An XYZ delta of the target's relative position would be all we need. Once we have that, we can extrapolate relative heading, velocity and distance.
.
But, of course, this may be too complex for many users. Separate built-in functions may be easier, eg: PitchAngleToTarget, RollAngleToTarget, TargetXposition, TargetYposition, TargetZposition, TargetHeading, TargetVelocity, etc
.
As for uses, this goes waaaaay beyond missile guidance and turrets. Think wingman drones, automatic camera crews, autodocking systems for airborne carriers (attach with magnets), target info readouts, and even a tracking system for ground vehicles so we can automatically hover over them with helicopters while controlling some other apparatus (turret, grabber winch, etc)
@Tessemi From my understanding, it seems like we can make a custom autopilot that can perform standard airliner maneuvers with full PID stabilisation but we won't be able to easily stabilise flips and rolls
@WNP78 Yeah, that makes sense. I should really try these things myself a little more lol. Guess I'll have to wait a bit longer to have a PID rate-stabilised aircraft.
It'd be great to have RollRate, PitchRate and YawRate functions that simulate a rate gyro as opposed to a horizon gyro
@Tessemi Angular velocity is defined as "the rate of change of angular position of a rotating body."
That's what rate(PitchAngle) means. PitchAngle (or RollAngle, etc) is your 'angular position' and rate measures how that changes over time.
And yes, the units are degrees per second
@Tessemi I wouldn't say PitchAngle and RollAngle are fixed. As the aircraft rotates, its PitchAngle, RollAngle, etc will change. By measuring the rate at which this angle changes with rate(PitchAngle) you should obtain the angular velocity.
But again, I haven't tested this yet
I second @MrSilverWolf
Back when I was using discord regularly, it was overrun by people who were banned on the website and did nothing but trashpost. But then again, things could have changed, maybe that's just what Discord servers are like, or maybe I just noticed the negative things too much
Good idea that's unlikely to be implemented. To get a similar look, you could try attaching a spring with disabled collisions to the sliding shaft of a piston. If you want to be really fancy, add a hidden rotator to the spring. This should replicate the look pretty closely if you resize everything appropriately
That's because the game messes around with mass tensors to smooth out vibrations. The end result is that flipping a 1 gram switch can make a heavy plane rock around like it was hit by a cannon. The tensor system can be turned off in XML but this introduces even worse issues.
.
But I see you've already discovered the solution of 'just mess around until it works'
My habit of not completing challenge entries is getting ridiculous. I'm at literally half of the minimum part count and the paint job looks like it was made by a drunken baboon in a mud pit
What do you use for flight control? (keyboard, mouse, joystick, etc?)
.
Because I've made a quasi-stable thrust-vectored aircraft that's capable of Lomcovak maneuvers but you need fine analogue control. Should I tune it for fine control or keyboard?
Yes you can. Just use this cheat sheet for every xml attribute. You can even make the guns look and function like lasers if you want (but they will sound like machine guns though)
@Maximum777 I'm happy to test and tune the full version once you've finished building it. I'm pretty confident my PC can handle anything you throw at it
@Maximum777 OK, so what I'm thinking of doing is this:
Shorten the 4-link setup on this vehicle by 75% and then copy it on to the front as well. Then we can build a body up from there
@Maximum777 I'm certainly impressed. Want to collab with a rock bouncer? I'm thinking of coming back to building on SImplePlanes with a heavily revised rock bouncer that's much tougher, looks half-decent and can drive a little better. It looks like you've found solutions to all the problems I encountered with suspension in the past
@iwannabeelected not often I see legitimate rocker-bogie suspension. Even heavily modified rocker-bogie isn't supposed to go over 10cm/hour so it's pretty boring most of the time lol
@CDRxavier Yeah, bogies are pretty bad for high speed vehicles. I just made this for the hell of it. If you want good suspension, look at the highlighted creations on my profile
@CDRxavier Yep, it's weird alright. It's the closest you can come to actually simulating the lockheed twister in simpleplanes. If there were damped rotators i could make it work properly
Build suspension first, then chassis, then body. If you do it the other way around, your suspension often doesn't work properly. Also make sure all suspension parts are connected to the right pieces. Try some mods like Overload, Fine Tuner and Designer Suite if you can
@Shanethepain1 ahhhh... a very common mistake that most players (even the top ones) make. You need to understand that shocks cant flex side to side like a slinky; they have a shaft forcing them to move up and down only. IRL, solid-axle suspension uses complicated linkages with ball joints and have the shocks also mounted on ball joints. Since there are no ball joints in simpleplanes, we have to make do with a bunch of hinges arranged in the right way. I would suggest copying the suspension from my car you tagged me on previously. Don't copy and paste the entire thing; instead, have a look at it and try to make it yourself. Fiddle with the hinges until it works (it took me months to make 4-link suspension work)
Well that's why we have moderators. It's annoying, sure, but it would be rather poor if anyone could remove any and all successors of their creations. You'd need a way of regulating it like... appointing moderators. But I do acknowledge it can be mildly frustrating
@Hyattorama The quality of on-screen controls depends on the quality of your screen. An old ipad air with otterbox case (trashy screen protector) is never going to have the same quality as a $280 controller I guess. I never could get on-screen aircraft controls to work on any games really because of the jumpy touch screen (which is completely undamaged too). That being said, I have made some of my most complex vehicles on ipad, even if i couldn't control them.
