@damanironman I never said it did -- at full throttle, it'll just keep accelerating. I've gone up to one million mph with another hover-build, there's no reason to believe this one won't do the same.
@TheBlueRobotProduct Yeah, because in one dimension you can only control the cornerTypes of the fuselage blocks, which limits the kind of shapes you can make in one go. You only have full control over two dimensions, partial control over the third. So you couldn't ever do a full-featured 3D modeling interface like in CAD software like 3DS Max, Maya, Modo or SolidWorks without changing the game engine fundamentally. I wouldn't even want to think of implementing one of those interfaces on mobile, it's simply not possible. So if there's ever a game that lets you create your airplanes out of meshes or NURBS or whatever, it would only be able to run on high-end desktop computers. It would be one hell of a game, though. It could be the first game in which players actually evolve the game itself by creating increasingly-complex vehicles. You'd make it so they would be able to tweak the AI, so they could script missions, create short movies, etc.
There are multiple versions of my program, or multiple programs if you prefer. Most of them are parametric functions that generate things like nose cones, smoothly curved sections, hollow cylinders, etc.
So you asked me a question, and I answered it comprehensively (and politely, and humorously), and that constitutes harassment? Thanks, I can always use a good hearty laugh.
It's a bit like an average wimp picking a fight with the Hulk, then complaining that he got bruised.
> You could've just said ''Not for me no''
I'm sure you'd like everyone to behave in a way to protect your fragile ego, but the world, and especially I, aren't here to accommodate you.
For your own sake, I hope you toughen up a great deal, or life is going to be very... hurtful for you.
@Othawne I love it when someone's defeated in an argument and the best they can do is "Ooh, you wrote a novel" and "I'm allowed to have my own opinion." Compelling arguments, those. Enjoy clinging to your incorrect and indefensible point of view :)
And it's a pity that you think I'd have to go "ape shit" to write that response... that's just off the top of my head. Sorry to burst your bubble (again).
It's all about expectations, one way or another. Most builds on SP are models -- they don't fly especially well, or perform their functions especially well (no offence intended, to anyone -- well-built models are great). For instance, an airplane may have aimable turrets, but it doesn't fly stably enough, or the turrets aren't controllable enough to hit anything. So it's understandable that a lot of users don't see the point in downloading something. They look at the images and part count, and hit upvote.
This really hurts the few builds that do function well, though. To get around this, if you have a functional build, make a GIF of it doing its thing and include it in the description. This will let people know that they can actually have some fun with your build.
@EternalDarkness Thanks for the vote of confidence. Your builds are the same, always high quality.
I like how you're exploring the game's flight model. There's no reason a 3000 mph aircraft can't be as stable as a 1000 mph one. Here's what you can fix:
Roll control surfaces need to be aligned with the center of mass
Wing loading is too low, which is what causes flutter at high speeds; try to get it above 20 lbs/sq ft
For high speed flight, you need to reduce the maxDeflectionDegrees of control surfaces for optimal handling. It's just like real airplanes -- if you deflect a control surface 35 degrees at Mach 3, the wing will probably break apart. To increase/decrease the control authority, adjust hingeDistance and/or the size of the control surface.
I think you'll have to put in a bit more effort than that if you expect to get many upvotes. Moreover, a lot of people on this site won't upvote my builds or their successors, so you've go that going against you.
@Treadmill103 What a great quote. I'm going to shamelessly adapt it for this aircraft:
"Make it totally clear that this aircraft is an engine of destruction. Don't add a cockpit -- that not only adds a point of un-armoured vulnerability, it humanizes the aircraft. Make it look like a beast lunging in its final attack on its prey -- all straining sinews, hunched shoulders, neck at full extension, jaws ready to tear into the enemy. Make the intakes look like gaping maws. Make it out of thick metal, then absolutely sheathe that in blocks of armour. You can never have enough armour. Don't use curves -- this thing needs to be all angles and facets, brutal and sharp. Make the engines really big -- they're the muscles of an aircraft, and everyone likes big muscles. As for the guns... make it perfectly clear that they're guns. Make them big, no-nonsense, and give them really thick barrels. Anyone looking at this beauty from the wrong end should feel like they've got two telephone poles pointed at them. Make it clear that this is not an airplane you take to airshows to do some fancy-pants show-off maneuvers in fancy-pants livery, this is a machine with one purpose and one purpose only -- to make war."
