Also I love the design and how you made it work (and genuinely look good while doing so) but running a set of traction motors off of a generator on a turbojet engine has to be one of the most inefficient ways possible to power a locomotive lol
"Bold and willful, they do not tremble as they blaspheme the glorious ones, whereas angels, though greater in might and power, do not pronounce a blasphemous judgment against them before the Lord. But these, like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed, blaspheming about matters of which they are ignorant, will also be destroyed in their destruction, suffering wrong as the wage for their wrongdoing." 2 Peter 2:10-13, ESV
sigh... you know what? I'm not even gonna say it anymore, I'm tired of having to repeat myself over and over again. Check my comment history for my answer, there should be several similar instances of it.
@spexplainedguy Depends on who you ask, honestly. I picked up Juno last year and I've been enjoying it quite a bit, but according to my Steam Year in Review I played SimplePlanes almost 250% more. Juno is fun but for me it's one of those games where I'll play it almost exclusively for a few weeks and then not play it for a few months (though another reason is I don't necessarily want my breaks from college engineering to be videogame engineering).
@spexplainedguy Honestly I'm not sure. A lot of the features that would be in SP2 (better wings, much more user-friendly interfaces, greatly expanded part customization, larger world, visual effects, etc.) are already in Juno, so I'm not sure what SP2 would bring to the table to differentiate it significantly enough to be its own product rather than a series of updates for Juno.
Started playing way back in 2015, only made an account in 2022 though.
Not a ton in terms of major changes, honestly. VR support was added and there's all sorts of cool cockpit stuff to go with that (several Funky Trees whizzes have made fully working one-part HUDs that are pretty much drop-in-and-go), but nothing revolutionary in terms of how parts go together and whatnot. The game has been officially deemed "finished" by Jundroo and development has been formally concluded (NOT "abandoned"), and they have moved on to focus on Juno: New Origins (ex-SimpleRockets 2) and whatever their next project is going to be.
You might be better off doing one based around rate of descent than dive angle since that would probably be easier to code (something along the lines of rate(Altitude) < [desired rate of descent, i.e. -1000] could probably work; I'm not sure specifically how the rate function acts but I'm pretty sure it's like that) so that it wouldn't activate if you just enter a brief dive or do a loop or something, but only if you're actually trying to dive-bomb.
It's not just a SP thing, actually. Honda is super picky about who gets to use their brand and trademarks (which include all of their products), and they don't like it when people do it without their permission. FlightGear ran into this back in 2014, and they ended up just removing the HondaJet entirely if I recall correctly.
Best to either stay away from modeling the brand entirely or to not specifically model a Honda product (not suggesting anything, but I think I've seen a few "JondaHet" builds before).
Discord finally rolled out the thing they've been planning for a while now where image embeds only work for a limited time (a day or so, if I recall correctly). It sounds like just an anti-user update at first but it means they no longer have to be hosting hundreds of thousands of images for free on other sites, so it's a big improvement for their servers and backend stuff.
SimplePlanes 👏 was 👏 not 👏 abandoned 👏 it 👏 reached 👏 the 👏 end 👏 of 👏 life 👏 that 👏 all 👏 games 👏 come 👏 to 👏 and 👏 Jundroo 👏 decided 👏 it 👏 was 👏 time 👏 to 👏 move 👏 to 👏 the 👏 future 👏 instead 👏 of 👏 a 👏 nine 👏 year 👏 old 👏 game 👏 that 👏 was 👏 increasingly 👏 difficult 👏 to 👏 work 👏 on 👏 due 👏 to 👏 its 👏 age.
How 👏 many 👏 times 👏 do 👏 I 👏 have 👏 to 👏 keep 👏 telling 👏 people 👏 this.
You can't rename yourself to a name that's been previously used, even if the old account has been deleted. (Fun fact that's also why I have the 01 at the end of my name; I made an account, changed my mind and deleted it, then changed my mind again)
@Trainzo When you select a part, you can bring up the precision transform menu by clicking the Rotate Part option (arrow on the right-hand side of the screen) and then selecting the icon that looks like a wrench in a circle. On the menu panel that opens, scroll down past Options and Rotation Amount, and you should see Nudge Amount.
There should be a movement increment (or something similar named, I forgot what it's labeled as) towards the bottom of the position/rotation adjustment panel. You might need to scroll down.
