@hpgbproductions My FPS is fine when recording, but playback is really slow. And when I set the aircraft to start playback, it explodes. Could this be because the airplane is trying to teleport through a mountain to the start position? And maybe you could disable physics when the airplane goes to set position somehow to avoid flaps and complex parts from exploding?
@realSavageMan Remember than squares can be done easily with a variable power function, for example Throttle*3 can do power of 0, 1, 2, and 3 (0,1,4,9)
I'm actually going to be using something similar to this for my 767 GPS map, it'll use rate(Heading) though to make the line curve to show course. It'll use rotators and lines though, no pistons.
@realSavageMan Rotators and pistons, then probably pitch and roll to control vertex, probably throttle for slope and then the square functions can be quite easily with a pow(X) function.
@Optical Another quick note, the cockpit details are about 4,000, so I will also test the aircraft without them. Actually, I'm at 8000 without any details on the cockpit now, and the wings are 1500 each, so that means I technically am only at 3500 parts excluding the cockpit and interior. my limit is about 6,000 for testing, so I will have to make sure that I include the cockpit working details in that limit (ILS hold, Speed/Altitude hold, etc. because they need to be flight tested. Static details like words and lights technically don't need to be tested.
@Optical Yes, the aircraft is expected to be about 15,000 parts. I have tested my computer up to 12,000 parts over two models (4500 on my aircraft and 7,500 on the AI) and have about 7 FPS. The trick in what I am doing is so install the 5,000 part, zero mass, zero drag interior after everything has been tested and approved, including the autopilot, landing gear, flight testing and aerodynamic tweaking, etc. This way, I will be able to test the airplane at 9-10k parts. (which I can run at about 20 FPS, 15 being the absolute minimum I can test at.) I will not be able to run the finished aircraft on my overclocked 9700K.
@Embo That's one of the pros of being a student pilot, you get to fly like every week!
Actually last time I was supposed to fly I couldn't go because the plane had an issue with a fuel tank seal and fuel started leaking :( It got fixed now though, so I should be flying again tomorrow, and then solo next week.
Great April Fools' joke! I wonder just two things though:
How are people making this much power?
If you guys really are working on fuselage holepunch and computer part
(computer part would be able to take regular FT input and make an output, say I wanted a variable called "aileron" and didn't want to have to spam the code into every aileron rotator).
It would make building much easier and would allow us to set variable names and inputs. It would simplify FT code for the actual rotators so much. Instead of having to put in the code for the aileron movement, I could just put in
"Aileron" * clamp01(Activate8)
Or something to that effect.
Never saw this before, looks great. Unfortunately I cannot run it on my school computer but I will test when I get home. It looks nice from what I see.
By the way, is it possible for you to create a full detail 747 using the whole wings? That would be cool and definitely something new from the lower-part builds. I understand that not many people will be about to run the 4000 part builds, but there are definitely people who can, including myself.
@ACEPILOT109 I am looking to finish it quickly as well, I don't really want to be using all my time on this aircraft lol
Really, all I have to do now is the cockpit, nose gear, and finish some small interior details, as well as the engine reverse thrust animation thing. I also need to take my test for my private pilot's license shortly, and finish up some more cross-country flight before that.
@CRJ900Pilot Thank you for the offer! I actually never knew that! I do have two questions.
1. How many PPH does the APU use on the 764?
2. What is the voltage of the battery?
@ACEPILOT109 Thank you! Unfortunately the project will take, in total, about a year. I am currently about to start the cockpit, which is actually very similar to the 757 (meaning that I can reuse parts). However, the increased number of numbers means that I'll need to redo some of the displays, adding some parts. For example, the engine panel will be accurate, showing the correct N1, N2, EGT, Fuel flow, fuel remaining, etc. The airplane will also have various warnings, like low speed, overspeed, incorrect flap setting, sink rate, bank angle, landing gear, engine starting, APU running, RAT deployed, G overload, low fuel, flap load relief, etc.