You're partly right in that the community has changed and seems to be in a cut-throat competition for points. However, there are still quite a few people who're in it for the fun.
More importantly, you can increase the number of upvotes you get very simply -- by presenting your builds better. Remember that first impressions are very important, so your first thumbnail image needs to look good. For a newish user, especially, It's the only thing that determines whether people click through to the actual post or not. Here are some things you can do:
When taking screenshots for uploading, make sure your build fills the screen. Right now it's very hard to tell what your build looks like from the thumbnail. See this, for instance.
You're on OSX, so there's no reason you should be building like you're on iOS. Mods are available for OSX - get them. First, get a designer background so you can get rid of the ugly platform and have a background that sets off you build. Second, get Color Editor so that you can have better colours for your builds. Third, get Fine Tuner and Overload, they'll help you do a great deal more than the default editor can.
Because the first impression is visual, it's not enough to upload a purely functional build. If you have an amazing walker mechanism but it looks like a bunch of sticks glued together, most people won't even click on it. It needs to look good. Once you've built the functional bit, encase it in a great-looking body.
Remember that no one started getting lots of upvotes straight away*. Every new user goes through a period of uploading lots of builds that get no attention. Once you get spotlighted or featured, your career will take off.
* Unless they're someone who deleted their account and came back, so that they're starting from a high skill level -- there are people who do this just to be able to boast about how quickly they got to platinum.
Great shape, and flies/functions well. Remarkably well done, but you're not presenting it well enough. First of all, the camera is too zoomed out in the thumbnails. Try to zoom in so the aircraft fills most of the view. Second, try a more eye-catching color scheme. This deserves a lot more upvotes.
"Your mission, James, is to infiltrate the research facility at Bilyarsk, and... retrieve... their hypersonic fighter prototype, and fly it back to England. It's a two-seater, but don't take that as an excuse to bring back one of those Slavic blondes you like so much."
"Go to Russia, shteal a plane. Yesh, shur.... How about a brunette, though?"
@SpiritusRaptor No chance of that, I'm afraid. Most of this community has diligently ignored me, and some of them talk quite a bit of trash about me behind my back. Outstanding, ground-breaking, one-of-a-kind builds of mine get ignored and have no chance of being seen past the first few hours. I have zero interest in letting most of this community benefit from my work.
Congratulations to you, @amazingperson124. Don't forget to tell me your Steam username or Amazon e-mail in an unlisted post. Note that if you use Steam, I have to add you as a Steam friend and then wait three days before I can send you a gift card.
@KSPFSXandSP You mean the cosmetic bomb casing, or the bombs themselves? If the former, it's about 60 feet long and 8 feet in diameter. Makes for nice videos.
If you mean what actual bombs I'm using, it contains two Boom 50s scaled up 3x.
@Ephwurd First, you need to install ReShade -- it just needs to be extracted to the folder containing SimplePlanes.exe, which on my PC is G:\games\Steam\SteamApps\common\SimplePlanes\. In there you'll find a folder called reshade-shaders\Shaders. Extract the SledDriverShaderPack.fx file there, then launch the game, and in the config dialog that comes up, click "Reload." That should load all the shaders in the .fx file, which you can enable one by one. The one you see in my screenshots and gifs is OrangeBlueSaturated.
@MaximusTheMinimus Ha, I wish I'd been an SR-71 pilot... but the only flying I've done is as an airline passenger. I chose the name because the SR-71 is my favourite aircraft by far.
@PlaneBuild0512 Thanks. So you're saying that you left your airplane almost finished in the designer, and when you came back, a lot of the parts were missing? Maybe someone messed around with your device. Have you tried undo-ing?
Reverse engineering is the best way to learn. But if you simply want the gun, I can post it separately or you can configure it yourself. The settings I used are:
@FlyingThings Wow, that is one hell of a coincidence. I wasn't thinking of that airplane at all when I built this or named it. If you'd asked me before just now what a Gloster Meteor looked like, I couldn't have told you.
@Camroncs Hmm. Part of that is true, all my aircraft go fast, handle beautifully, and have very smooth shapes. The high speed is because I find slow aircraft very boring.
But as for function, just look at my profile. I have short-range mortars, long-range mortars, howitzers, flying howitzers, hovering howitzers, spotter drones, spaceships, fighters, alien aircraft, guided missiles, drone bombs, bomb shotguns, plasma shotguns, and many more highly functional builds that do their function very well.
