@BoiExist
For the dutch roll issue, here's two things that might have happened.
1. There's assymetric weight. Maybe the weight is to the left a bit?
Or,
2. Anhedral wings are weird in this game.
For the problem with taking off, it has something to do with either assymetric weight or the tires of the custom landing gear itself. It's a very tedious process to get it to act like an actual tire that has grip, but the simplest way to solve this is to turn the tire's sideways traction to 50%. This reduces the effect, but it reduces your maneuverability on the ground.
However, if your variation does not serve any improvements over the existing airplane, it may be removed.
I will consider a change of weapons, or some addition of livery "an improvement". However, I will not consider a simple recolor "an improvement". Especially when you recolor a few or two parts. That is a big no.
I will spare you this time, but if you do it again, I might have to report it.
@ReinMcDeer
On one case, it does.
I tried testing anhedrals (on my T-2) and putting the lift data acquired by the wings, separately, and the other part of the wing just, doesn't get enough lift, and because of that, it dutch rolled.
Also, ok, cool
@rexzion
Well, not neccessarily both. I want it to have like, a somewhat semi-realistic flight model. Y'know what I mean? It's realistic, but not too realistic.
I mean... Kinda? Truth is, I kinda rather have SR2 than SP. I just didn't think about it ever since I've found SP, but now that I know, I wanted to buy it rather than pirate it. However, my fund saving is... Lacking, you can say.
@IICXLVIICDLXXXIIIDCXLVII
Look up "Standard Aircraft Characteristics". It can give you more specific performances of the aircraft.
If you want to make a very accurate replica however, look up NAVAIR manuals.
Also, if you have a drawing app with rulers, use the rulers, angle them at 90/0° and see if it's straight center right from the nose to tail.
Well, I used the one Blueprint that existed on the Wikipedia, and I had no problem. Also, for the size, if you're unsure, you can always ask somebody to measure it for you, or you can measure it yourself. Go to a museum, and ask whoever has power to measure the size of the F-16. It's a hard task, I would imagine so.
Also, for blueprints, check out the-blueprints.com. It's where I get my blueprints. I would warn you though, most blueprints are angled by like... 0.6° or somthin. It's really annoying.
Edit:
According to the unclassified document of "Characteristics Summary of the F-16C Block 32", the F-16C Blk 32 has a length of 49.3ft, height of 16.6ft, and a wingspan of 32.8ft. Compare it to the Wikipedia's (F-16C Blk 52) size data, the dimensions are equal if not very close to that of the declassified document. Length of 49.5ft, height of 16ft, and wingspan of 32.8ft. So rest assured, it is accurate. While not 100%, it's still accurate.
nice
+2the transition from engine is a bit off but overall it gud :thumbsup:
@Hiimakeplanes
it tags you once the plane is published
@Hiimakeplanes
It's already out my man
it's the 26/27th
@xNotDumb
I know but wdym by "go back and front"
@ReinMcDeer :D
@weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
+1@shiwoshiwo2
@GorillaGuerilla
@alexJgameYTukraine000000
@Memenator1231
@SPAircraftOfficial
@xNotDumb
@Stanmich
@Bryan5
@JustWingIt
@Nerfaddict
@weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
@shiwoshiwo2
@GorillaGuerilla
@alexJgameYTukraine000000
@Memenator1231
@SPAircraftOfficial
@xNotDumb
@Stanmich
@Bryan5
@JustWingIt
@Nerfaddict
@weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
@shiwoshiwo2
@GorillaGuerilla
@alexJgameYTukraine000000
@Memenator1231
@SPAircraftOfficial
@xNotDumb
@Stanmich
@Bryan5
+1@JustWingIt
@Nerfaddict
@jamesPLANESii
I slept
@xNotDumb
Wdym
@ReinMcDeer @GorillaGuerrilla
Nevermind. Found the reason why it does that.
Anhedral wings are weird.
God fucking damn that is good
+1also
+1mine's probably not gonna win but hey
more love for the tornadoh :)
@HuskyDynamics01
+1so by this rule an F/A-18 is allowed?
because yknow
it moves
@BoiExist
For the dutch roll issue, here's two things that might have happened.
1. There's assymetric weight. Maybe the weight is to the left a bit?
Or,
2. Anhedral wings are weird in this game.
For the problem with taking off, it has something to do with either assymetric weight or the tires of the custom landing gear itself. It's a very tedious process to get it to act like an actual tire that has grip, but the simplest way to solve this is to turn the tire's sideways traction to 50%. This reduces the effect, but it reduces your maneuverability on the ground.
oh wow that is an amazing looking countach, good job
fr tho good job
ok so tomcat don't work
let's try tornado
or I could do the funny with auto sweeping f14
goddamn
+1that's really good
might make a bobmer for once cuz yez
sorta
No.
I will consider a change of weapons, or some addition of livery "an improvement". However, I will not consider a simple recolor "an improvement". Especially when you recolor a few or two parts. That is a big no.
I will spare you this time, but if you do it again, I might have to report it.
Ah, yes. What did you change again?
@ReinMcDeer
On one case, it does.
I tried testing anhedrals (on my T-2) and putting the lift data acquired by the wings, separately, and the other part of the wing just, doesn't get enough lift, and because of that, it dutch rolled.
Also, ok, cool
Yukikaze vibes
y e s .
@TheCommentaryGuy
Yep.
like, Idk, 80 nmi?
+3@JesusChrist @ColonelCanada
Link is now up.
@DashEight @Oyasumi @404
Link is ready.
@rexzion
Well, not neccessarily both. I want it to have like, a somewhat semi-realistic flight model. Y'know what I mean? It's realistic, but not too realistic.
You have a problem with it?
Ok.
I mean... Kinda?
+2Truth is, I kinda rather have SR2 than SP. I just didn't think about it ever since I've found SP, but now that I know, I wanted to buy it rather than pirate it. However, my fund saving is... Lacking, you can say.
my man the sea conqueror :D
+1No, that's just SP wheel physics.
+1They just barely have any grip whatsoever.
@IICXLVIICDLXXXIIIDCXLVII
dunno.
@IICXLVIICDLXXXIIIDCXLVII
+1Look up "Standard Aircraft Characteristics". It can give you more specific performances of the aircraft.
If you want to make a very accurate replica however, look up NAVAIR manuals.
Also, if you have a drawing app with rulers, use the rulers, angle them at 90/0° and see if it's straight center right from the nose to tail.
Well, I used the one Blueprint that existed on the Wikipedia, and I had no problem. Also, for the size, if you're unsure, you can always ask somebody to measure it for you, or you can measure it yourself. Go to a museum, and ask whoever has power to measure the size of the F-16. It's a hard task, I would imagine so.
+1Also, for blueprints, check out the-blueprints.com. It's where I get my blueprints. I would warn you though, most blueprints are angled by like... 0.6° or somthin. It's really annoying.
Edit:
According to the unclassified document of "Characteristics Summary of the F-16C Block 32", the F-16C Blk 32 has a length of 49.3ft, height of 16.6ft, and a wingspan of 32.8ft. Compare it to the Wikipedia's (F-16C Blk 52) size data, the dimensions are equal if not very close to that of the declassified document. Length of 49.5ft, height of 16ft, and wingspan of 32.8ft. So rest assured, it is accurate. While not 100%, it's still accurate.
All jokes aside, this is good.
@iMxr
No, I don't.
@iMxr
Ah.
@iMxr
Top of the blueprint menu