@WolfSpark Actually it'll be about 13-14,000 parts. Not sure how many people could run it, but my intention is to have the most detailed airliner for a long time to come.
@Aviation2 No, unfortunately I will not be making the A320. Savageman has already made quite a nice 319/321, you can lengthen the 319 if you need a 320.
@asteroidbook345 I think a 3 deck airliner wouldn't use much more runway, take the 777 and A380 for example:
777-200LR- 11,500 feet
A380-800- 12,300 feet
Following this trend, the triple deck airplane would probably need about 13,100 feet of runway. Jfk longest runway- 14,500 feet. However Heathrow only has 12,800 feet so it might need to sacrifice some payload or get more powerful engines. I think that the double deck 787 looks way better too.
Besides, nobody needs a plane that can carry over 1200 people. If I remember, the A380 can already hold 863 in all economy (exit limit?) @captainBoeing
@Aviation2
1. You can add them if you want, I only have PW2000, PW4000, JT8D, and CF-6-80 engines laying around.
2. I am thinking of making the 767 a dual pack where both airlines are there. There would be two aircraft in the pack, and total part count of 26,000.
3. It takes more than six months to make a new aircraft, and hundred of hours. I consider very carefully before starting a new project, but I will take the A320NEO into consideration. Savageman already made an A321 though, so it's highly unlikely I'll do something so similar. Also, I've made two major projects in the past twelve months, 747-400 and 767-400ER so I could use a break.
4. It is actually a 757-232WL. If you want to be specific, that's it.
@Aviation2 767 is at 8000 parts right now, It's not completed but it is definitely taking shape. Just need to do nose gear, cockpit interior, and crew rest areas as well as the aft end of the fuselage.
@realSavageMan We need Multiplayer, buttons that can be assigned custom outputs (buttons you can click that give an FT input out, say I press the autopilot button and it changes the value "autopilot" to 1, so the elevators, ailerons, engines, etc can read "autopilot = 1"
The glass idea is great but we need anti-fuselage blocks that can just punch holes in other fuselage blocks. Actual legitimate holes that you can select things behind.
@Gundamboy No help except for questions on which arrangement looks better (directed to the people on SPBC). I built all of this, as well as designing all the funky trees, by myself.
@WagonTime 500 parts will be impossible. Sorry. Even my 4500 part 757 could only go down to 1600. I usually calculate 1/3 parts for low detail, so in this case around 3,000.
@1918 Nice, BTW I don't know how you managed to keep the plane around 2000 considering that the wings are 840 each. If you did use the full wings, that means the part count is 83% wings.
(Edit) I now see that you changed the landing gear and engines (and removed the leading edge flap hinges, nooooo), which accounted for half the wing's parts. (about 400)
@hpgbproductions My FPS is fine when recording, but playback is really slow. And when I set the aircraft to start playback, it explodes. Could this be because the airplane is trying to teleport through a mountain to the start position? And maybe you could disable physics when the airplane goes to set position somehow to avoid flaps and complex parts from exploding?
+1@SneakySniper Ahh the infamous SneakySniper
Anyone know if this still works?? It just goes invisible for me.
Any reason why my airplane would explode and game come to .1 FPS when I do FltRec Play? It's a pretty complicated design. @hpgbproductions
@AriakimTayo 9700k.
@AriakimTayo Unfortunately it probably won't work, I run an i7 at 5.1.
@AriakimTayo I'm working on the rest of it this summer. What are your computer specs?
@RunwayLane Thank you, it's 1300 now
@RunwayLane sure.
@SnoWFLakE0s Hmm interesting, what are the pixels actually made of?
@realSavageMan Remember than squares can be done easily with a variable power function, for example Throttle*3 can do power of 0, 1, 2, and 3 (0,1,4,9)
I'm actually going to be using something similar to this for my 767 GPS map, it'll use rate(Heading) though to make the line curve to show course. It'll use rotators and lines though, no pistons.