It's absolutely fine if you don't like my work, but no one can say my builds aren't functional.
@ThomasRoderick The gyro on this build is standard, not modded at all. Setting extreme values for gyroscope speed/stability, and/or using multiple gyros, are messy and ineffective fixes for inherent problems with the build itself -- incorrect mass or drag distribution. For this kind of build (I call it the spaceship-type), the slightest imbalance in mass/drag distribution causes problems like rolling to one side, or pitching up or down when moving. The faster you move, the more noticeable these effects become, and no number of modded gyros will solve the problem. When the mass and drag distribution is correct, you can go as fast as you like without any stability problems. I have spaceship-type builds that go over one million mph with perfect stability.
You're right that gyros don't work well on fixed-wing aircraft, and they make the handling feel off as well -- the controls feel sluggish, as when you're losing hydraulic pressure in a real aircraft. In my opinion, gyros don't belong on fixed-wing aircraft at all.
@Pianoman Sure thing. To me, it's a shame that a build this unique and high-quality got so few comments, and didn't get spotlighted by anyone but me. It just shows the cliquish, narrow-minded nature of a large part of this community. It's very sad that a website that's entirely about being creative and building things has so much negativity.
The engines are a bit small, but it's still great.
+1@datpilotguy Thanks. Check out this and this as well, they might make your day three times over.
+1@damanironman I never said it did -- at full throttle, it'll just keep accelerating. I've gone up to one million mph with another hover-build, there's no reason to believe this one won't do the same.
+1@jamesPLANESii Clearly you don't believe me or @JetCarRacer... I, for one, don't care.
+1@TheBlueRobotProduct Yeah, because in one dimension you can only control the cornerTypes of the fuselage blocks, which limits the kind of shapes you can make in one go. You only have full control over two dimensions, partial control over the third. So you couldn't ever do a full-featured 3D modeling interface like in CAD software like 3DS Max, Maya, Modo or SolidWorks without changing the game engine fundamentally. I wouldn't even want to think of implementing one of those interfaces on mobile, it's simply not possible. So if there's ever a game that lets you create your airplanes out of meshes or NURBS or whatever, it would only be able to run on high-end desktop computers. It would be one hell of a game, though. It could be the first game in which players actually evolve the game itself by creating increasingly-complex vehicles. You'd make it so they would be able to tweak the AI, so they could script missions, create short movies, etc.
There are multiple versions of my program, or multiple programs if you prefer. Most of them are parametric functions that generate things like nose cones, smoothly curved sections, hollow cylinders, etc.
+1Outstanding. You're improving at a very impressive rate.
+1@Othawne
So you asked me a question, and I answered it comprehensively (and politely, and humorously), and that constitutes harassment? Thanks, I can always use a good hearty laugh.
It's a bit like an average wimp picking a fight with the Hulk, then complaining that he got bruised.
> You could've just said ''Not for me no''
I'm sure you'd like everyone to behave in a way to protect your fragile ego, but the world, and especially I, aren't here to accommodate you.
For your own sake, I hope you toughen up a great deal, or life is going to be very... hurtful for you.
+1@Othawne I love it when someone's defeated in an argument and the best they can do is "Ooh, you wrote a novel" and "I'm allowed to have my own opinion." Compelling arguments, those. Enjoy clinging to your incorrect and indefensible point of view :)
And it's a pity that you think I'd have to go "ape shit" to write that response... that's just off the top of my head. Sorry to burst your bubble (again).
+1It's all about expectations, one way or another. Most builds on SP are models -- they don't fly especially well, or perform their functions especially well (no offence intended, to anyone -- well-built models are great). For instance, an airplane may have aimable turrets, but it doesn't fly stably enough, or the turrets aren't controllable enough to hit anything. So it's understandable that a lot of users don't see the point in downloading something. They look at the images and part count, and hit upvote.
This really hurts the few builds that do function well, though. To get around this, if you have a functional build, make a GIF of it doing its thing and include it in the description. This will let people know that they can actually have some fun with your build.
@EternalDarkness Thanks for the vote of confidence. Your builds are the same, always high quality.
