@PyrusEnderhunter Well, I've had it happen. I deleted the build this was happening on, or I could have shown you. Another problem is that if I scale an entire build, the mass distribution goes haywire and what used to fly perfectly now flies very badly or not at all. Try scaling this one. I scaled it down twice, once with "calculate mass" checked and once unchecked, and both times the center of mass moved behind the center of lift and the center of thrust also moved out of line. Maybe it's to do with my system configuration.
@PyrusEnderhunter I avoid scaling things whenever possible, especially entire subassemblies or builds. Scaled parts don't behave very well when attaching other parts, so modifying builds becomes harder. I've had problems when mirroring as well, with all the parts on one side losing all their connections when mirrored. Everything looks ok in the designer, but when you enter the sandbox, one entire side falls to pieces.
@PyrusEnderhunter Yeah, the size is a requirement for the smoothness of the generated shapes. At this size, it takes segments 0.25 units thick to make the shapes look smooth, especially the stronger curves. If I used smaller blocks, I'd have to reduce the thickness, and that causes glitches like striped shadows.
@pk41382 This only works if you're using a device that lets you edit files directly.
Go to your AircraftDesigns folder (where all your airplanes are saved). On my Windows PC, this is C:\Users\<username>\AppData\LocalLow\Jundroo\SimplePlanes\AircraftDesigns
Go up one level
Open the file CloudSettings.xml
You'll see a bunch of Location items. On each Location item, you'll see position, rotation, and initialVelocity. These define the spawn point for your aircraft/vehicle.
Each Location item has a DynamicObjects child, which in turn has seven DynamicObject children. These have the position and rotation values for each of the ships.
@KSPFSXandSP Also, even if everyone on here did hate me and my work, and I got zero upvotes, I'd still be building and posting. I'll be damned if I let anyone stop me from doing something I want to do.
I don't "hate" the community, I just don't follow its religion of replica-model-building, part-count-worship or whatever.
I'm not building or uploading them for the community; I'm doing it for myself. I build because I like to build beautiful things, not to get anyone's approval. My mindset when posting is not "I hope people like it and give me validation," it's "here's something beautiful/impressive/amazing, let's see if there's anyone out there with the good taste to like it."
The community is not one homogeneous group with everyone holding the same opinions. There are people on here that I like just fine. It's just some people who seem to have assumed the role of arbiters of SP groupthink and seem to believe that they can criticise anyone's work, but can't stand having their work criticised in return.
@Jetpackturtle Well, as long as you read it finally. Seeing as how you don't think this is upvote-worthy, would you mind deleting your comments and not upvoting or commenting on my posts in future?
@Stingray Hmm, now that you mention it, it could pass for a bat-aircraft. Needs more guns, though. Thanks, glad you like its flight handling. All my aircraft pretty much fly the same these days.
I designed it that way. It's intentional. I'm not unaware that the actual SR-71 cockpit is very different from what I built. It was a conscious decision to go with the one I did.
> Furthermore, I didn't take your statement on what you like and dislike as an attack, I was simply offering a suggestion.
Outright lie right there. Your unedited post said something about why I have to "go on an all-out attack" on you.
> Finally, isn't the comment section meant for giving feedback?
Perhaps to you. If I wanted feedback, I'd write "Feedback welcome" or something like that in the description. In SP as in real life, I only want to hear from positive people, not jealous, hypocritical, negative, rude idiots who offer their opinions without being asked, and who don't even take the trouble to understand what someone is saying before attacking him.
I wish there was a way to disable comments entirely, or to have a whitelist of people who're allowed to comment on your posts. I want to spend my time building beautiful planes, not arguing with the wilfully stupid.
@Supercraft888 If you keep editing your posts to change them entirely, that's quite a bit dishonest.
> Woah now mate, im just suggesting something on your aircraft, im just saying to stay true to the actual SR-71 the cockpit is very angular and sharp, almost like a point
And who are you to say that? If I want to put a bubble canopy on my SR-71, I will. If I want to give it an open cockpit, I will. If you don't like a build, don't upvote it, move on, and don't give critical feedback unless asked to. Is something so simple that hard to understand?