@Hyattorama Since I'm already used to CAD software, I find the keyboard and mouse much, much better. As for flying, the mouse and keyboard is hopeless. I usually use a xbox 360 controller for flying but I can use my Taranis X9D+ which is normally used for FPV quads and RC planes. I found that simpleplanes physics is too simple to warrant the accuracy of a taranis though
@UssInvincible lol. A few people ask this every day and dozens ask that question whenever a dev makes a post or a comment. All the previous responses have been an emphatic negative. Maybe that's changed though
@mikoyanster lol. I'm terrible at these
@SnoWFLakE0s absolutely has to be relative to your own position, I agree
An XYZ delta of the target's relative position would be all we need. Once we have that, we can extrapolate relative heading, velocity and distance.
.
But, of course, this may be too complex for many users. Separate built-in functions may be easier, eg: PitchAngleToTarget, RollAngleToTarget, TargetXposition, TargetYposition, TargetZposition, TargetHeading, TargetVelocity, etc
.
As for uses, this goes waaaaay beyond missile guidance and turrets. Think wingman drones, automatic camera crews, autodocking systems for airborne carriers (attach with magnets), target info readouts, and even a tracking system for ground vehicles so we can automatically hover over them with helicopters while controlling some other apparatus (turret, grabber winch, etc)
@Tessemi From my understanding, it seems like we can make a custom autopilot that can perform standard airliner maneuvers with full PID stabilisation but we won't be able to easily stabilise flips and rolls
@WNP78 Yeah, that makes sense. I should really try these things myself a little more lol. Guess I'll have to wait a bit longer to have a PID rate-stabilised aircraft.
It'd be great to have RollRate, PitchRate and YawRate functions that simulate a rate gyro as opposed to a horizon gyro
@Tessemi Angular velocity is defined as "the rate of change of angular position of a rotating body."
That's what rate(PitchAngle) means. PitchAngle (or RollAngle, etc) is your 'angular position' and rate measures how that changes over time.
And yes, the units are degrees per second
@Tessemi I wouldn't say PitchAngle and RollAngle are fixed. As the aircraft rotates, its PitchAngle, RollAngle, etc will change. By measuring the rate at which this angle changes with rate(PitchAngle) you should obtain the angular velocity.
But again, I haven't tested this yet
I second @MrSilverWolf
+2Back when I was using discord regularly, it was overrun by people who were banned on the website and did nothing but trashpost. But then again, things could have changed, maybe that's just what Discord servers are like, or maybe I just noticed the negative things too much
Good idea that's unlikely to be implemented. To get a similar look, you could try attaching a spring with disabled collisions to the sliding shaft of a piston. If you want to be really fancy, add a hidden rotator to the spring. This should replicate the look pretty closely if you resize everything appropriately
That's because the game messes around with mass tensors to smooth out vibrations. The end result is that flipping a 1 gram switch can make a heavy plane rock around like it was hit by a cannon. The tensor system can be turned off in XML but this introduces even worse issues.
+1.
But I see you've already discovered the solution of 'just mess around until it works'
@Tessemi I understand that would be expressed by rate(PitchAngle) and rate(RollAngle) but I haven't tested it yet
I've been waiting so long for PID control. Now the question is whether or not I'll put in the effort to tune it properly :\
@Trijets Oops, forgot to mention: AG1 to open gun hatches
My habit of not completing challenge entries is getting ridiculous. I'm at literally half of the minimum part count and the paint job looks like it was made by a drunken baboon in a mud pit
What do you use for flight control? (keyboard, mouse, joystick, etc?)
.
Because I've made a quasi-stable thrust-vectored aircraft that's capable of Lomcovak maneuvers but you need fine analogue control. Should I tune it for fine control or keyboard?