+1I like how you're exploring the game's flight model. There's no reason a 3000 mph aircraft can't be as stable as a 1000 mph one. Here's what you can fix:
- Roll control surfaces need to be aligned with the center of mass
- Wing loading is too low, which is what causes flutter at high speeds; try to get it above 20 lbs/sq ft
- For high speed flight, you need to reduce the maxDeflectionDegrees of control surfaces for optimal handling. It's just like real airplanes -- if you deflect a control surface 35 degrees at Mach 3, the wing will probably break apart. To increase/decrease the control authority, adjust hingeDistance and/or the size of the control surface.
+1I think you'll have to put in a bit more effort than that if you expect to get many upvotes. Moreover, a lot of people on this site won't upvote my builds or their successors, so you've go that going against you.
+1@Treadmill103 What a great quote. I'm going to shamelessly adapt it for this aircraft:
"Make it totally clear that this aircraft is an engine of destruction. Don't add a cockpit -- that not only adds a point of un-armoured vulnerability, it humanizes the aircraft. Make it look like a beast lunging in its final attack on its prey -- all straining sinews, hunched shoulders, neck at full extension, jaws ready to tear into the enemy. Make the intakes look like gaping maws. Make it out of thick metal, then absolutely sheathe that in blocks of armour. You can never have enough armour. Don't use curves -- this thing needs to be all angles and facets, brutal and sharp. Make the engines really big -- they're the muscles of an aircraft, and everyone likes big muscles. As for the guns... make it perfectly clear that they're guns. Make them big, no-nonsense, and give them really thick barrels. Anyone looking at this beauty from the wrong end should feel like they've got two telephone poles pointed at them. Make it clear that this is not an airplane you take to airshows to do some fancy-pants show-off maneuvers in fancy-pants livery, this is a machine with one purpose and one purpose only -- to make war."
+1@Treadmill103 You might say it's rather... brutal... in its presentation.
+1You're partly right in that the community has changed and seems to be in a cut-throat competition for points. However, there are still quite a few people who're in it for the fun.
More importantly, you can increase the number of upvotes you get very simply -- by presenting your builds better. Remember that first impressions are very important, so your first thumbnail image needs to look good. For a newish user, especially, It's the only thing that determines whether people click through to the actual post or not. Here are some things you can do:
* Unless they're someone who deleted their account and came back, so that they're starting from a high skill level -- there are people who do this just to be able to boast about how quickly they got to platinum.
+1@grizzlitn It was originally 664, I added two parts just to get it to 666... :)
+1"...that is because I have imagination." Classic.
+1Very intriguing design.
+1Nice build. I'd spotlight it, but that might be seen as self-serving by some.
+1Glad you like it, @Desertstorm88. This one is even easier to use, and it carries 60 bombs instead of 20.
+1@Treadmill103 Oh that's good. That's very good.
+1Great shape, and flies/functions well. Remarkably well done, but you're not presenting it well enough. First of all, the camera is too zoomed out in the thumbnails. Try to zoom in so the aircraft fills most of the view. Second, try a more eye-catching color scheme. This deserves a lot more upvotes.
+1@F104Deathtrap Thank you. I call it Jeet Brawn Do, "the Way of the Scripting Fist."
+1"Your mission, James, is to infiltrate the research facility at Bilyarsk, and... retrieve... their hypersonic fighter prototype, and fly it back to England. It's a two-seater, but don't take that as an excuse to bring back one of those Slavic blondes you like so much."
"Go to Russia, shteal a plane. Yesh, shur.... How about a brunette, though?"
"James...."
"I'll be on my way then."
+1@JoeCFX The prize money has been sent. Congratulations once again!
+1@RedstoneAeroAviation Link's in the description.
+1@Vuki11 "Weird?" Innovative, unique, high-performance, functional -- these are the words you're looking for. Oh, and don't forget, beautiful.
+1@BluAetherium made them myself. I've posted quite a few custom weapons, there are links in my profile.
+1@123Planebuilder Well, what size planes can your mobile run? Can it run this one?
+1@MEERKAT978 Mmmm yeah, I remember the feeling when I discovered that as well. Now, go forth and carpet bomb some stuff.
+1@SpiritusRaptor No chance of that, I'm afraid. Most of this community has diligently ignored me, and some of them talk quite a bit of trash about me behind my back. Outstanding, ground-breaking, one-of-a-kind builds of mine get ignored and have no chance of being seen past the first few hours. I have zero interest in letting most of this community benefit from my work.