@Supercraft888 I'm actually really surprised -- how is it that a simple statement of facts and my personal likes and dislikes is taken as an attack by you people? You bunch are the most oversensitive, clueless people I've ever encountered.
@Supercraft888 I don't like the kind of cockpits you like. The cockpits you like look clunky and crude to me. A cockpit like that would look even clunkier and cruder on one of my aircraft, considering how smooth the rest of them are. So, given the choice between an out-of-place, clunky cockpit and one that melds smoothly into the airframe, I choose the latter.
@MrDoolittle Obviously you cannot understand clear and simple English. You completely misunderstood the thread. Then you have the nerve to throw in a personal taunt. Bye now.
Thanks, @DemonSniper8
Thanks, @sexylips35
@FGW2014 Here they are if you want them.
@FGW2014 No, just 15 miniguns pointed at very slightly different angles.
@Nerfaddict As in, you'd go "Hell no" if it was your enemy and attacking you, but if it was on your side...
@Nerfaddict But what if it was on your side?
Here's a short video showing what happens.
@PyrusEnderhunter Did you try scaling this one? Check the center of mass before and after.
@PyrusEnderhunter Well, I've had it happen. I deleted the build this was happening on, or I could have shown you. Another problem is that if I scale an entire build, the mass distribution goes haywire and what used to fly perfectly now flies very badly or not at all. Try scaling this one. I scaled it down twice, once with "calculate mass" checked and once unchecked, and both times the center of mass moved behind the center of lift and the center of thrust also moved out of line. Maybe it's to do with my system configuration.
@PyrusEnderhunter I avoid scaling things whenever possible, especially entire subassemblies or builds. Scaled parts don't behave very well when attaching other parts, so modifying builds becomes harder. I've had problems when mirroring as well, with all the parts on one side losing all their connections when mirrored. Everything looks ok in the designer, but when you enter the sandbox, one entire side falls to pieces.
@Squirrel Suits me, thanks.
@PyrusEnderhunter Yeah, the size is a requirement for the smoothness of the generated shapes. At this size, it takes segments 0.25 units thick to make the shapes look smooth, especially the stronger curves. If I used smaller blocks, I'd have to reduce the thickness, and that causes glitches like striped shadows.
Nice, but you should probably include some instructions on how to fly this thing.
@dootdootbananabus The SR-72 was, in fact, on my mind when I was designing the side profile. Good eye.
@pk41382 This only works if you're using a device that lets you edit files directly.
Go to your AircraftDesigns folder (where all your airplanes are saved). On my Windows PC, this is C:\Users\<username>\AppData\LocalLow\Jundroo\SimplePlanes\AircraftDesigns
Go up one level
Open the file CloudSettings.xml
You'll see a bunch of Location items. On each Location item, you'll see position, rotation, and initialVelocity. These define the spawn point for your aircraft/vehicle.
Each Location item has a DynamicObjects child, which in turn has seven DynamicObject children. These have the position and rotation values for each of the ships.
@KSPFSXandSP Also, even if everyone on here did hate me and my work, and I got zero upvotes, I'd still be building and posting. I'll be damned if I let anyone stop me from doing something I want to do.
@ColonelStriker Luckily, what's been seen isn't something horrible.
@KSPFSXandSP
I don't "hate" the community, I just don't follow its religion of replica-model-building, part-count-worship or whatever.
I'm not building or uploading them for the community; I'm doing it for myself. I build because I like to build beautiful things, not to get anyone's approval. My mindset when posting is not "I hope people like it and give me validation," it's "here's something beautiful/impressive/amazing, let's see if there's anyone out there with the good taste to like it."
The community is not one homogeneous group with everyone holding the same opinions. There are people on here that I like just fine. It's just some people who seem to have assumed the role of arbiters of SP groupthink and seem to believe that they can criticise anyone's work, but can't stand having their work criticised in return.
@KSPFSXandSP Humour gets upvotes, sure, but so should beauty and performance.
@pk41382 By editing CloudSettings.xml.
@Z3RO Thanks, glad you like it. If you want your SP to look like that, I can give you the shader I'm using.
