My entry's in. I've gone for what I hope is a decent balance between speed and handling. It hits 2000 mph and still handles fairly well while being stable enough for the AI to control. If it's a flat-out drag race, I'm going to lose, but if there's some turns I might do reasonably well.
@AndrewGarrison Does the 3 minute per race limit apply to this tournament?
65 km in 3 minutes means planes will have to be going over 810 mph just to reach the finish in time.
Man, this is tougher than I thought. I've built one that hits 1400 mph and has good agility, but is that good enough? Do I need more speed, or will the loss of turning ability do more harm than good? I've got no way of knowing.
Maybe I should just build a Cessna 172 instead.
OK, this is interesting. I think it should be a plane race, not a car one, otherwise it would be car class. I think I'll build a plane that can take off from a runway if it has to, has decent top speed, but focus on handling - we've got no idea what the turns are going to be like, so you've got to be prepared.
@EarthwormJim I've gone for reliability over speed with my entry. In testing, it finishes the race in exactly one minute, with good reliability.
Of course, that's in testing. Who knows what will happen in the real event. Well, actually we do know what's going to happen - KiNo's going to win again.
@ThiccBloke Yes, that's always the hardest bit on this track. The entry I'm working on makes it most of the time, but I still want to get it more consistent.
It might be worth adding vertical stabilisers or changing your wings to move the centre of lift up - that helps the plane be more stable and less likely to roll off to the side, crashing into the bridge.
Thank you! It was an interesting challenge and I learned by doing it. I'm going to experiment with using structural panels and wing sections for the body of planes more, it seemed to work well on this.
@Alienbeef0421 Just for completeness, I will point out that I used parts with collisions disabled on that plane. Also, check out the Eagle Pass tournament to see things going faster without an engine.
I wouldn't say the car tournaments have been boring, but I would like to see what would happen if we were allowed to use jet and prop engines for power, not just car engines.
@ShiptyCo I'm happy to do business with you, but your offer is too low. The price of this is $350K, though we may be able to bring that down if you're ordering a large number. As you're interested in military applications, you might also be interested in other models in this series of planes. The Neygi Mk 4 is a combat trainer; it performed well enough that it was eventually developed into the Neygi Mk 5 fighter.
I just spotted this while watching replays of the Riding Dirty tournament. I'm not sure why you entered this in a car class race, but it was impressive how well it flew and hovered.
Well, my entry didn't perform as well in the race as it did in testing, but I reached the semi-finals and only got beaten by KiNo. I think that's a pretty good result.
Congratulations to ABC123 on their win.
My entry's in. It's good, but probably not quite good enough to win. Still, I'm happy with it, that's what matters. And I should get through a few rounds until I meet a top-tier entry.
I'm entering, my Serica is up as a successor. I liked this challenge, it was interesting building something to fly and cope with the limitations of the engines provided.
KiNo won this last time. I did pretty well with my entry, so might re-use it. This course is definitely more about agility than speed, it should be and interesting tournament.
I grabbed a copy of it when they put it up for download and still have it saved on my phone. It's briefly entertaining, but very very simple, you're not missing out on much.
@landspeedcreator I was thinking more of the old cross-country air races, rather than the ones round a tight and twisty course. Agility wasn't so important for them, and the long tail helps keep this stable. Plus I wanted to get the look of everything tapering back from a big engine in the nose.
@Fishbowl1121 You are correct, I went on holiday to the Isle of Wight a few years ago and took a photo of this. I wanted something unusual as my Gravatar, and this worked nicely.
For those who are wondering, it is the Yarmouth Gribble - a sculpture and public seat named and designed after the gribble worms that are attacking the wood of a nearby pier.
Oh plane of mine, why do you dive when you roll? I admire that you carry on even after dipping into the water, but that will get you disqualified in the race.
Mine can't compete with those kind of times. But at least it's faster than the winner of the Unlimited Class Oceanview tournament. That's something, right?
@OtterOfToast I know it was a lot of text, but it was a genuine attempt to cool things down, have a rational discussion and work out where we disagreed. Apparently you're not interested in that, so let me make it very simple for you:
- By saying that the shakers were a bunch of cheaters,, you have falsely accused myself and many other players of being cheats. You should admit that you were wrong and apologise.
- You're misrepresenting what Andrew Garrison has said. There's nothing there saying that shakers were a cheat, in fact he says it was fun. He's announced that they won't be allowed in future tournaments, but that doesn't change the past.
- You made this post in the forums and knew people would be able to comment on it. If you think replying to your comments is harassment, I suggest that you tag a moderator with your concerns. I'm perfectly happy to accept their judgement on this matter.