+1Thanks, @KerlonceauxIndustries @FastDan
+1Glad you like it, @chancey21
+1Congratulations to you, @amazingperson124. Don't forget to tell me your Steam username or Amazon e-mail in an unlisted post. Note that if you use Steam, I have to add you as a Steam friend and then wait three days before I can send you a gift card.
+1@hopotumon @grizzlitn @JoeCFX
+1@KSPFSXandSP You mean the cosmetic bomb casing, or the bombs themselves? If the former, it's about 60 feet long and 8 feet in diameter. Makes for nice videos.
If you mean what actual bombs I'm using, it contains two Boom 50s scaled up 3x.
+1@Ephwurd First, you need to install ReShade -- it just needs to be extracted to the folder containing SimplePlanes.exe, which on my PC is G:\games\Steam\SteamApps\common\SimplePlanes\. In there you'll find a folder called reshade-shaders\Shaders. Extract the SledDriverShaderPack.fx file there, then launch the game, and in the config dialog that comes up, click "Reload." That should load all the shaders in the .fx file, which you can enable one by one. The one you see in my screenshots and gifs is OrangeBlueSaturated.
+1@MaximusTheMinimus Ha, I wish I'd been an SR-71 pilot... but the only flying I've done is as an airline passenger. I chose the name because the SR-71 is my favourite aircraft by far.
+1@PlaneBuild0512 Thanks. So you're saying that you left your airplane almost finished in the designer, and when you came back, a lot of the parts were missing? Maybe someone messed around with your device. Have you tried undo-ing?
+1@MisterMitchell No thanks required... the upvote is the thanks, for uploading something good.
+1We believe in truth in advertising, @Tengam :) Glad you enjoyed it.
+1@aguy
Reverse engineering is the best way to learn. But if you simply want the gun, I can post it separately or you can configure it yourself. The settings I used are:
ammoCount="200"
+1burstCount="1000"
timeBetweenBursts="0.5"
muzzleVelocity="2000"
roundsPerSecond="20"
spread="0"
activationGroup="0"
tracerColor="00FFFF"
damage="10000"
bulletScale="20,20,10"
muzzleFlash="false"
Glad you like it, @DemonSniper8 @Ryn176
+1@chancey21 Well, I thought you'd downloaded them. Why would you wait to download them?
+1@ACMECo1940 Ha, no. I'd enjoy Zaphod's company any day.
+1@FlyingThings Wow, that is one hell of a coincidence. I wasn't thinking of that airplane at all when I built this or named it. If you'd asked me before just now what a Gloster Meteor looked like, I couldn't have told you.
+1@chancey21 Let's not go into that. Let's stick to building and appreciating cool stuff.
+1@Camroncs Hmm. Part of that is true, all my aircraft go fast, handle beautifully, and have very smooth shapes. The high speed is because I find slow aircraft very boring.
But as for function, just look at my profile. I have short-range mortars, long-range mortars, howitzers, flying howitzers, hovering howitzers, spotter drones, spaceships, fighters, alien aircraft, guided missiles, drone bombs, bomb shotguns, plasma shotguns, and many more highly functional builds that do their function very well.
It's absolutely fine if you don't like my work, but no one can say my builds aren't functional.
+1@Camroncs "Never had function?" What do you mean, my builds have always been functional and high-performance.
+1@ThomasRoderick The gyro on this build is standard, not modded at all. Setting extreme values for gyroscope speed/stability, and/or using multiple gyros, are messy and ineffective fixes for inherent problems with the build itself -- incorrect mass or drag distribution. For this kind of build (I call it the spaceship-type), the slightest imbalance in mass/drag distribution causes problems like rolling to one side, or pitching up or down when moving. The faster you move, the more noticeable these effects become, and no number of modded gyros will solve the problem. When the mass and drag distribution is correct, you can go as fast as you like without any stability problems. I have spaceship-type builds that go over one million mph with perfect stability.
You're right that gyros don't work well on fixed-wing aircraft, and they make the handling feel off as well -- the controls feel sluggish, as when you're losing hydraulic pressure in a real aircraft. In my opinion, gyros don't belong on fixed-wing aircraft at all.
+1@Pianoman Sure thing. To me, it's a shame that a build this unique and high-quality got so few comments, and didn't get spotlighted by anyone but me. It just shows the cliquish, narrow-minded nature of a large part of this community. It's very sad that a website that's entirely about being creative and building things has so much negativity.
+1