In version 1.8.3, the game optimized the resistance calculation. But this made my plane pitch very serious.
I built an airplane to test the resistance.
http://www.simpleplanes.com/a/Xcn77d/wingtest07
(take off in the air,it hasn't got landingGear.)
This aircraft is completely symmetrical, symmetrical up and down, symmetric left and right.
The structure behind the aircraft, two boards attached to the rotator replaced the vertical tail. Under normal circumstances, according to the physics, the aircraft can fly forward normally.
And I found that the resistance of the latter two boards is different, and the gap is quite large.
the drag point is 5463
And this drag point is 5563!
This shows that the board above provides 481 drag points,and the board below provides 580 drag points.
The difference is serious!
This gap makes my aircraft nose constantly deflected.
I feel this bug is really bad.
@AndrewGarrison Thank you very much.
This craft is not large enough to be affected by the drag calculation optimization made in 1.8 (its volume is about 10x too small). You can try using the Overload mod to disable drag on the offending parts until your craft is balanced the way that you want it to be. The
dragScaleandcalculateDragxml properties were created for this purpose.GA Challenge Results (post 2)
Mod EternalDarkness 17 hours ago
PART TWO OF GA Challenge Results
15: ##Cessna 337 Super Skymaster by Deboss311
Design: 7/10
Performance: 9/10
Paint scheme: 6/10
Build quality: 5/10
Personal impression: 5/5
Description: 3.5/10
Total: 34.5/55
Nice choice of plane. You've made sure to get every major detail on it. It's close to scale too, I'd say. Performance are good, except the lack of flaps changing takeoff/landing performance. Paint scheme is realistic, but roughly made, reducing a few points in both paint scheme and build quality categories. Also, lack of flaps and surfaces being stock reduces "quality". However, gear is custom, all features are working, and the plane is holding together, which are all plusses. Description is pretty dry. Overall, very good for a bronze user.
16: ##Ghost Dynamics GD-201 Sparrow by GhostHTX
Design: 6/10
Performance: 9/10
Paint scheme: 5/10
Build quality: 8/10
Personal impression: 4/5
Description: 1/10
Total: 33/55
Dummies aren't life-sized, and making the cockpit around them caused it to be too small. Performance are good, except that flaps don't provide a lot of extra lift and brakes are unedited, making the plane feel like slamming into a wall while braking. Paint scheme is basic, but has registration on it and suits the plane. Sharp trailing edge is always better than a rounded one, but cockpit is very nice and landing gear is good. There's barely any description.
17: ##Ring Wing Mk.1 by asteroidbook345
Design: 6/10
Performance: 5.5/10
Paint scheme: 4/10
Build quality: 7/10
Personal impression: 3.5/5
Description: 4/10
Total: 30/55
This plane has a very unusual and likeable design idea behind it. However, it's not well executed. Canopy is huge, and tail surfaces are tiny. It pulls left on the runway and rolls slightly to the left, and doesn't like low speed landings. Paint scheme is pretty basic, with some effort being made on in on the "wingtips". All control surfaces are custom, but there's not much in terms of details. Description is a bit plain and only has one picture of the plane that was an inspiration for the build.
18: ##Lykins UC-1 Colt by Strikefighter04
Design: 4/10
Performance: 6/10
Paint scheme: 5/10
Build quality: 5/10
Personal impression: 2/5
Description: 7/10
Total: 29/55
While I see where you were going with the design, it isn't very well executed. The fuselage rear doesn't taper in height as much as it should, wing cord is unusually large for this kind of plan
andrew@jundroo.com
发邮件吧
@weebabyseamus
Did anyone see this?
Did anyone notice this?
@AndrewGarrison Please pay attention to this issue, thank you...