Previous comment was cut off, continued here:
C3) You therefore had the ability to know that the fastest entries in the tournament were likely to be shakers.
Section D: What I'd like you to do
D1) You should admit that shakers were legitimate entries for the Eagle Pass tournament.
D2) You should admit that those who used shakers as their entry were not cheating.
D3) You should accept that your poor performance in the tournament was down to your decision to use a slower design.
Conclusion: I doubt that you're going to agree with all of this. If there are bits you disagree with, can you try to be clear what they are? And if you've got any other points you'd like to raise, please make them individual ones for easy reference.
@OtterOfToast We do seem to be going round in circles. I'm going to break it down into separate sections, so we can at least figure out what we can agree and disagree about.
Section A: Why I'm arguing with you.
A1) My initial reason for jumping in here is that I think that bad losers are bad for the community. When someone wins a tournament, it's not unusual for them to receive accusations of cheating / having produced an unfair design. It's also not unusual for Andrew Garrison to receive multiple requests to investigate the winner. My concern is that the tournaments might be stopped if they create too much hassle and abuse. By making a post purely to complain about the winning designs, you put yourself in this category of bad losers.
A2) You have also made this personal. My entry for the Eagle Pass tournament was a shaker, albeit a mediocre one. You've said that shakers cheated you, and are a bunch of cheaters. That means you have accused me of cheating. I do not cheat, and to falsely accuse me of doing so is unacceptable.
Section B: Tournament races in general
B1) The aim of entering a tournament is that your entry will complete the course as fast as possible. I know not every entry to a tournament is a serious competitor, but most of them are there to race.
B2) Each tournament has its own set of rules. There are general classes of race, but there are also those with additional rules as well, such as the Flyweight Oceanview Speedway race.
B3) It is impossible to have an entry that breaks the rules, as an automated check for illegal parts is carried out before the tournament begins.
B4) It is therefore impossible to cheat in a tournament.
B5) Tournament entries are not required to look or behave like realistic vehicles.
Section C: Posted comments
C1) In the Eagle Pass tournament comments section, some people were being open that they were using shakers, and were posting the times they could achieve.
C2) As I pointed out previously, Andrew Garrison stated that the shaking glitch was allowed in the Eagle Pass tournament.
@OtterOfToast Can you provide a link to that, please?
Edit: Never mind, I found it.
By the way, it doesn't mean my argument was invalid. Andrew has said that shakers won't be allowed in future glider tournaments. That means they were allowed in this one.
@OtterOfToast Look at the tournaments page. Observe that the Eagle Pass race is listed as an Unlimited race. There is currently no such thing as a "glider class" tournament on Simple Planes.
If you look at the tournament rules page, you will see that in Unlimited class, all engine types are allowed. So as you're claiming shakers are a kind of engine, that means they are allowed in an Unlimited class race.
@OtterOfToast It looks like you're going to like the new tournament better - it's just gone up as Mod class Oceanview Speedway. I don't think it's possible to get a shaker working from a standing start on the runway.
@OtterOfToast I'm going to quote you. "Don't glitch in here with your powered flight and screw up my glider tournament."
It's not YOUR glider tournament. It's Andrew Garrison's glider tournament. And as I showed with the comments I linked to, he said that shakers are allowed.
For what it's worth, I suspect the reason shakers were allowed is because it would be quite hard to check for them during the validation. If they do want to run a shaker-free tournament, they'd probably have to put a limit on the number of wings and stabilisers that are allowed on the plane - that would be an easy check to automate.
How is it a fair fight? How does any of that encourage engineering and innovation? Simple: It's fair because everyone has the same parts to use. It's up to the individual how they put them together, which is where the engineering and innovation come in.
You say that it ought to be cheating to use the shaking glitch, but Andrew Garrison has been veryclear that it is allowed. He's the tournament organiser, his decision is final. Shakers weren't cheating, and no amount of complaining will change that.
You beat KiNo in a tournament! That has to be worth an upvote.
@AndrewGarrison it's broken again.
My entry's in. I've gone for what I hope is a decent balance between speed and handling. It hits 2000 mph and still handles fairly well while being stable enough for the AI to control. If it's a flat-out drag race, I'm going to lose, but if there's some turns I might do reasonably well.
@AndrewGarrison Does the 3 minute per race limit apply to this tournament?
65 km in 3 minutes means planes will have to be going over 810 mph just to reach the finish in time.
Man, this is tougher than I thought. I've built one that hits 1400 mph and has good agility, but is that good enough? Do I need more speed, or will the loss of turning ability do more harm than good? I've got no way of knowing.
Maybe I should just build a Cessna 172 instead.
@Blue0Bull You can use a plane you've already built, provided it follows the rules (no weapons, not a successor of someone else's plane etc.).
