*10=1, so the original thrust, but the consumption remains at 0.1).
+19:52 & 10:35 in the video, but I could've explained better in the video.
Sadly it's very difficult to fly
+1@DoftPack1129 Probably, I didn't analyzed what taken a lot of parts. But Malone builds are very detailed, so if the total part counts is double compared to yours, it means that his wings are built more efficiently
+1PS: maybe take a look at the gear wells of my Citation V. You will notice that I devide the wing for the wells shape only on the part which is necessary, the rest of the wing takes less parts, also for the wells interior, I used simple parts for the walls ; looks like you did a different building technique on your plane, which takes more parts.
The pictures are misleading because it doesn't include the camouflage
+1Nice replica ! it is flying very well, and it's looking good (not a fan of those weird shaped roundels tho)... For me the gunner has a quite slow speed, and it's very sensitive, which makes aiming difficult. But apart from that, everything is done nicely.
+1@Funnyball098 Which ?
+1@GuianLorenzo thank u
+1@GoldenSidewinder Who is HABU ? this name sounds familiar but I don't remember
+1@SuperSuperTheSylph Yep, kinda.
+1@SuperSuperTheSylph It can happen if you fly at high altitude and if the aircraft has a high slip angle or angle-of-attack.
+1The problem are the movements. See, when you're driving a truck on a computer, you're clicking on keys, instead of turning a wheel. It's completely different. So maybe you could find a way so your steering wheel can be turned only with a rotating mouvement. But that seems complicated for a such inexperimented player that you are.
+1There is probably something wrong with this build
+1@Ericshideout It is now available on my profile :)
+1@DoftPack1129 The landing gear seems good to me, but you should increase the damper, so it will takes a shorter time to absorb movements and bumps, and it will be more stable.
+1Also, experiment with different wing airfoils, they have differents lift and drag specifications.
That would be probably easier to do with SP2, with the new paint and decal system
+1@BaconEggs Thank you for your very deep feedback (maybe a bit too long ? lol). In some cases you stated, I said there was alternative means of calculating things, if people have the data.
+1Just some questions:
For the load factor, the good method would be to keep the default control surface angle, and putting a FT code so it reduces the input with airspeed ? (which would simulate the increase of pressure on the stick ; some people don't put those limits and prefer to put detachers on the wings etc, but that's not my philosophy... what do you think ?)
For the airfoil yeah I could have gone a little deeper. I would like to add a reference, I know that V (the user) had made a graphic about SP airfoils lift/drag (more accurate than JamesPlanesii ones, plus his is no longer available) but I can't find the SP.com post...
But yeah I kinda keeped this tutorial at medium level, to be accessible for everyone, and experimented players like you probably know how to do their own researchs on aerodynamics etc so the flight model is even more realistic.
@Hooha12 Just so you know, a lot of ww2 fighters were known to ground loop at takeoff (or even at landing), they were demanding precise control. So what I would do is revert them to an acceptable value, maybe even increasing the side traction for the tail wheel, and try to increase the authority of the rudder. Most of the time, if you keep a fighter below 10-20° yaw slip you can save it with rudder, above that the spin is almost inevitable.
+1But eh, you do what you want, it's your build.
Well, this is an interesting build, there is a lot to say.
+1First, 1140 parts. I mean, it doesn't looks like it has so much. Where does those parts gone ? for me it's a 600-700 parts build, and it looks a waste of parts. If it's done on purpose, maybe you could explain in the description why it contains so much parts, what were the different stages of the building, so people could understand (and I don't).
Second, flying. It doesn't fly like a normal airplane. On a total of 5 take-off runs, I've succeeded to take-off in one piece only 2 times. It looks like the tail doesn't want to lift whatever you do, and the wings directly stall which puts you in an uncomfortable situation. The landing is probably easier to do. Maybe it's a design flaw ? Anyway, maybe you could use the instructions to give advices to the players which wants to fly this build, because it's not easy.
So yeah this build is quite weird, it seems like you have the capacity of making very good builds, but not doing it the right way.
If you need advices, I can help you.
Nice build, a lot of interesting features, however I wonder if the arcade flying was done on purpose ? it accelerates very fast and does maneuvers which would have probably killed the pilot lol.
+1For this number of parts, it's not a bad build ! I'm kinda impressed about how it looks.
+1The only flaws I found is the Roll rate which is maybe a little excessive, and the main gears don't have enough grip to taxi properly. Also the tail gear has brake, which shouldn't be the case.
When building an aircraft with fuselage wings, you can scale the wings down so they don't overlap with fuselage, and they preserve their flight properties as they were not scaled, I've explained that in my flight model tutorial.
Keep it up !
When pressing Left, the boat rolls right and yaws left very slowly... I think I have seen more efficent boats in the past
+1@realSavageMan Just disable the targeting. You know, you have air-to-air, air-to-ground, and targeting disabled. Also I think the marks disappear if you hide the UI (F9).
+1The fact that the last cars avoided you is some great technology
+1We rarely see this version of the U2 with the bare aluminium, it was a good idea to make it.
+1@RicardoACE Ehh... Problem. Due to the fuselage modifications, the subassembly don't perfectly fit, as you can see on this image. For me, it's a lot of work, and to be honest I don't want to do it. If you want I can give you the project as it is now, and you can do the modifications. I kept the -5F cockpit btw. Also some fuselage modifications would be needed to clear the back seat space.
+1@RicardoACE I think I can do it, but idk when. I think I can done it relatively quickly by using the parts of this build on yours. If I do the thing before mid-december is it okay ?
+1@AndiTontrando Yes, as I said, reducing drag points is good to make the aircraft perform much realistically, but here you got too far I think. In the tutorial I will present a maneer to put a specific amount of drag depending on the irl craft performance.
+1@OverlordPrime The probability that it's involuntary is very small, to be honest.
+1C-130J-30 but with four-bladed propellers ??
+1I 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.
+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