@TheDerpingMemes I realise that if you remove all ensigns, the part count is 183 and flight abilities are not affected. However the plane really needs an engine and wing upgrade. It's got some serious lackluster performance for an air supremacy fighter.
There are multiple ways of doing it but I will only state four ways. Firstly, you can use a lighter fuselage so the thrust to weight is higher. Second, if you can XML, you can set input max to 0.1 while setting engine power to 10 multiplier. The engine will perform like a normal engine but more fuel efficient, add more zeros and the engine will be more efficient. Third, you can use a more efficient engine. Four, you can lessen the drag so the plane can travel faster with less power.
@Kalanimcd sorry, that one doesn't work, also I'm building a second entry because my plane is struggling to beat another, however it wasn't yours. There's a 109 late war variant with wing loading of about 4.5lbs. you should try dogfighting his plane, I bet you'll lose.
@Kalanimcd uhhh you mean long range setup? Yes, short range and medium range? Totally gets beaten to shreds. Maneuverability is important too, especially in this type of challenge(where guns are only allowed) because the tester usually tests at med to short range and never tests at long range because to them it's a waste of time...I don't think so... Plus if it wasn't that criteria I would build something similar, I'm better with fast, armoured and high firepower planes rather than maneuverable ones.
@ZackAttack5050 oh...I see... Maybe I should try building one, this time however it's an aerodynamic one, this should make a flying turret more viable.
What a strange design, I build turret based planes for missile locks and this is why I don't fit the turret with weapons, instead I fit the plane with missiles on detachers or vertically, so the missile can track any direction without any problem. And I usually use small but fast firing, accurate and high damage guns.
@Dimkal yes, I didn't need them due to what I call "range play". It's brilliant because it removes the need of any other equipment. Plus, it's got a piece of equipment you didn't notice, do you see the bulge in the lower part of the nose? That is a lock on system that allows 360° rotational lockon. That allows the plane to lock on from the side, which makes the tactic viable, this isn't available in other planes in the challenge.( except the predecessor) I've stated controls in the old version.
Honestly...I think this is a bad idea...I bet the AI can barely train these guns on target.
Hey at least it doesn't have stalling problems like the other two planes am I right?
@Jacobdaniel @Kalanimcd uhhhh then you might not want to see my plane. Jacob is gonna freak out when he knows I build a plane that is so maneuverable, fast and powerful that it wins even before the turning fight starts(at times).
@Dimkal nah, it doesn't auto-roll. It just has a very bad roll rate. Which I'm asking whether it's fine because I hope it is. Also can we for hard points with hard points attached to each other?(which means one hard point with 3 missiles)
@MajesticAerospace dude the plane explodes because the lights are stacked in the rear and whenever you pull negative g the plane gets destroyed by the lights.
P.S. when were lights a deadly weapon XD hahahaha!
Actually even if you don't disqualify him, that plane won't perform well anyways...Sorry but after testing this plane, I decided to criticize it here in this comment. Too little offensive armament too little parts too unmaneuverable for a single engined plane too high wing loading aaaaand too vulnerable to fire. Done.
@TheDerpingMemes I realise that if you remove all ensigns, the part count is 183 and flight abilities are not affected. However the plane really needs an engine and wing upgrade. It's got some serious lackluster performance for an air supremacy fighter.
@TheDerpingMemes hmmmm... As a follower I'll try and help.
There are multiple ways of doing it but I will only state four ways. Firstly, you can use a lighter fuselage so the thrust to weight is higher. Second, if you can XML, you can set input max to 0.1 while setting engine power to 10 multiplier. The engine will perform like a normal engine but more fuel efficient, add more zeros and the engine will be more efficient. Third, you can use a more efficient engine. Four, you can lessen the drag so the plane can travel faster with less power.
+1It's because the "missile's" center of mass is too far from the center of lift. You will need to solve that in order for the missile to work.
It will not be an entry anymore.
@Zerokiller3 I see...
@Kalanimcd oh wait...It doesn't look like a p38... NOOOOO!
@Kalanimcd sweet! P38! My second favorite WW2 US fight!
Sorry but this plane is going to be removed.
Crazy! I think I'll need to make a smaller plane...
@Kalanimcd the plane is called der karl
@Kalanimcd I advise you to upgrade your plane.