OK, this is interesting. I think it should be a plane race, not a car one, otherwise it would be car class. I think I'll build a plane that can take off from a runway if it has to, has decent top speed, but focus on handling - we've got no idea what the turns are going to be like, so you've got to be prepared.
@EarthwormJim I've gone for reliability over speed with my entry. In testing, it finishes the race in exactly one minute, with good reliability.
Of course, that's in testing. Who knows what will happen in the real event. Well, actually we do know what's going to happen - KiNo's going to win again.
I've managed to get mine working now! It wasn't just raising the centre of lift that I needed, it was adding more dihedral angle to the wings.
@ThiccBloke Yes, that's always the hardest bit on this track. The entry I'm working on makes it most of the time, but I still want to get it more consistent.
It might be worth adding vertical stabilisers or changing your wings to move the centre of lift up - that helps the plane be more stable and less likely to roll off to the side, crashing into the bridge.
Ah, crashing into bridges. My favourite.
Thank you! It was an interesting challenge and I learned by doing it. I'm going to experiment with using structural panels and wing sections for the body of planes more, it seemed to work well on this.
@Alienbeef0421 Just for completeness, I will point out that I used parts with collisions disabled on that plane. Also, check out the Eagle Pass tournament to see things going faster without an engine.
Yes, I'll enter this. Thanks for inviting me.
@ShiptyCo Cool. I name it the Kanthrop. Have you actually made this in SimplePlanes? I'd like to see it if you have.
I wouldn't say the car tournaments have been boring, but I would like to see what would happen if we were allowed to use jet and prop engines for power, not just car engines.
@ShiptyCo I'm happy to do business with you, but your offer is too low. The price of this is $350K, though we may be able to bring that down if you're ordering a large number. As you're interested in military applications, you might also be interested in other models in this series of planes. The Neygi Mk 4 is a combat trainer; it performed well enough that it was eventually developed into the Neygi Mk 5 fighter.
I just spotted this while watching replays of the Riding Dirty tournament. I'm not sure why you entered this in a car class race, but it was impressive how well it flew and hovered.
Well, my entry didn't perform as well in the race as it did in testing, but I reached the semi-finals and only got beaten by KiNo. I think that's a pretty good result.
Congratulations to ABC123 on their win.
My entry's in. It's good, but probably not quite good enough to win. Still, I'm happy with it, that's what matters. And I should get through a few rounds until I meet a top-tier entry.
I'm entering my Jinete as my second submission for this challenge.
I'm in, my Striker is up as a successor.
I'm in, my Skyview is up as a successor. I used the part you provided, but not as a cockpit. I hope you like it.
I'm entering, my Serica is up as a successor. I liked this challenge, it was interesting building something to fly and cope with the limitations of the engines provided.
A car tournament? Cool, I've got a new idea I want to try out. It will probably fail horribly, but it'll be fun to try.
I'm entering, my Crecelle is up as a successor.
I'm in, my Airslug is up as a successor.
@Liquidfox Nudging is always allowed in tournaments.
@MaximusTheMinimus You might need to make your wings smaller. If they're too wide, they're going to clip the pylons.
KiNo won this last time. I did pretty well with my entry, so might re-use it. This course is definitely more about agility than speed, it should be and interesting tournament.
I grabbed a copy of it when they put it up for download and still have it saved on my phone. It's briefly entertaining, but very very simple, you're not missing out on much.
I've submitted my jet entry, the GP-202 Bulldog.
@landspeedcreator I was thinking more of the old cross-country air races, rather than the ones round a tight and twisty course. Agility wasn't so important for them, and the long tail helps keep this stable. Plus I wanted to get the look of everything tapering back from a big engine in the nose.
When is the deadline for entries?
@Fishbowl1121 You are correct, I went on holiday to the Isle of Wight a few years ago and took a photo of this. I wanted something unusual as my Gravatar, and this worked nicely.
For those who are wondering, it is the Yarmouth Gribble - a sculpture and public seat named and designed after the gribble worms that are attacking the wood of a nearby pier.
@MAHADI Structural wings with control surfaces are allowed.
Oh plane of mine, why do you dive when you roll? I admire that you carry on even after dipping into the water, but that will get you disqualified in the race.
@CoBros2 Using part scaling is only allowed in mod class tournaments, it's not allowed in this one.
I'm off to spend the day with some friends, don't know if I'll catch any of the stream. Good luck to all the competitors!
Mine can't compete with those kind of times. But at least it's faster than the winner of the Unlimited Class Oceanview tournament. That's something, right?
