I think everyone agrees that tracks (and rails, lol) would be great. In the mean time, just ask to borrow somebody's smooshy wheels and you should be fine.
Download highly-rated posts, take them apart to learn how they're made. There are guides on how to modify parts with xml and funky trees, but don't bother with those until you've learned how to do the basic stuff.
@Starbound Helicopters are dangerous, nauseating, loud contraptions and I hope I never have to ride in one. But they're also the best tools for a wide variety of critical tasks and also a huge part of the history of the 20th century. To say they are "inferior" to fixed wing craft is like saying a shovel is inferior to a hammer.
Downloads are the most satisfying part (other then finally finishing something!) Of the game for me. The idea that so many people enjoy and want to learn about something I made and shared, it's a great feeling. Congratulations, you clearly put a lot of work in on this.
@jamesPLANESii I hope so. Some of those builds have over a thousand parts. I'm all for supporting low-part count builds for efficiency and mobile friendliness. But nothing kicks you in the marbles like spending a month on something that gets 20 votes.
@BogdanX Late-war USAAF aircraft were ordered in "bare aluminum" with a shiny polish to reduce drag. It was determined that by deleting the paint layer, they could reduce the weight of the plane and save resources (especially with large aircraft). Aside from being a cost-cutting measure, it was a bold statement to the Axis powers about the state of US air dominance: our planes had no need to hide. This practice lasted until the Vietnam era and became popular with the USSR as well.
DUDE! I don't know if you're interested in making anymore sweet French racers, but back in the 30's Caudron made some absolutely stunning planes. You should check them out.
Looks pretty good. I like your attention to texture, the shape of the fuselage and the overall layout of the plane. The back story makes sense (I especially like the bit about political meddling). I like how you centered the location of the bombs with the center of mass and the gun placement is also excellent. The radio antenna cables give the plane a very realistic appearance and look great. For improvement, consider the size of internal components when designing things like wings and nacelles. There's not enough space in the nacelles for engines, ductwork, and the landing gear hydraulics. Your wings are also much too thin in terms of z axis (height), consider making the wing roots about 5 times thicker than the tips when viewed from the front.
@DeezDucks In real life, they were so difficult to take off and land that the Navy refused to allow them on carriers. Part of a long line of Vought aircraft known for killing their own pilots.
Please spend many hours building a construct that won't get any upvotes so I can shamelessly use it to get upvotes. I have no respect at all for the stuff you've already submitted, and it's too much work for me to figure this stuff out.
@edensk It's ok. I agree about people overdoing the thrust, slapping 20 or 30 engines onto a box of fuel is one of the first things people do when they install Simpleplanes!
@Shnippy Do what @jamesPLANESii said. The max input directly controls the braking power. With a high enough max setting you can instantly stop from almost any speed and even float motionless in midair for 10 or 15 seconds.
If you boil it down, the story of any great combat plane is really the story of someone taking a great engine and building a plane around it. The P-47 had the best engine of World War Two, the Pratt&Whitney Double-Wasp. No other engine could reliably produce that much power and put up with that much abuse, not the German turbojets or the British V-12's, nothing came close. The R-2800 Double-Wasp was used in many awesome US aircraft, but the Jug was its ultimate incarnation thanks to a monstrous General Electric turbosupercharger the size of a truck engine. While the cold air intake for the turbo was located below the engine, the colossal turbocharger was much too big to be located in the front of the plane. It was actually located in the back, right above the large exhaust port ahead of the tail wheel. This link shows all the guts of a Thunderbolt and explains just how crucial this unusual design was to its incredible power and ruggedness.
@Finnagetrekt The missile weighs 5 metric tons and was designed to kill aircraft carriers from hundreds of kilometers away, not very appropriate for a helicopter.
@CookieCrumz It may seem like that sometimes, but it's not the case. Newer players have always felt this way and the recipe for success has always been to make visually impressive preview pictures that can land your creation on the front page. Each week somebody manages to do that with their second or third build. The mods are more than eager to feature a new player with an impressive design.
@ThePilotDude I have a feeling that with the right features, some of our more talented builders could make some pretty fun ships (military or civilian) but I also see where you're coming from.
@BogdanX Normally, I'd agree with you, this is a game after all. But the landing speed with (flaps and medium throttle) IRL is somewhere around 177mph which is about what I've represented here. Realistic jet engines spool up too slowly for realistic jets to work properly at the "Approach" locations, though some might have light enough wing loading to glide in the Tu-22 and Tu-22M certainly do not. This requires more from the pilot, but the higher wing loading does make for a smoother less hazardous ride at low altitudes, perfect for a high speed penetration bomber. That said, your advice is always important to me and I will keep it in mind for my next project.
@GoldenFalcon63 No problem! This stuff will make more sense to you in time. Every last one of us went through this exact thing you're going through, learning by problem solving and asking for help.
My boss was part of the flight crew on an EA-3B (the Navy version of this plane) back in the 80s. He said landing in a plane this large on a carrier deck was terrifying.