@realSavageMan Rotators and pistons, then probably pitch and roll to control vertex, probably throttle for slope and then the square functions can be quite easily with a pow(X) function.
Why is the takeoff speed over 210 knots
+2@MassiveSimurgh Oh lol thanks haha
It didn't have any actual problems, but it was never made for an airbus so that explains any possible fitment issues.
+1@Optical Another quick note, the cockpit details are about 4,000, so I will also test the aircraft without them. Actually, I'm at 8000 without any details on the cockpit now, and the wings are 1500 each, so that means I technically am only at 3500 parts excluding the cockpit and interior. my limit is about 6,000 for testing, so I will have to make sure that I include the cockpit working details in that limit (ILS hold, Speed/Altitude hold, etc. because they need to be flight tested. Static details like words and lights technically don't need to be tested.
@Optical Yes, the aircraft is expected to be about 15,000 parts. I have tested my computer up to 12,000 parts over two models (4500 on my aircraft and 7,500 on the AI) and have about 7 FPS. The trick in what I am doing is so install the 5,000 part, zero mass, zero drag interior after everything has been tested and approved, including the autopilot, landing gear, flight testing and aerodynamic tweaking, etc. This way, I will be able to test the airplane at 9-10k parts. (which I can run at about 20 FPS, 15 being the absolute minimum I can test at.) I will not be able to run the finished aircraft on my overclocked 9700K.
@realSavageMan With the full interior like MD-80? (Yes, I like interiors lol)
Has nobody considered using an autoclicker program that also has a scroll wheel function?
I like this! You did a good job with the clean nose.
Now all I'm waiting for is a full interior passenger widebody! 777 maybe?
+1@EpicPigster1 Might have forgotten to tag you here
@MassiveSimurgh Did you give credit to me lol or is this not the nose that you modified from mine?
+1@Embo That's one of the pros of being a student pilot, you get to fly like every week!
Actually last time I was supposed to fly I couldn't go because the plane had an issue with a fuel tank seal and fuel started leaking :( It got fixed now though, so I should be flying again tomorrow, and then solo next week.
Great April Fools' joke! I wonder just two things though:
+1How are people making this much power?
If you guys really are working on fuselage holepunch and computer part
(computer part would be able to take regular FT input and make an output, say I wanted a variable called "aileron" and didn't want to have to spam the code into every aileron rotator).
It would make building much easier and would allow us to set variable names and inputs. It would simplify FT code for the actual rotators so much. Instead of having to put in the code for the aileron movement, I could just put in
"Aileron" * clamp01(Activate8)
Or something to that effect.
Never saw this before, looks great. Unfortunately I cannot run it on my school computer but I will test when I get home. It looks nice from what I see.
By the way, is it possible for you to create a full detail 747 using the whole wings? That would be cool and definitely something new from the lower-part builds. I understand that not many people will be about to run the 4000 part builds, but there are definitely people who can, including myself.
Yes, @MrShenanigans . Just make sure you give credit!
@ACEPILOT109 I am looking to finish it quickly as well, I don't really want to be using all my time on this aircraft lol
Really, all I have to do now is the cockpit, nose gear, and finish some small interior details, as well as the engine reverse thrust animation thing. I also need to take my test for my private pilot's license shortly, and finish up some more cross-country flight before that.
@realSavageMan Will it be a full interior hollow body?
@CRJ900Pilot Thank you for the offer! I actually never knew that! I do have two questions.
1. How many PPH does the APU use on the 764?
2. What is the voltage of the battery?
@ACEPILOT109 Thank you! Unfortunately the project will take, in total, about a year. I am currently about to start the cockpit, which is actually very similar to the 757 (meaning that I can reuse parts). However, the increased number of numbers means that I'll need to redo some of the displays, adding some parts. For example, the engine panel will be accurate, showing the correct N1, N2, EGT, Fuel flow, fuel remaining, etc. The airplane will also have various warnings, like low speed, overspeed, incorrect flap setting, sink rate, bank angle, landing gear, engine starting, APU running, RAT deployed, G overload, low fuel, flap load relief, etc.
