The Blasto J15, J50, J90, and VTOL engine were original, as were the RCS nozzles.
The only cockpit in the first version was the basic one.
Nothing in the Gizmos or Weapons sections were in the first version.
I've been wondering about a similar issue, but with Overload. When making a bunch of changes to things, or changing - testing - changing, Overload's loading time becomes much slower. With the B-25J, I ended up waiting over 30 seconds for the Overload menu to even open, and then another 30 seconds to get to the parameter I actually wanted to change. Restarting the game seemed to fix it temporarily though. Could be a memory leak somewhere for sure.
Well, one thing that can drastically change the look of a build is the paint. Not just the color, but also the smoothness and... metallic-ness?
For example, I recall that one person's style in particular was to use 100% Metallic and 0% smoothness on everything except the canopy, which gave the build a very clean, though matte, look. I personally am going with overall 100% metallic and 50% smoothness on my current build, since it gives it a nice reflective surface while not being mirrorlike. I'd definitely recommend messing around with those sliders if you haven't already.
Won't likely happen, because your device is not the only device they need to be able to support. Some people play on older hardware that is not even remotely capable of supporting higher graphics.
I've got five that I backed up from my old iPad, unmodified and 100% original:
ACS-51 Snowfox (ornithopter)
ACS-57 (twin-pusher PSM)
ACS-60 Wave (low-wing amphibian)
HCS-26 (electric Huey)
TRCS-12 (electric prerunner that may be one of the few still in existence, as I have not seen a reuploaded/"archived" version anywhere)
However, I will not be reuploading any of these, to respect the wishes of their original creator.
Okay so currently it looks like the reason pitch doesn't work is (maybe?) because there's two ControlBases involved (maybe one ControlBase can't move another or something?). If the Roll base is removed (and the yoke is fixed directly to the vertical part), pitch works fine. This should be a fun bug to work around, I'll let you know when I have something.
@CanadianAircraftBuilder Thanks for letting me know. I'll do some messing around and tag you on a second version in a bit if that's ok. Do the brakes work with the triggers?
@IICXLVIICDLXXXIIIDCXLVII It's specifically a Honda thing. They don't want anyone using the name, branding, likeness, etc. of their aircraft and won't tell anyone why. FlightGear got some bad attention from them back in 2013 about it.
In my seven years of playing, I've never encountered a lag "bug". Lag, yes. Bug, no.
Have you tried adjusting your game settings to improve performance? Also, have you had any similar problems with other aircraft in the past? If so, how many parts did they have? Every device has its own maximum part count it can capably run without lag, and you may have inadvertently found yours.
You could give the turrets on my Mitchell a look. The nose and tail guns are limited differently than what you would need, but should be able to be adjusted without too much difficulty.
Though, I do think both pictures (and others I've been using ) are the N-23, despite the differences. Both show the same registration, as does your second image (NX8500H, which was identified as an N-23 in the crash report). Also, the N-32 was the company designation for the YC-125, which - though based on the Pioneer - was a rather different-looking aircraft, as I'm sure you know. The N-32/YC-125 was not contracted until March 1948, and the N-23 had crashed the previous month.
My theory is that, as an experimental aircraft, the N-23 was modified quite a bit over its lifetime, with different engine nacelles (which would explain the paint variations), additional cabin windows (which, according to my research, were indeed added as a modification to the N-23 at some point), outer wing dihedral, etc. (and the new vertical fin that didn't end up working so well).
In light of this, here's an image that shows the aircraft with the larger engines, but without a noticeable wing dihedral. Maybe this was a sort of "in-between" configuration?
delivering greasy spoons to the car washWho does their dishes in a car wash?!
@ZeroRaven87 Yes, SimplePlanes and SPVR use the same map.
rip
@ChamDel78 Sure!
@SpartanSR91 I believe this falls into your area of expertise
@O5BIRD This one.
All tags were requested.
@AnOmalOcaris @Elorus
All tags were requested.
@combatwombat363 @ChamDel78 @Dragoranos
All tags were requested.
@Reworkable @KangBaksoSoeharto @Kissingthehomiesgoodnight
All tags were requested.
@asteroidbook345 @X99STRIKER @Bryan5
@L3FTxR1GHT Oh yeah, those were. Whoops.
The Blasto J15, J50, J90, and VTOL engine were original, as were the RCS nozzles.
The only cockpit in the first version was the basic one.
Nothing in the Gizmos or Weapons sections were in the first version.
@WinsWings Yep, I used this map.
All tags were requested.
@Bo1233 @combatwombat363
@Maxikgrad Yep. In fact, the Cleaver is almost certainly the easiest to shoot down, since it is the largest and slowest missile available.
@Maxikgrad Point the plane (or the gun, if it's in a turret or something) at the missile, hold the trigger, and hope you hit it.
@Maxikgrad Either the wing gun or minigun should work, but hitting the missile can be pretty difficult.