@OtterOfToast I know it was a lot of text, but it was a genuine attempt to cool things down, have a rational discussion and work out where we disagreed. Apparently you're not interested in that, so let me make it very simple for you:
- By saying that the shakers were a bunch of cheaters,, you have falsely accused myself and many other players of being cheats. You should admit that you were wrong and apologise.
- You're misrepresenting what Andrew Garrison has said. There's nothing there saying that shakers were a cheat, in fact he says it was fun. He's announced that they won't be allowed in future tournaments, but that doesn't change the past.
- You made this post in the forums and knew people would be able to comment on it. If you think replying to your comments is harassment, I suggest that you tag a moderator with your concerns. I'm perfectly happy to accept their judgement on this matter.
Previous comment was cut off, continued here:
C3) You therefore had the ability to know that the fastest entries in the tournament were likely to be shakers.
Section D: What I'd like you to do
D1) You should admit that shakers were legitimate entries for the Eagle Pass tournament.
D2) You should admit that those who used shakers as their entry were not cheating.
D3) You should accept that your poor performance in the tournament was down to your decision to use a slower design.
Conclusion: I doubt that you're going to agree with all of this. If there are bits you disagree with, can you try to be clear what they are? And if you've got any other points you'd like to raise, please make them individual ones for easy reference.
@OtterOfToast We do seem to be going round in circles. I'm going to break it down into separate sections, so we can at least figure out what we can agree and disagree about.
Section A: Why I'm arguing with you.
A1) My initial reason for jumping in here is that I think that bad losers are bad for the community. When someone wins a tournament, it's not unusual for them to receive accusations of cheating / having produced an unfair design. It's also not unusual for Andrew Garrison to receive multiple requests to investigate the winner. My concern is that the tournaments might be stopped if they create too much hassle and abuse. By making a post purely to complain about the winning designs, you put yourself in this category of bad losers.
A2) You have also made this personal. My entry for the Eagle Pass tournament was a shaker, albeit a mediocre one. You've said that shakers cheated you, and are a bunch of cheaters. That means you have accused me of cheating. I do not cheat, and to falsely accuse me of doing so is unacceptable.
Section B: Tournament races in general
B1) The aim of entering a tournament is that your entry will complete the course as fast as possible. I know not every entry to a tournament is a serious competitor, but most of them are there to race.
B2) Each tournament has its own set of rules. There are general classes of race, but there are also those with additional rules as well, such as the Flyweight Oceanview Speedway race.
B3) It is impossible to have an entry that breaks the rules, as an automated check for illegal parts is carried out before the tournament begins.
B4) It is therefore impossible to cheat in a tournament.
B5) Tournament entries are not required to look or behave like realistic vehicles.
Section C: Posted comments
C1) In the Eagle Pass tournament comments section, some people were being open that they were using shakers, and were posting the times they could achieve.
C2) As I pointed out previously, Andrew Garrison stated that the shaking glitch was allowed in the Eagle Pass tournament.
@AndrewGarrison To make it easier to moderate out shakers, you could set a limit on the number of wings / stabilisers that can be on the plane.
@OtterOfToast Can you provide a link to that, please?
Edit: Never mind, I found it.
By the way, it doesn't mean my argument was invalid. Andrew has said that shakers won't be allowed in future glider tournaments. That means they were allowed in this one.
@OtterOfToast Look at the tournaments page. Observe that the Eagle Pass race is listed as an Unlimited race. There is currently no such thing as a "glider class" tournament on Simple Planes.
If you look at the tournament rules page, you will see that in Unlimited class, all engine types are allowed. So as you're claiming shakers are a kind of engine, that means they are allowed in an Unlimited class race.
Another tournament already? Andrew Garrison is spoiling us! Thank you!
@OtterOfToast It looks like you're going to like the new tournament better - it's just gone up as Mod class Oceanview Speedway. I don't think it's possible to get a shaker working from a standing start on the runway.
@OtterOfToast I'm going to quote you. "Don't glitch in here with your powered flight and screw up my glider tournament."
It's not YOUR glider tournament. It's Andrew Garrison's glider tournament. And as I showed with the comments I linked to, he said that shakers are allowed.
For what it's worth, I suspect the reason shakers were allowed is because it would be quite hard to check for them during the validation. If they do want to run a shaker-free tournament, they'd probably have to put a limit on the number of wings and stabilisers that are allowed on the plane - that would be an easy check to automate.
How is it a fair fight? How does any of that encourage engineering and innovation? Simple: It's fair because everyone has the same parts to use. It's up to the individual how they put them together, which is where the engineering and innovation come in.
You say that it ought to be cheating to use the shaking glitch, but Andrew Garrison has been very clear that it is allowed. He's the tournament organiser, his decision is final. Shakers weren't cheating, and no amount of complaining will change that.