@Delphinus Thanks. Oh btw, there is one thing thats useful to me but not covered in there. Some people get control surfaces on structural wings, and some people can get things to attach to other parts, without being anywhere near eachother.
@Pilotmario only two fighters, however... There's a few taildragger jet aircraft of larger sizes, as they have the jet engines on the wings, far further forward then a fighter...Additionally taildragging can be useful in taking off at a shorter distance, as your already facing slightly upward.
@Berzerk The wings can be anywhere on a plane aesthetetically speaking (you'll know that if you've made a hypnoplane). The thing that matters is the CoM, CoT and CoL, which can be turned on with a button in the menu when making a plane... I'll let someone else explain how they affect flight, but due to this, your wings could be a mile infront of the front of the plane.
Really, there still isn't a reason for this post... Also, next time it'd be better to give a post an informative title, rather than a slightly misleading one.
@ChasingHorizon Well, that's a different matter. See, we have had all sorts of bad behaviour on simpleplanes, however, saying that there is an influx of one or two specific types, just because someone did it to you is a different thing, although I do agree the bypassing of the successor system should be looked into, possibly by a report button on the plane post, you shouldn't really have made this post, your best course of action, after he denied using your plane and turret, would've been to go to @andrewgarrison and not involve anyone else, just simply to handle it nicely then.
@Geekpride the rocket however, won't engage thrust, will it? Plus, what if I want to fit it to the fuselage, or want to avoid using a large, clunky pylon? We could make manually guided rockets back before even fuselages, but they were big, and messy. The point of an individual unguided rocket, is to be small. Compact and efficient.
Additionally an unguided rocket would probably be smaller then the guided ones, max two blocks long.
@Johndfg , I know how to bypass the successor system myself actually, but the problem there isn't copying, it's the bypassing of the successor system. So if that's what the apparently "breaking news" is, then that's what it should say... Copying planes. Even without variation is fine with the successor system, it's not going to make you a super good community , member, but it's fine. The bypassing successor system is the problem.
Wait, can simpleplanes be printed now :o I so want a whole collection of @Rohan and @SpiritusRaptor planes, I'm not sure hypnotoads will hold together though.
Copying planes, doesn't matter to much, due to the whole thing of the original person getting points from it, and normally people do put a small variation on it, a recolour or control surface or landing gear change. I recently did a variant of the XE-08 shuttle, new colour, slight adjustment to some control surfaces, a few Pistons and a landing gear movement, not a BIG change, but a change nonetheless, but the original creator was very kind and supportive, and said how he liked the variant. There are a few more people getting angry in comments, but only a few.
Nice idea, I foresee the problem of it being asymmetrical. I thought rudders were rotated by being fixed to a gear though, which when turned, rotates the rudder with it?
@MechWARRIOR57 oh no, I know he's busy, but he's quite good at XML, so can do those sorts of things fairly easily (normally)... Ahh, i remember back when he made simpler planes though, that was the good ol' days. If you can do them well though, go ahead, and link me to them.
Hey @spiritusraptor I'd love to see you to make a Cessna or something similar! Also, do you think you might be able to make me a 10x power VTOL engine, some VTOL nozzles with very little thrust effect & a more powerful light/beacon?
@Stadlles A lot of people have made spitfires. Not just you, nor just Himynameiswalrus. I personally like SpiritusRaptors replicas the most, however it's nice that this one is both simple, yet accurate.
@Delphinus Thanks. Oh btw, there is one thing thats useful to me but not covered in there. Some people get control surfaces on structural wings, and some people can get things to attach to other parts, without being anywhere near eachother.
@Delphinus Ye, but a >good< unofficial guide? thats easy to understand etc. etc.
@Delphinus Any tips you have? Or do you know of any good unofficial guides?
The asymmetry is spectacular.
That's real nice looking.
Thanks @TheNightmare - Don't forget to check out my newly released stealth aircraft too!
Thanks @Supermini555
It's nice, perhaps you should use some fuselages for the curves, it can make it quite a bit easier (atleastt without XML)
It's nice, very nice looking. Hypno planes are generally far larger though.
@ramjet Not really any specific one, but I guess you could say it's slightly inspired by jeep etc.
@DisferGoatz and @Delphinus Thanks!
Ohh, I remember the sports car which used a diesel generator they tested on the show later on...Inspired by top gear? :P
It is a Beautifal set of pontoons you've added.
Nice! You're good at land vehicles like this!
