@Flightsonic Yes, there are some lifting surfaces. They aren't needed to make it fly though. I included them to make it easier for the pilot to change the direction of the aircraft's velocity.
Ooh. rate(Latitude) is a pretty nice way to express velocity components. What advantages does this method have over using trig to get your velocity components? It does look simpler code-wise, which I suppose is a pretty nice advantage.
Imagine unironically posting garbage like this on the SP forums, instead of tolerating the existence of a classmate who is different from you.
.
Please think before you post. This isn’t productive, just like 99% of the rest of your post history.
Very nice! I have been thinking of making a technical resources page much like the one that you have made. Perhaps making it into a forum post might be beneficial - some users do not have access to (or understand) google docs.
@TheKraken3 I plan to make a few more widgets/tools for SP users as I continue to hone my coding skills. As for whether I will do this is specifically funky trees stuff? That depends on what I feel like making.
I do not think that you need the pi / 180 term. That would be only necessary if the trig functions required a radian argument. Also, the sine function should have the sum of AoA and pitch angle as it’s argument. I can provide some reference material if you want.
I’ve been experiencing this, especially with my descriptions. I have decided to cut back on word count, because I’d rather not write a Stephen King novel with each of my uploads.
Not a bad thing, though there is a chance that your computer is using its integrated graphics card instead of your NVIDIA card. There is a tutorial on SP’s steampage.
Unfortunately RCNs do use a small amount of fuel. An alternative may be inverted airbrakes. With funky trees, you can design an inverted airbrake with a max velocity.
@Mustang51 @TheChosenOne @thefalkenreich Thank you for your interest in Corpus Ikran! The build has been uploaded, and it even has an obnoxiously long description.
Yep, this seems very much like a funky trees problem. For the 45% VTOL problem, the input would probably be clamp01(VTOL - 0.45). As for the -25% pitch, the input would most likely by clamp01(-0.25 - Pitch), assuming that you would want the piston to move when the pitch input goes to larger negative numbers. This code should work for the purposes described in this post, feel free to copy-paste the code that I provided.
In short, yes! Here's a post describing how to use comparative logic. I can provide the code specific to your question at a later time if you need, too.
@BuiltBionixInd10 I'm sure that an autopilot would be possible for a walking mechanism. As for how to do it, that goes over my head. I have never been too good with mechs.
@SnoWFLakE0s Constantly improving has been one of the most rewarding parts of everything that I do on the site. Feeling that something unpolished is a natural part of that process. If you want constructive criticism, though, feel free to contact me via this website or on discord. My discord is spefyjerbf#8985.
@Sutairs Ty!
+1@PlanefunJr Thanks! I have an account with one (broken) upload. I like how SP has combat and Funky Trees, so for now I’m sticking to SP.
+1@Flightsonic Yes, there are some lifting surfaces. They aren't needed to make it fly though. I included them to make it easier for the pilot to change the direction of the aircraft's velocity.
+1@BaconRoll Beautiful pasta. You are a great chef!
+1All below comments are here because I cannot delete them. I recycled this old forum post, because I did not want to spam the forums.
+1@Axartar Ty! She flies great too.
+1@BuiltBionixInd10 Ainsley is the man. I’ll be sure to tag!
+1@jamesPLANESii Controls are well formatted at the beginning. The word count comes from explaining FT code for the challenge.
+1Of course! This build has some nice functionality in a pretty package.
+1Looks great, and its pretty part efficient. Spotlight-worthy IMO
+1Jundroo.
+1Ooh.
+1rate(Latitude)is a pretty nice way to express velocity components. What advantages does this method have over using trig to get your velocity components? It does look simpler code-wise, which I suppose is a pretty nice advantage.Very nice. I feel like it could use some detailing though.
+1Another option would be to include your timezone in your bio, in the form of a link to a clock with your local time.
+1Certainly a unique aircraft. Thanks for making my jetstream more interesting! You earned a new follower.
+1Imagine unironically posting garbage like this on the SP forums, instead of tolerating the existence of a classmate who is different from you.