The default value should be .078125
Depends on the application. The Twin Otter is a better all-around aircraft and can just generally do more (more passengers/cargo, longer range, greater safety with two engines), but subjectively the DHC-3 is a better bush plane (less maintenance, still comparable passenger/cargo capacity, possibly better STOL performance).
In other words, from a certain point of view the DHC-6 is essentially a DHC-3 but larger and more capable, while the DHC-3 is quite literally the DHC-2 (in both design and role) but bigger and better.
The C-47 in question has 47 parts and no interior. The only notable difference between it and a civilian DC-3 at that scale is the cargo door (and technically the engine performance, but better to get that so that it flies like it should rather than making the numbers in the editor match up precisely). In short, I do not understand the problem.
@ShinyGemsBro Well, definitely the vast majority of (pre-war) J-3 Cubs were yellow with some variation of the black stripe, but the engine cowling on the Bush Plane is definitely based on the later Super Cub (many of which were also yellow, though they are commonly seen in a variety of other colors as well unlike the J-3).
@ShinyGemsBro well achskyually the Bush Plane is closer to a PA-18 Super Cub than a classic J-3
Also,
The Kicking Fish is loosely based on an F-16
The Little Bugger is a Chenowth sand rail
The Sea Plane is a Lake LA-4
And the closest I've found for the Twin Prop is a DA42-style fuselage with PA-23 Apache wings, engines, and tail
@PPLLAANNEE oh sick thanks!
edit: the MIDI is kinda scuffed but it'll still be a huge help; I can still use it as a reference instead of having to do each note by ear now!
I'd also been wondering if something like this was possible but I never had the skill to even attempt it. THIS IS AMAZING!
I wonder if I can get it to play Valkyrie Airlines... will have to try that later.
@StockPlanesRemastered Hollow fuselages still have the collider of a regular fuselage (i.e. there's no "interior" and the ends are still solid), so if you need something - like a cargo plane - where another object can actually move through the tube while also not wanting to disableAircraftCollisions on the whole thing, this could be quite useful.
@WinsWings Yeah I'm with 32 and Graingy on this, having to pay for certain builds would just instantly make me ditch both games. The whole point of the websites is that anyone can share what they make for anyone else to play with, and locking user-created content behind a paywall is just an abhorrent business practice. I've got enough of a problem with official content being paywall-restricted. DLC for extra parts and whatnot I'd probably support, but outright having to pay to download user creations is a big no-no. This doesn't need to turn into War Thunder with all sorts of premium paywalled builds, when this is supposed to be a fun sandbox game where you can build anything you want.
I do agree with you that some "preset" parts would be neat though, like more landing gears, better wings, tank tracks, and whatnot.
@AshdenpawTG22 "Ghosting"? You mean, ramping down updates as they shift focus to a new project?
Remember, Jundroo is literally seven people. They can't really work on two projects on the scale of Juno/SP simultaneously effectively, and Juno - as the newer and significantly more advanced and in-depth project - obviously would receive priority.
It is unrealistic to assume that development on both could continue simultaneously, or that updates for SimplePlanes would just keep coming indefinitely.
I still haven't made up my mind on the free edition of Juno though. On the one hand it's great to get more attention to the game and probably will in fact help with profits ("cash grab" in the videogame sense is not an appropriate term for this though; that would be more like if they had hyped up Juno as a KSP-beater - which they didn't - and then abandoned it two weeks after launch once a bunch of people had bought it), but on the other hand their presentation of it is somewhat misleading in terms of what you'd actually be getting for free.
Huh, okay. Well, in order to give my thoughts I'm going to know precisely what you mean by "lack of effort put in by Jundroo," because wrapping up development on a nine-year-old game to finally fully move to their next major project is decidedly not lack of effort.
My inability to understand the meaning of this post is further impeded by your inability to communicate in a decipherable manner, as well as an abhorrent lack of both punctuation and any kind of formatting structure.
Also I love the design and how you made it work (and genuinely look good while doing so) but running a set of traction motors off of a generator on a turbojet engine has to be one of the most inefficient ways possible to power a locomotive lol
+3DE6 control stand go brr
+1._.
@Funnny
"Bold and willful, they do not tremble as they blaspheme the glorious ones, whereas angels, though greater in might and power, do not pronounce a blasphemous judgment against them before the Lord. But these, like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed, blaspheming about matters of which they are ignorant, will also be destroyed in their destruction, suffering wrong as the wage for their wrongdoing."