@Pilotmario only two fighters, however... There's a few taildragger jet aircraft of larger sizes, as they have the jet engines on the wings, far further forward then a fighter...Additionally taildragging can be useful in taking off at a shorter distance, as your already facing slightly upward.
@Berzerk The wings can be anywhere on a plane aesthetetically speaking (you'll know that if you've made a hypnoplane). The thing that matters is the CoM, CoT and CoL, which can be turned on with a button in the menu when making a plane... I'll let someone else explain how they affect flight, but due to this, your wings could be a mile infront of the front of the plane.
Really, there still isn't a reason for this post... Also, next time it'd be better to give a post an informative title, rather than a slightly misleading one.
@ChasingHorizon Well, that's a different matter. See, we have had all sorts of bad behaviour on simpleplanes, however, saying that there is an influx of one or two specific types, just because someone did it to you is a different thing, although I do agree the bypassing of the successor system should be looked into, possibly by a report button on the plane post, you shouldn't really have made this post, your best course of action, after he denied using your plane and turret, would've been to go to @andrewgarrison and not involve anyone else, just simply to handle it nicely then.
@Destroyerz117 well, most of all I need the suspension and wheel arches. One axle where it's just fixed, and 1 which can allow the wheels to turn.
@gamerperson1126 ahh it's nothing major, just the wing in the middle. On the plan view from above you can see it.
@Rohan Lol :P
@Geekpride I might try it, on PC the people with XML modding can easily shrink it, but a new part for it would be nice.
@Johndfg perhaps, but maybe in a little separate bit, and maybe less points awarded to original...
@Rohan long time no see :)
@Geekpride the rocket however, won't engage thrust, will it? Plus, what if I want to fit it to the fuselage, or want to avoid using a large, clunky pylon? We could make manually guided rockets back before even fuselages, but they were big, and messy. The point of an individual unguided rocket, is to be small. Compact and efficient.
Additionally an unguided rocket would probably be smaller then the guided ones, max two blocks long.
@Johndfg , I know how to bypass the successor system myself actually, but the problem there isn't copying, it's the bypassing of the successor system. So if that's what the apparently "breaking news" is, then that's what it should say... Copying planes. Even without variation is fine with the successor system, it's not going to make you a super good community , member, but it's fine. The bypassing successor system is the problem.
Nice, the weapons are a bit overkill but nice nonetheless.
Wait, can simpleplanes be printed now :o I so want a whole collection of @Rohan and @SpiritusRaptor planes, I'm not sure hypnotoads will hold together though.
Tag added. Didn't know till now forum posts had tags.
Copying planes, doesn't matter to much, due to the whole thing of the original person getting points from it, and normally people do put a small variation on it, a recolour or control surface or landing gear change. I recently did a variant of the XE-08 shuttle, new colour, slight adjustment to some control surfaces, a few Pistons and a landing gear movement, not a BIG change, but a change nonetheless, but the original creator was very kind and supportive, and said how he liked the variant. There are a few more people getting angry in comments, but only a few.
Keep up the good work!
She's nice, she is.
@SpiritusRaptor ahh thanks, its been a long time.
Ahh ok @Destroyerz117, oh do you think you could build a car chassis perhaps. I'm not as good at mechanisms in SP
Nice idea, I foresee the problem of it being asymmetrical. I thought rudders were rotated by being fixed to a gear though, which when turned, rotates the rudder with it?
It's a nice variation, however it's asymmetrical
@MechWARRIOR57 oh no, I know he's busy, but he's quite good at XML, so can do those sorts of things fairly easily (normally)... Ahh, i remember back when he made simpler planes though, that was the good ol' days. If you can do them well though, go ahead, and link me to them.
Hey @spiritusraptor I'd love to see you to make a Cessna or something similar! Also, do you think you might be able to make me a 10x power VTOL engine, some VTOL nozzles with very little thrust effect & a more powerful light/beacon?
Nice idea, however it'd be better if they were VTOL thrust nozzles.
Thanks @ViperGB and @Razr for your speedy up votes. Almost as fast as the shuttle!
@Stadlles A lot of people have made spitfires. Not just you, nor just Himynameiswalrus. I personally like SpiritusRaptors replicas the most, however it's nice that this one is both simple, yet accurate.
Still making mighty impressive planes I see.
It's a nice, simple, plane. It'd be nice to be in vanilla planes actually.
Oh this is damn nice.
@Jachupl Perhaps.
@PlanesOfOld awesome!
@PlanesOfOld go back to making old planes please. :)
Nice.
It's ok, neither here nor there really. I'd love to see something a bit unusual.
Thanks @Delphinus !