@Freerider2142 It was a joke, amigo. The F-5 was a design well ahead of it's time, but the technology inside of it wasn't. As a result, you can see time and again where the design itself impacted the world of aviation in the form of newer aircraft using better technology and the solid F-5 design as a starting point.
This plane looks very nice, but you can do better. You captured the overall shape very well, the outline looks great and everything is pretty much to scale. The cockpit area and air intakes look great.
But there are problems here. Your tail has split elevators, that's a big no-no for anything supersonic. All superson aircraft have all-moving horizontal tails, no exceptions. You left out the "dog-tooth" on the leading edge of the main wings, one of the Phantom's most distinguishing features. Aside from that, consider putting more effort into the tail instead of attaching vanilla wings back there and building your own landing gear.
I know this is pretty harsh, but you're gold now and you've been building for a long time. This is a great looking build and I can see from the parts of the plane that you got right that you've got the skills to improve the parts you missed.
Yes, the P-51 is the most over-used aircraft on this website, slightly beating the (almost identical looking) BF-109 and Spitfire. Words fail to describe how sick I am of those three planes.
You gotta be careful with the GA hate, a lot of our best makers are wild about that stuff. I would also recommend you never say anything bad about the Avro Vulcan or TSR2, emotions run hot around those two.
@GiuliMBorgesYT Be careful. If you forget a part then your plane will fly really crooked.
+2@Yourcrush Theres a bug with hollow blocks that let's you make concave shapes, sort of. If you google it, you'll see the forum post about it.
+2@Kfineran I assume the angle of attack has to change, but like I said I'm no expert
+2I think everyone agrees that tracks (and rails, lol) would be great. In the mean time, just ask to borrow somebody's smooshy wheels and you should be fine.
+2@RailfanEthan You've been waiting all year for that, haven't you?
+2Download highly-rated posts, take them apart to learn how they're made. There are guides on how to modify parts with xml and funky trees, but don't bother with those until you've learned how to do the basic stuff.
+2You'll be back.
+2There are people in this forum looking for help and trying to display their work. Please stop drowning them out with your spam posts.
+2@Starbound Helicopters are dangerous, nauseating, loud contraptions and I hope I never have to ride in one. But they're also the best tools for a wide variety of critical tasks and also a huge part of the history of the 20th century. To say they are "inferior" to fixed wing craft is like saying a shovel is inferior to a hammer.
+2WE SAIL TONIGHT FOR SINGAPORE!
+2From now on boy, this iron boats your home!
Hey man, that's pretty cool. You can post photos by uploading them to an image hosting site and linking to them like this:
+2
SIMPLE PLANES
+2@Strikefighter04 You're only as strong as your weakest link.
+2The Big E
+2Downloads are the most satisfying part (other then finally finishing something!) Of the game for me. The idea that so many people enjoy and want to learn about something I made and shared, it's a great feeling. Congratulations, you clearly put a lot of work in on this.
+2@Yourcrush
YAAAAAAAAAAS
thank you thank you thank you
Also, thank you @thesavagemanZ for the sweet tutorial
+2@jamesPLANESii I hope so. Some of those builds have over a thousand parts. I'm all for supporting low-part count builds for efficiency and mobile friendliness. But nothing kicks you in the marbles like spending a month on something that gets 20 votes.
+2@Mr10ToN In the build screen, the propellers need to move forward 0.5 blocks.
+2@BogdanX Late-war USAAF aircraft were ordered in "bare aluminum" with a shiny polish to reduce drag. It was determined that by deleting the paint layer, they could reduce the weight of the plane and save resources (especially with large aircraft). Aside from being a cost-cutting measure, it was a bold statement to the Axis powers about the state of US air dominance: our planes had no need to hide. This practice lasted until the Vietnam era and became popular with the USSR as well.
+2Absolutely stunning. A beautiful job on a gorgeous plane
+2Man, this one is going right to the top!
+2DUDE! I don't know if you're interested in making anymore sweet French racers, but back in the 30's Caudron made some absolutely stunning planes. You should check them out.
+2Nobody does civilian planes as good as you!
+2Looks pretty good. I like your attention to texture, the shape of the fuselage and the overall layout of the plane. The back story makes sense (I especially like the bit about political meddling). I like how you centered the location of the bombs with the center of mass and the gun placement is also excellent. The radio antenna cables give the plane a very realistic appearance and look great. For improvement, consider the size of internal components when designing things like wings and nacelles. There's not enough space in the nacelles for engines, ductwork, and the landing gear hydraulics. Your wings are also much too thin in terms of z axis (height), consider making the wing roots about 5 times thicker than the tips when viewed from the front.
+2Hail to the king
+2@DeezDucks In real life, they were so difficult to take off and land that the Navy refused to allow them on carriers. Part of a long line of Vought aircraft known for killing their own pilots.