+12 Peter 2:10-13, ESV
@Graingy oh no not the grass
@Graingy honestly that's probably pretty close at this point haha
now get off my lawn
when the goal is to get attention from someone and it keeps working
+2it's treason, then
sigh... you know what? I'm not even gonna say it anymore, I'm tired of having to repeat myself over and over again. Check my comment history for my answer, there should be several similar instances of it.
@AtlasAir747MyBeloved oh hey spy on me next
+1(like seriously go ahead and do it, I want to see if my online security is as good as I think it is)
@spexplainedguy Depends on who you ask, honestly. I picked up Juno last year and I've been enjoying it quite a bit, but according to my Steam Year in Review I played SimplePlanes almost 250% more. Juno is fun but for me it's one of those games where I'll play it almost exclusively for a few weeks and then not play it for a few months (though another reason is I don't necessarily want my breaks from college engineering to be videogame engineering).
@spexplainedguy Honestly I'm not sure. A lot of the features that would be in SP2 (better wings, much more user-friendly interfaces, greatly expanded part customization, larger world, visual effects, etc.) are already in Juno, so I'm not sure what SP2 would bring to the table to differentiate it significantly enough to be its own product rather than a series of updates for Juno.
Started playing way back in 2015, only made an account in 2022 though.
Not a ton in terms of major changes, honestly. VR support was added and there's all sorts of cool cockpit stuff to go with that (several Funky Trees whizzes have made fully working one-part HUDs that are pretty much drop-in-and-go), but nothing revolutionary in terms of how parts go together and whatnot. The game has been officially deemed "finished" by Jundroo and development has been formally concluded (NOT "abandoned"), and they have moved on to focus on Juno: New Origins (ex-SimpleRockets 2) and whatever their next project is going to be.
You might be better off doing one based around rate of descent than dive angle since that would probably be easier to code (something along the lines of
+2rate(Altitude)<[desired rate of descent, i.e. -1000]could probably work; I'm not sure specifically how the rate function acts but I'm pretty sure it's like that) so that it wouldn't activate if you just enter a brief dive or do a loop or something, but only if you're actually trying to dive-bomb.What possessed you to make this, and why did you listen
+1It's not just a SP thing, actually. Honda is super picky about who gets to use their brand and trademarks (which include all of their products), and they don't like it when people do it without their permission. FlightGear ran into this back in 2014, and they ended up just removing the HondaJet entirely if I recall correctly.
Best to either stay away from modeling the brand entirely or to not specifically model a Honda product (not suggesting anything, but I think I've seen a few "JondaHet" builds before).
+3See here
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/RrB1A3/Cursed-Bush-Plane
Discord finally rolled out the thing they've been planning for a while now where image embeds only work for a limited time (a day or so, if I recall correctly). It sounds like just an anti-user update at first but it means they no longer have to be hosting hundreds of thousands of images for free on other sites, so it's a big improvement for their servers and backend stuff.
+3Objectively the best replica on the site of a very unique and beautiful plane. Well done!
+1SimplePlanes 👏 was 👏 not 👏 abandoned 👏 it 👏 reached 👏 the 👏 end 👏 of 👏 life 👏 that 👏 all 👏 games 👏 come 👏 to 👏 and 👏 Jundroo 👏 decided 👏 it 👏 was 👏 time 👏 to 👏 move 👏 to 👏 the 👏 future 👏 instead 👏 of 👏 a 👏 nine 👏 year 👏 old 👏 game 👏 that 👏 was 👏 increasingly 👏 difficult 👏 to 👏 work 👏 on 👏 due 👏 to 👏 its 👏 age.
+10How 👏 many 👏 times 👏 do 👏 I 👏 have 👏 to 👏 keep 👏 telling 👏 people 👏 this.
Try
+3clamp01(VTOL)and then invert the input if necessary.You can't rename yourself to a name that's been previously used, even if the old account has been deleted. (Fun fact that's also why I have the 01 at the end of my name; I made an account, changed my mind and deleted it, then changed my mind again)
+2@Trainzo Of course, glad to be able to help!
@Trainzo When you select a part, you can bring up the precision transform menu by clicking the Rotate Part option (arrow on the right-hand side of the screen) and then selecting the icon that looks like a wrench in a circle. On the menu panel that opens, scroll down past Options and Rotation Amount, and you should see Nudge Amount.
@Trainzo Here you go. It's the Nudge Amount property.
There should be a movement increment (or something similar named, I forgot what it's labeled as) towards the bottom of the position/rotation adjustment panel. You might need to scroll down.
+1The default value should be .078125
@CrazyCatZe I think it fits it quite well.