@WolfSpark Actually it'll be about 13-14,000 parts. Not sure how many people could run it, but my intention is to have the most detailed airliner for a long time to come.
@Easternairlinesisnotdead There is one in the sucessors.
I'd be interested to see you print a plane with 4000+ parts using a high-detail nozzle and an exceedingly long print time.
+3@Aviation2 No, unfortunately I will not be making the A320. Savageman has already made quite a nice 319/321, you can lengthen the 319 if you need a 320.
Looking forward to seeing your 752 soon.
@asteroidbook345 I think a 3 deck airliner wouldn't use much more runway, take the 777 and A380 for example:
777-200LR- 11,500 feet
A380-800- 12,300 feet
Following this trend, the triple deck airplane would probably need about 13,100 feet of runway. Jfk longest runway- 14,500 feet. However Heathrow only has 12,800 feet so it might need to sacrifice some payload or get more powerful engines. I think that the double deck 787 looks way better too.
Besides, nobody needs a plane that can carry over 1200 people. If I remember, the A380 can already hold 863 in all economy (exit limit?) @captainBoeing
@Aviation2 Pretty long, when I went on one I was in seat 50A (N827MH).
@Aviation2
1. You can add them if you want, I only have PW2000, PW4000, JT8D, and CF-6-80 engines laying around.
2. I am thinking of making the 767 a dual pack where both airlines are there. There would be two aircraft in the pack, and total part count of 26,000.
3. It takes more than six months to make a new aircraft, and hundred of hours. I consider very carefully before starting a new project, but I will take the A320NEO into consideration. Savageman already made an A321 though, so it's highly unlikely I'll do something so similar. Also, I've made two major projects in the past twelve months, 747-400 and 767-400ER so I could use a break.
4. It is actually a 757-232WL. If you want to be specific, that's it.
@Aviation2 767 is at 8000 parts right now, It's not completed but it is definitely taking shape. Just need to do nose gear, cockpit interior, and crew rest areas as well as the aft end of the fuselage.
I like this, did you make the wings?
@jokopuryono 1213 now with the addition of This engine
@realSavageMan We need Multiplayer, buttons that can be assigned custom outputs (buttons you can click that give an FT input out, say I press the autopilot button and it changes the value "autopilot" to 1, so the elevators, ailerons, engines, etc can read "autopilot = 1"
+1The glass idea is great but we need anti-fuselage blocks that can just punch holes in other fuselage blocks. Actual legitimate holes that you can select things behind.
@Gundamboy Nope, just check how old this account is.
@Kennneth Thank you, glad you enjoyed and will download the finished project in 6 months.
@Gundamboy No help except for questions on which arrangement looks better (directed to the people on SPBC). I built all of this, as well as designing all the funky trees, by myself.
@WagonTime 500 parts will be impossible. Sorry. Even my 4500 part 757 could only go down to 1600. I usually calculate 1/3 parts for low detail, so in this case around 3,000.
@1918 Oh. Okay then. I'm kinda sad that you took away all the details but I guess it was necessary for lower-part builds.
@1918 Nice, BTW I don't know how you managed to keep the plane around 2000 considering that the wings are 840 each. If you did use the full wings, that means the part count is 83% wings.
(Edit) I now see that you changed the landing gear and engines (and removed the leading edge flap hinges, nooooo), which accounted for half the wing's parts. (about 400)
+1Looks like a -200
@Boeing737800ali It will be done at the end of summer, 2021. Probably early August.
@realSavageMan Pretty good
@Z3chi0 Exactly! This project was definitely worth it though, and I'll make sure that the rest of the airplane has the same level of detail.