Nice build again. Just a tip, don't post more than one build a day or so. Otherwise you're just competing with yourself for upvotes.
This would have been good if a bronze user had built it. For someone so new to the game, this is very good indeed.
@NathanAviation Thanks, this is one of my favourites.
@Stingray True. But my builds are usually similar in size, so I can reuse my existing flight module that I've perfected over months.
@Jetpackturtle Well, as long as you read it finally. Seeing as how you don't think this is upvote-worthy, would you mind deleting your comments and not upvoting or commenting on my posts in future?
@Stingray Hmm, now that you mention it, it could pass for a bat-aircraft. Needs more guns, though. Thanks, glad you like its flight handling. All my aircraft pretty much fly the same these days.
Looks like a drone version of the F-35. Nice work.
Thanks, @Sfoster1109
@KSPFSXandSP Yeah, what about it? This thing of beauty gets 27 upvotes, a flying pig that shoots missiles out of its rear end gets 60. Can't say that inspires much respect or affection in me.
Glad you like it, @avvy66
Thanks, @DemonSniper8 @BaconRoll @sxy
@KSPFSXandSP A present to the community the majority of which has given me nothing but resentment and jealousy? I don't think so.
@ahappyape Well, thank you for saying that.
@BaconRoll Thanks, and Merry Christmas to you too. Holy crap, I never made that connection.
@phanps Thanks, Merry Christmas to you too.
@ahappyape Oh, ok. I only asked because it's so rare (for me, at least) to get an upvote on a build that's older than a couple of days.
@Supercraft888 Merry Christmas to you.
@Supercraft888
> it's just the cockpit that was a bit off.
I designed it that way. It's intentional. I'm not unaware that the actual SR-71 cockpit is very different from what I built. It was a conscious decision to go with the one I did.
> Furthermore, I didn't take your statement on what you like and dislike as an attack, I was simply offering a suggestion.
Outright lie right there. Your unedited post said something about why I have to "go on an all-out attack" on you.
> Finally, isn't the comment section meant for giving feedback?
Perhaps to you. If I wanted feedback, I'd write "Feedback welcome" or something like that in the description. In SP as in real life, I only want to hear from positive people, not jealous, hypocritical, negative, rude idiots who offer their opinions without being asked, and who don't even take the trouble to understand what someone is saying before attacking him.
I wish there was a way to disable comments entirely, or to have a whitelist of people who're allowed to comment on your posts. I want to spend my time building beautiful planes, not arguing with the wilfully stupid.
Great build, very original design, flies well too.
@Supercraft888 If you keep editing your posts to change them entirely, that's quite a bit dishonest.
> Woah now mate, im just suggesting something on your aircraft, im just saying to stay true to the actual SR-71 the cockpit is very angular and sharp, almost like a point
And who are you to say that? If I want to put a bubble canopy on my SR-71, I will. If I want to give it an open cockpit, I will. If you don't like a build, don't upvote it, move on, and don't give critical feedback unless asked to. Is something so simple that hard to understand?
@Supercraft888 I'm actually really surprised -- how is it that a simple statement of facts and my personal likes and dislikes is taken as an attack by you people? You bunch are the most oversensitive, clueless people I've ever encountered.
@Supercraft888 I don't like the kind of cockpits you like. The cockpits you like look clunky and crude to me. A cockpit like that would look even clunkier and cruder on one of my aircraft, considering how smooth the rest of them are. So, given the choice between an out-of-place, clunky cockpit and one that melds smoothly into the airframe, I choose the latter.
@KSPFSXandSP Certainly not now, after the stupidity I've had to wade through on the successor airplane's thread.
@KSPFSXandSP If you read even slight anger, leave alone fury, in my comments then you're terrible at reading comprehension.
@MrDoolittle Obviously you cannot understand clear and simple English. You completely misunderstood the thread. Then you have the nerve to throw in a personal taunt. Bye now.
Thanks, @BaconRoll, she's beautiful isn't she?
@Nukelord yeah, the website has a few quirks.
@Nukelord oh ok. Merry Christmas to you too.
Thanks, @Z3RO.