I'm in. Hopefully a good one will be done by then
@AxHellino Just add 4 more lights or something like that
They're stealthy. You're not meant to be able to see them everywhere ;)
+1Yes you can. Just use this cheat sheet for every xml attribute. You can even make the guns look and function like lasers if you want (but they will sound like machine guns though)
@Maximum777 I'm happy to test and tune the full version once you've finished building it. I'm pretty confident my PC can handle anything you throw at it
I'll try a few things with it tomorrow. Looks good!
@Maximum777 That'd be good. We can decide the next step from there I guess
+1@Maximum777 OK, so what I'm thinking of doing is this:
Shorten the 4-link setup on this vehicle by 75% and then copy it on to the front as well. Then we can build a body up from there
Oops, just realised the part count is too low. I'm actually surprised I had enough time to make it this far lol @mikoyanster
Well here's my CAS challenge entry. The successor system broke because I uploaded an unlisted version first. I tried and failed to fix it @mikoyanster
I'll try testing to see if upgrading the health of hinges through XML will help significantly
@Maximum777 nice sciencing. I've also found that the suspension breaks extremely easily if it's stretched
@Maximum777 I'm certainly impressed. Want to collab with a rock bouncer? I'm thinking of coming back to building on SImplePlanes with a heavily revised rock bouncer that's much tougher, looks half-decent and can drive a little better. It looks like you've found solutions to all the problems I encountered with suspension in the past
+1that is some brilliant suspension
beautiful
+1@iwannabeelected not often I see legitimate rocker-bogie suspension. Even heavily modified rocker-bogie isn't supposed to go over 10cm/hour so it's pretty boring most of the time lol
+1And with this challenge, I just might come back to simpleplanes for a little while
I think they use that configuration because it’s usually more effective. I’ve seen other designs in use as well @CDRxavier
+1Weird. Can’t help I’m afraid @Shadowmozez877
gotta love cantilever suspension. I never did make it very well
@CDRxavier Yeah, bogies are pretty bad for high speed vehicles. I just made this for the hell of it. If you want good suspension, look at the highlighted creations on my profile
+1@CDRxavier Yep, it's weird alright. It's the closest you can come to actually simulating the lockheed twister in simpleplanes. If there were damped rotators i could make it work properly
+1@Shanethepain1 Wow! This is really good suspension. Only problem is that the cockpit is facing backwards. makes it kinda hard to drive :P
@Shanethepain1 I'll have a closer look soon-ish to give you more specific tips. Just giving you some generic tips so far
Build suspension first, then chassis, then body. If you do it the other way around, your suspension often doesn't work properly. Also make sure all suspension parts are connected to the right pieces. Try some mods like Overload, Fine Tuner and Designer Suite if you can
@Shanethepain1 ahhhh... a very common mistake that most players (even the top ones) make. You need to understand that shocks cant flex side to side like a slinky; they have a shaft forcing them to move up and down only. IRL, solid-axle suspension uses complicated linkages with ball joints and have the shocks also mounted on ball joints. Since there are no ball joints in simpleplanes, we have to make do with a bunch of hinges arranged in the right way. I would suggest copying the suspension from my car you tagged me on previously. Don't copy and paste the entire thing; instead, have a look at it and try to make it yourself. Fiddle with the hinges until it works (it took me months to make 4-link suspension work)
@Shanethepain1 I can give you pointers. Could you mention me on them?
Well that's why we have moderators. It's annoying, sure, but it would be rather poor if anyone could remove any and all successors of their creations. You'd need a way of regulating it like... appointing moderators. But I do acknowledge it can be mildly frustrating
+3@Hyattorama The quality of on-screen controls depends on the quality of your screen. An old ipad air with otterbox case (trashy screen protector) is never going to have the same quality as a $280 controller I guess. I never could get on-screen aircraft controls to work on any games really because of the jumpy touch screen (which is completely undamaged too). That being said, I have made some of my most complex vehicles on ipad, even if i couldn't control them.
+1An actual diff and transmission. Wow. I'll just trust that it works because my PC has no hope of running this
@Hyattorama Since I'm already used to CAD software, I find the keyboard and mouse much, much better. As for flying, the mouse and keyboard is hopeless. I usually use a xbox 360 controller for flying but I can use my Taranis X9D+ which is normally used for FPV quads and RC planes. I found that simpleplanes physics is too simple to warrant the accuracy of a taranis though
+1@Shippy456 His brother was fine. It's his friend who died. But yes, still very depressing
I'm too busy to build anything new and I don't have anything quite like that but here's some inspiration:
1. totally not what you asked for but pretty fun
2. too big but can be shrunk down a lot
3. easy and unrealistic but high performance
nah there aren't any. No one has ever made one. Discord invite
@UssInvincible lol. A few people ask this every day and dozens ask that question whenever a dev makes a post or a comment. All the previous responses have been an emphatic negative. Maybe that's changed though
+2