I've been wondering about a similar issue, but with Overload. When making a bunch of changes to things, or changing - testing - changing, Overload's loading time becomes much slower. With the B-25J, I ended up waiting over 30 seconds for the Overload menu to even open, and then another 30 seconds to get to the parameter I actually wanted to change. Restarting the game seemed to fix it temporarily though. Could be a memory leak somewhere for sure.
All tags were requested.
@combatwombat363
All tags were requested.
@X99STRIKER
@Dragoranos
@IceCraftGaming
@CanadianAircraftBuilder Well, "blueprint" in this case referring to an orthographic side view. Also known as this.
@asteroidbook345 Oh, does logging in make them go away too? Didn't know that. Nice.
@IceCraftGaming That's probably why, then.
Out of curiosity, which mod ended up being the problem?
Uhh... tail rotor?
Nice!
Well, one thing that can drastically change the look of a build is the paint. Not just the color, but also the smoothness and... metallic-ness?
For example, I recall that one person's style in particular was to use 100% Metallic and 0% smoothness on everything except the canopy, which gave the build a very clean, though matte, look. I personally am going with overall 100% metallic and 50% smoothness on my current build, since it gives it a nice reflective surface while not being mirrorlike. I'd definitely recommend messing around with those sliders if you haven't already.
Won't likely happen, because your device is not the only device they need to be able to support. Some people play on older hardware that is not even remotely capable of supporting higher graphics.
@DatRoadTrainGuy19
Here you go
I've got five that I backed up from my old iPad, unmodified and 100% original:
ACS-51 Snowfox (ornithopter)
ACS-57 (twin-pusher PSM)
ACS-60 Wave (low-wing amphibian)
HCS-26 (electric Huey)
TRCS-12 (electric prerunner that may be one of the few still in existence, as I have not seen a reuploaded/"archived" version anywhere)
However, I will not be reuploading any of these, to respect the wishes of their original creator.
@asteroidbook345 big sad
Shared Steam screenshots also work but you have to modify the URL a bit. I use either that or Discord.
Okay so currently it looks like the reason pitch doesn't work is (maybe?) because there's two ControlBases involved (maybe one ControlBase can't move another or something?). If the Roll base is removed (and the yoke is fixed directly to the vertical part), pitch works fine. This should be a fun bug to work around, I'll let you know when I have something.
@CanadianAircraftBuilder Thanks for letting me know. I'll do some messing around and tag you on a second version in a bit if that's ok. Do the brakes work with the triggers?
@IICXLVIICDLXXXIIIDCXLVII It's specifically a Honda thing. They don't want anyone using the name, branding, likeness, etc. of their aircraft and won't tell anyone why. FlightGear got some bad attention from them back in 2013 about it.
@KangBaksoSoeharto I'm on a laptop right now, but I used to play on an iPad that could only run like 350 parts at a playable level.
Have you tried adjusting your graphics settings (image effects, etc.)?
This is so fun to fly! The PSM is smooth and easily controllable, and I love the engine nozzles (and that radar!)
Manual install location should be
C:\Users\[yourUserName]\AppData\LocalLow\Jundroo\SimplePlanes\Mods.Bye
In my seven years of playing, I've never encountered a lag "bug". Lag, yes. Bug, no.
Have you tried adjusting your game settings to improve performance? Also, have you had any similar problems with other aircraft in the past? If so, how many parts did they have? Every device has its own maximum part count it can capably run without lag, and you may have inadvertently found yours.
Try turning off Image Effects, or turning the physics quality down. I've found those two to have the biggest impact on performance.
@MrSilverWolf they were boosted there obviously
@PlaneFlightX Oh yeah, there's that too.
T
crunchy
@IDNSatyaBUKANNova Yep. The nose and tail ones do, anyway.
@IDNSatyaBUKANNova The turrets on the Mitchell are auto-aim, if the proper activation groups are turned on.
You could give the turrets on my Mitchell a look. The nose and tail guns are limited differently than what you would need, but should be able to be adjusted without too much difficulty.
Not a mod but this is pretty good
@asteroidbook345 Glad you like it!
Though, I do think both pictures (and others I've been using ) are the N-23, despite the differences. Both show the same registration, as does your second image (NX8500H, which was identified as an N-23 in the crash report). Also, the N-32 was the company designation for the YC-125, which - though based on the Pioneer - was a rather different-looking aircraft, as I'm sure you know. The N-32/YC-125 was not contracted until March 1948, and the N-23 had crashed the previous month.
My theory is that, as an experimental aircraft, the N-23 was modified quite a bit over its lifetime, with different engine nacelles (which would explain the paint variations), additional cabin windows (which, according to my research, were indeed added as a modification to the N-23 at some point), outer wing dihedral, etc. (and the new vertical fin that didn't end up working so well).
In light of this, here's an image that shows the aircraft with the larger engines, but without a noticeable wing dihedral. Maybe this was a sort of "in-between" configuration?
Can confirm from watching it unfold, it was justified.