+1.
Please think before you post. This isn’t productive, just like 99% of the rest of your post history.
Nice. I never really understood smooth. How is it used in this application?
+1Awesome! This will make funky trees accessible for many more users.
+1The lantern SWINGS! Well, now I have to spotlight this.
+1Very nice! I have been thinking of making a technical resources page much like the one that you have made. Perhaps making it into a forum post might be beneficial - some users do not have access to (or understand) google docs.
+1@Sm10684 @Gameboi14 Looks like Gameboi14 had it pretty close to right. "Speffy-jerb-if"
+1@TheKraken3 I plan to make a few more widgets/tools for SP users as I continue to hone my coding skills. As for whether I will do this is specifically funky trees stuff? That depends on what I feel like making.
+1@destroyerP Certainly no annoyance at all! It gives me something to do during breaks.
+1I do not think that you need the pi / 180 term. That would be only necessary if the trig functions required a radian argument. Also, the sine function should have the sum of AoA and pitch angle as it’s argument. I can provide some reference material if you want.
+1@BeefyBoy4516 Thank you! A lot of thought goes into these builds. It feels great to hear that the extra effort shows.
+1@randomusername Nice. I had slightly different code in mind that might work too. If it works, I’ll let you know.
+1@Starbound Wonderful! I’ll verify some of these values to get units. Thank you.
+1@jamesPLANESii Adding AoA in the trig function should account for that.
+1Beautiful! I think @Ephwurd would appreciate the style.
+1@BogdanX Thanks! I hope it isn’t too hard to judge performance-wise.
+1I’ve been experiencing this, especially with my descriptions. I have decided to cut back on word count, because I’d rather not write a Stephen King novel with each of my uploads.
+1Unfortunately entity tracking isn’t a thing. That would be really, really cool though.
+1@Gameboi14 ⬇️
+1I would paste the needed code, but @SnoWFLakE0s already did that for me. That should work for your purposes.
+1@XenoMorphic Thank you! It was fun to make this one.
+1Yes. You would have to use beefy airbrakes and a medium to lightweight aircraft.
+1Nice. Good work!
+1Very nice. As for the gyro, I think the stability/speed needs to decreased to prevent wobbling.
+1Not a bad thing, though there is a chance that your computer is using its integrated graphics card instead of your NVIDIA card. There is a tutorial on SP’s steampage.
+1Very nice. Looks like you explored a slightly different style here! My only criticism is that the sides could probably be smoothed out a bit.
+1Unfortunately RCNs do use a small amount of fuel. An alternative may be inverted airbrakes. With funky trees, you can design an inverted airbrake with a max velocity.
+1@ThomasRoderick Good to see you too! I hope that this build makes up for my absence.
+1@HarryBen47 Thank you! SP gets exciting when I can apply math to it.
+1@Mustang51 @TheChosenOne @thefalkenreich Thank you for your interest in Corpus Ikran! The build has been uploaded, and it even has an obnoxiously long description.
+1K
+1Yep, this seems very much like a funky trees problem. For the 45% VTOL problem, the input would probably be
+1clamp01(VTOL - 0.45). As for the -25% pitch, the input would most likely byclamp01(-0.25 - Pitch), assuming that you would want the piston to move when the pitch input goes to larger negative numbers. This code should work for the purposes described in this post, feel free to copy-paste the code that I provided.In short, yes! Here's a post describing how to use comparative logic. I can provide the code specific to your question at a later time if you need, too.
+1@XjayIndustrys Thank you! It was fun and useful to write this forum post.
+1@BuiltBionixInd10 I'm sure that an autopilot would be possible for a walking mechanism. As for how to do it, that goes over my head. I have never been too good with mechs.
+1@SnoWFLakE0s Constantly improving has been one of the most rewarding parts of everything that I do on the site. Feeling that something unpolished is a natural part of that process. If you want constructive criticism, though, feel free to contact me via this website or on discord. My discord is spefyjerbf#8985.
+1