Depends on the application. The Twin Otter is a better all-around aircraft and can just generally do more (more passengers/cargo, longer range, greater safety with two engines), but subjectively the DHC-3 is a better bush plane (less maintenance, still comparable passenger/cargo capacity, possibly better STOL performance).
In other words, from a certain point of view the DHC-6 is essentially a DHC-3 but larger and more capable, while the DHC-3 is quite literally the DHC-2 (in both design and role) but bigger and better.
They had us in the first part not gonna lie
- You're being creepy again, stop it.
- The C-47 in question has 47 parts and no interior. The only notable difference between it and a civilian DC-3 at that scale is the cargo door (and technically the engine performance, but better to get that so that it flies like it should rather than making the numbers in the editor match up precisely). In short, I do not understand the problem.
+1T, looks awesome!
When you try and get points by copying and pasting the site rules
@ShinyGemsBro Well, definitely the vast majority of (pre-war) J-3 Cubs were yellow with some variation of the black stripe, but the engine cowling on the Bush Plane is definitely based on the later Super Cub (many of which were also yellow, though they are commonly seen in a variety of other colors as well unlike the J-3).
@ShinyGemsBro well achskyually the Bush Plane is closer to a PA-18 Super Cub than a classic J-3
Also,
The Kicking Fish is loosely based on an F-16
The Little Bugger is a Chenowth sand rail
The Sea Plane is a Lake LA-4
And the closest I've found for the Twin Prop is a DA42-style fuselage with PA-23 Apache wings, engines, and tail
@PPLLAANNEE oh sick thanks!
edit: the MIDI is kinda scuffed but it'll still be a huge help; I can still use it as a reference instead of having to do each note by ear now!
I'd also been wondering if something like this was possible but I never had the skill to even attempt it. THIS IS AMAZING!
+2I wonder if I can get it to play Valkyrie Airlines... will have to try that later.
Finally I can download more RAM
+2Your bio says that you are 8 years old. Is this correct?
If so, I think there's another rule you're going to hate.
Edit: I see you have since updated your bio to remove this information. Smooth.
+5@StockPlanesRemastered Hollow fuselages still have the collider of a regular fuselage (i.e. there's no "interior" and the ends are still solid), so if you need something - like a cargo plane - where another object can actually move through the tube while also not wanting to disableAircraftCollisions on the whole thing, this could be quite useful.
+1LEGO disassembling soundsWooo!
I don't, actually.
@phrongus word
@HuskyDynamics01
+1edit: yep
@WisconsinStatePolice you shall NOT slander Burt Rutan in this house
+1@WinsWings Yeah I'm with 32 and Graingy on this, having to pay for certain builds would just instantly make me ditch both games. The whole point of the websites is that anyone can share what they make for anyone else to play with, and locking user-created content behind a paywall is just an abhorrent business practice. I've got enough of a problem with official content being paywall-restricted. DLC for extra parts and whatnot I'd probably support, but outright having to pay to download user creations is a big no-no. This doesn't need to turn into War Thunder with all sorts of premium paywalled builds, when this is supposed to be a fun sandbox game where you can build anything you want.
I do agree with you that some "preset" parts would be neat though, like more landing gears, better wings, tank tracks, and whatnot.
+3@AshdenpawTG22 "Ghosting"? You mean, ramping down updates as they shift focus to a new project?
Remember, Jundroo is literally seven people. They can't really work on two projects on the scale of Juno/SP simultaneously effectively, and Juno - as the newer and significantly more advanced and in-depth project - obviously would receive priority.
It is unrealistic to assume that development on both could continue simultaneously, or that updates for SimplePlanes would just keep coming indefinitely.
I still haven't made up my mind on the free edition of Juno though. On the one hand it's great to get more attention to the game and probably will in fact help with profits ("cash grab" in the videogame sense is not an appropriate term for this though; that would be more like if they had hyped up Juno as a KSP-beater - which they didn't - and then abandoned it two weeks after launch once a bunch of people had bought it), but on the other hand their presentation of it is somewhat misleading in terms of what you'd actually be getting for free.
+3Huh, okay. Well, in order to give my thoughts I'm going to know precisely what you mean by "lack of effort put in by Jundroo," because wrapping up development on a nine-year-old game to finally fully move to their next major project is decidedly not lack of effort.
+1My inability to understand the meaning of this post is further impeded by your inability to communicate in a decipherable manner, as well as an abhorrent lack of both punctuation and any kind of formatting structure.
+1