@Kalanimcd sorry, that one doesn't work, also I'm building a second entry because my plane is struggling to beat another, however it wasn't yours. There's a 109 late war variant with wing loading of about 4.5lbs. you should try dogfighting his plane, I bet you'll lose.
Awesome! I've attempted to search up this plane for so long! Finally a nice looking replica!
@Kalanimcd I thought you had "hundreds of guns" but apparently you had way less.
@Kalanimcd uhhh you mean long range setup? Yes, short range and medium range? Totally gets beaten to shreds. Maneuverability is important too, especially in this type of challenge(where guns are only allowed) because the tester usually tests at med to short range and never tests at long range because to them it's a waste of time...I don't think so... Plus if it wasn't that criteria I would build something similar, I'm better with fast, armoured and high firepower planes rather than maneuverable ones.
@ZackAttack5050 oh...I see... Maybe I should try building one, this time however it's an aerodynamic one, this should make a flying turret more viable.
What a strange design, I build turret based planes for missile locks and this is why I don't fit the turret with weapons, instead I fit the plane with missiles on detachers or vertically, so the missile can track any direction without any problem. And I usually use small but fast firing, accurate and high damage guns.
+1@ThatTotalRando wonder if this challenge is active...
Nice zero...I'll fix it.
Oh wait...It is a lockers Hudson bomber, PV-2 version!
Looks like a lockeed hudson bomber.
@Dimkal yes, I didn't need them due to what I call "range play". It's brilliant because it removes the need of any other equipment. Plus, it's got a piece of equipment you didn't notice, do you see the bulge in the lower part of the nose? That is a lock on system that allows 360° rotational lockon. That allows the plane to lock on from the side, which makes the tactic viable, this isn't available in other planes in the challenge.( except the predecessor) I've stated controls in the old version.
Torpedo powered ship....Interesting it's probably the first of its kind!
Amazing!
@Dimkal the new variant of my plane is done! It should do a lot better in this challenge.( I think I started the hard points war now XD)
Honestly...I think this is a bad idea...I bet the AI can barely train these guns on target.
Hey at least it doesn't have stalling problems like the other two planes am I right?
@Kalanimcd holy crap XD I thought the challenge limit for parts of 100.
@Jacobdaniel @Kalanimcd uhhhh then you might not want to see my plane. Jacob is gonna freak out when he knows I build a plane that is so maneuverable, fast and powerful that it wins even before the turning fight starts(at times).
@Jacobdaniel I realise this question repeated twice hahahahaha XD
@Jacobdaniel I'll try making a plane for this fun challenge! :)
@Dimkal nah, it doesn't auto-roll. It just has a very bad roll rate. Which I'm asking whether it's fine because I hope it is. Also can we for hard points with hard points attached to each other?(which means one hard point with 3 missiles)
Will this be tested on high physics?
@MajesticAerospace oh wait...Don't mind the comment below, some of the lights aren't attached...
@MajesticAerospace is it the physics quality? I set it to low so probably...
@ZackAttack5050 very difficult... How far am I supposed to lead?
+1Hahahahaha XD totally gonna save this plane!
@Irobert55 it wasn't needed I think...Ammo is really limited in the game.
+1@Dimkal unless you think bad rolling is fine.
@Dimkal it needed it anyway.
@Dimkal alright then, I'll only do a small modification.
@Dimkal hey can I modify my plane so there are more hard points?This time on the wings.
@RYANF34 flies nice...It might do well :) enjoyed flying it.
@MajesticAerospace I want to fly it but it might explode...
@MajesticAerospace dude the plane explodes because the lights are stacked in the rear and whenever you pull negative g the plane gets destroyed by the lights.
P.S. when were lights a deadly weapon XD hahahaha!
Lol did I criticize it too much?XD
+1Actually even if you don't disqualify him, that plane won't perform well anyways...Sorry but after testing this plane, I decided to criticize it here in this comment. Too little offensive armament too little parts too unmaneuverable for a single engined plane too high wing loading aaaaand too vulnerable to fire. Done.
+1@Dimkal thanks...I wonder if the map really has a sh*t load of USA beasts so I was worries...
@Dimkal do hard points in the fuselage count as wing hard points?
@Dimkal multirole capability...Oh no...