+2In other words:
Please spend many hours building a construct that won't get any upvotes so I can shamelessly use it to get upvotes. I have no respect at all for the stuff you've already submitted, and it's too much work for me to figure this stuff out.
That about right?
+2@edensk It's ok. I agree about people overdoing the thrust, slapping 20 or 30 engines onto a box of fuel is one of the first things people do when they install Simpleplanes!
+2@Shnippy Do what @jamesPLANESii said. The max input directly controls the braking power. With a high enough max setting you can instantly stop from almost any speed and even float motionless in midair for 10 or 15 seconds.
+2If you boil it down, the story of any great combat plane is really the story of someone taking a great engine and building a plane around it. The P-47 had the best engine of World War Two, the Pratt&Whitney Double-Wasp. No other engine could reliably produce that much power and put up with that much abuse, not the German turbojets or the British V-12's, nothing came close. The R-2800 Double-Wasp was used in many awesome US aircraft, but the Jug was its ultimate incarnation thanks to a monstrous General Electric turbosupercharger the size of a truck engine. While the cold air intake for the turbo was located below the engine, the colossal turbocharger was much too big to be located in the front of the plane. It was actually located in the back, right above the large exhaust port ahead of the tail wheel. This link shows all the guts of a Thunderbolt and explains just how crucial this unusual design was to its incredible power and ruggedness.
+2@Finnagetrekt The missile weighs 5 metric tons and was designed to kill aircraft carriers from hundreds of kilometers away, not very appropriate for a helicopter.
+2No one will know all the detail you put into this if you don't zoom in and take more screenshots!
+2@Omel I just mean they exist, that's all
+2@CookieCrumz It may seem like that sometimes, but it's not the case. Newer players have always felt this way and the recipe for success has always been to make visually impressive preview pictures that can land your creation on the front page. Each week somebody manages to do that with their second or third build. The mods are more than eager to feature a new player with an impressive design.
+2@asteroidbook345 The detail is often quite stunning
+2@ThePilotDude I have a feeling that with the right features, some of our more talented builders could make some pretty fun ships (military or civilian) but I also see where you're coming from.
+2@Blyatsickle Well, let's break it down and figure out one pat at a time. What's the most confusing part for you?
+2@BogdanX Normally, I'd agree with you, this is a game after all. But the landing speed with (flaps and medium throttle) IRL is somewhere around 177mph which is about what I've represented here. Realistic jet engines spool up too slowly for realistic jets to work properly at the "Approach" locations, though some might have light enough wing loading to glide in the Tu-22 and Tu-22M certainly do not. This requires more from the pilot, but the higher wing loading does make for a smoother less hazardous ride at low altitudes, perfect for a high speed penetration bomber. That said, your advice is always important to me and I will keep it in mind for my next project.
+2SOVIET AVIATION IN THE HOOOOOOOOUSE!
@AircraftoftheRedStar @asteroidbook345 @SimplyPlain
+2@Feanor We thank and praise you for your wisdom and assistance. May the upvotes wash over you like the cleansing brine of the mother ocean herself.
+2Come on people, this is IMPORTANT
Tell your friends to upvote this thread.
+2Great idea. Call up the folks at Apple and let us know how it works out.
+2This is old and there are now more complicated ways of making good wings, but Q's old method is easy to understand
+2@GoldenFalcon63 No problem! This stuff will make more sense to you in time. Every last one of us went through this exact thing you're going through, learning by problem solving and asking for help.
+2My boss was part of the flight crew on an EA-3B (the Navy version of this plane) back in the 80s. He said landing in a plane this large on a carrier deck was terrifying.
+2@Freerider2142 It was a joke, amigo. The F-5 was a design well ahead of it's time, but the technology inside of it wasn't. As a result, you can see time and again where the design itself impacted the world of aviation in the form of newer aircraft using better technology and the solid F-5 design as a starting point.
+2This plane looks very nice, but you can do better. You captured the overall shape very well, the outline looks great and everything is pretty much to scale. The cockpit area and air intakes look great.
But there are problems here. Your tail has split elevators, that's a big no-no for anything supersonic. All superson aircraft have all-moving horizontal tails, no exceptions. You left out the "dog-tooth" on the leading edge of the main wings, one of the Phantom's most distinguishing features. Aside from that, consider putting more effort into the tail instead of attaching vanilla wings back there and building your own landing gear.
I know this is pretty harsh, but you're gold now and you've been building for a long time. This is a great looking build and I can see from the parts of the plane that you got right that you've got the skills to improve the parts you missed.
+2@BlackhattAircraft Remove the S from HTTPS if your pictures are hosted by imgur
+2Yes, the P-51 is the most over-used aircraft on this website, slightly beating the (almost identical looking) BF-109 and Spitfire. Words fail to describe how sick I am of those three planes.
+2You gotta be careful with the GA hate, a lot of our best makers are wild about that stuff. I would also recommend you never say anything bad about the Avro Vulcan or TSR2, emotions run hot around those two.
+2