@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.
No?
I mean, shaders are nice and all, but if you couple it with high part count builds, it doesn't get much better.
Also, I'd imagine that shaders on mobile wouldn't have the same effect as the PC one. It's kind of just better off asking other person who has a PC and ask them for screenshots with shaders, if that's what you want.
I'm not against it, I just want to state my honest opinion.
my dude
makin high quality shit in this game ain't easy just sayin
even the lowest of the highest quality could take months of work and procrastination simply because you lost the motivation to do so
@Maxihamberg
I don't think you caught my point
what I want you to do is to put your camera in the center by adding mass to the left, not any other else
or the opposite, Idfk
holup
you said your camera focus is at the right shoulder?
if yes, you gotta add more weight to the left shoulder until the camera is at the center
this is what caused the spin: assymetrical weight
it's basically where one part has more weight than the opposite part
orbit, chase, and fly by cameras are focused to the center of mass, and since your camera focus is to the right, the center of mass of your craft is on the right side
@Erc90F4RU
Also, about the TLS, it's really up to you to be completely honest.
Fun fact:
The first iteration of the Zoisite Tactical Laser System which was used on the ADFX-01 does not have a moving laser. It also cannot be installed simultaneously with the Morganite or the Hypersthene. Weight issues, I assume.
@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
Did you try to click anything from the top of the menu? If yes, then you'd have to manually add blueprints now, I guess.
No?
I mean, shaders are nice and all, but if you couple it with high part count builds, it doesn't get much better.
Also, I'd imagine that shaders on mobile wouldn't have the same effect as the PC one. It's kind of just better off asking other person who has a PC and ask them for screenshots with shaders, if that's what you want.
I'm not against it, I just want to state my honest opinion.
as much as I want to critique how much innacurate this is, it's great job :)
+2dam that's nice
+1my dude
makin high quality shit in this game ain't easy just sayin
even the lowest of the highest quality could take months of work and procrastination simply because you lost the motivation to do so
@Maxihamberg
I don't think you caught my point
what I want you to do is to put your camera in the center by adding mass to the left, not any other else
or the opposite, Idfk
holup
+1you said your camera focus is at the right shoulder?
if yes, you gotta add more weight to the left shoulder until the camera is at the center
this is what caused the spin: assymetrical weight
it's basically where one part has more weight than the opposite part
orbit, chase, and fly by cameras are focused to the center of mass, and since your camera focus is to the right, the center of mass of your craft is on the right side
man's be spending money to get peoples usernames on the carryout
+2what a dude
Putting too much engine can cause this, but I never had this issue.
seeing russkiy hud on an f18 styled cockpit feels cursed
@Erc90F4RU
The 2nd iteration of the Zoisite does, however.
@Erc90F4RU
Also, about the TLS, it's really up to you to be completely honest.
Fun fact:
The first iteration of the Zoisite Tactical Laser System which was used on the ADFX-01 does not have a moving laser. It also cannot be installed simultaneously with the Morganite or the Hypersthene. Weight issues, I assume.
What's up with people adding TVC to Morgans? It's already unstable enough, don't add more instability there.
+1I'm going to be honest, the site is kind of okay.
I just... No?
top view is good
+3side view however makes me aeugh
although I would give him (Griseo, not you) props for making that goddamn camo
@Panzerwaifu69
+1no no
it's fine :)
I would love to participate with my own concept, but I wouldn't have time Imma be honest
+1