@ShinyGemsBro Hehe, i found a solution though its still more complex than my other weaponry. Watch my recent weapon post for explanation. So, i took turbojets for this duty - and since unlike rotators and basic rockets they do not care about detachers, I had to find a way to manually designate their launch sequence, so that the ingame system of doing so wouldn't mess that up.
I accomplish this by adding a secondary missile(R-21 Counter)/bomb(ATGM Counter) to each ordnance unit, so these secondary munitions would act as an ammo counter instead of a actual, primary munition. R-21 has that in the front part of its nosecone, while ATGM has it right behind its nosecone. These "counters" also have their AGs to disable themselves when selected.
So, the actual munitions are only activated in a specific user-designated sequence, one at a time so the game wouldn't dare to launch the other one instead without firing its engine while the one with a working engine just remains attached to a plane. Also these secondary "counting" munitions better be made unlaunchable and undroppable by one and another way.
How about working with Meteor and Hello Meteor? These are two different musicians. The first one can make you combat aircraft music, the second one can make a music for peaceful flying.
https://meteormusic.bandcamp.com/track/smoke-trails
https://hellometeor.bandcamp.com/track/and-returns
It is to be noted that this plane is surprisingly easy to handle and aim. When sinking a USS Tiny for ∞th time, I didn't enable its auto-aim despite playing with a keyboard.
Hey pss, have you considered using a helicopter rotors as a propellers as well as for simulating prop wash on wings and empennage? https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/jNtQFS/Lautern-Skyly-J-2-Teacher
@mikoyanster Would you please clarify the "significant" and "insignificant" rule breach, especially about the guns? Is putting 6 NR-23 guns instead of 4 a "significant breach", even if the plane is sufficiently bulky for that? Is using an N-37 cannons a "significant breach"? If you disqualify for having an N-37, than you basically terminate almost any remotely notable soviet fighter plane of that era from your challenge, same goes for NR-30, unless yer ADEN is also supposed to be the "NR-30". If i utilise a gun that isn't among allowed weaponry, but has realistic specs and was widely used on many fighters of this era, will that be a red ticket? Is altering yer guns to be more inline with their IRL counterparts a "major breach"?
Thank you for lifting the weight limit to 19 metric tons, this one makes sense. I also had some more some more critical thoughts about your gun limits and a Simpleplanes AI-vs-AI dogfight as an evaluation method. I'll share this critique and expanded suggestions here.
Greetings! I found that this plane has a longitudinal array of low-power gyroscopes in its spine behind the airbrake. Would you please explain the principles and benefits of this solution instead of using a single, more powerful gyro, gyros on rotators, or not using gyroscopes in the first place? These gyros somehow don't seem to restrict maneurability in any way.
Oh heck, I just checked the specs of these guns you provided, and they don't correspond with their IRL counterparts at all. For example, your 30mm DEFA has almost the same damage as yer M39 with its 2.5 times lighter shell, among other discrepancies.
Would you please allow other models of aircraft machine guns and autocannons as long as they correspond with their real-life counterparts in the same way as your guns do? Your cannon selection lacks two iconic weapons of that era: a .50 cal AN/M3 and a 37mm N-37 cannon, found respectively on an F-86 Sabre and a MiG-15. Allowing the NR-30(soviet answer to that DEFA 30) would be good as well.
Hello there, I've recently tried to solve the same problem, and found a solution when trying to make a launch sequence that's controlled by none but myself. The only downside is that you need atleast two units of ordnance and a detacher per each munition unit. I'll post it soon.
Greetings! Have you considered making something relatively small and simple, perhaps an ATGM with a PLOS guidance such as FGM-172? And since we'll be mostly using it from our aircraft, there's no real need for top-attack trajectory and lofting, and even terrain avoidance can be omitted as well.
The line between a "Missile" and an "Unmanned Aerial Vehicle" is quite blurry. I came to think that this thing may be classified as a rocket-powered air defence drone rather than a missile, since it's reusable.
Author, please don't stop and make more such things. Weird Aircraft Matter! I actually think that ability of making such stuff is one of the main appealing features of this game.
Huh , i think you should've given it a deadline of several months due to multiple reasons. Since the design of a stealthy aircraft requires panelling, the fuselage slicing is much less helpful compared to a normal, non-stealthy creations. And it also requires a fancy internal bays for weaponry and landing gear, and a some funky equations for flight control, thus that kind of airplane can face long delays much like their real-life counterparts, albeit still a bit shorter. As you probably see, all the creations of the participants look rushed. My own Tempest took me a lot of time, and it still lacks some features i'd want to implement.
@BoiExist This construction of mine capitalises on a bug-turned-feature that is enacted by uing a certain arrangement of munitions and a detacher. In the missile's AG there should be -Fireweapons, so those munitions could be dropped in a semi-auto mode. If there's no such thing in the AG, then they all will just drop simultaneously no matter how smoothly you press your fireweapons button.
@Kelvinusher Here's my answer
When you launch the missile, the detacher disconnects everything that has been connected to it's upper end, thus freeing the rotators to unfold the wings and tail. The good side of it - you don't need ammo-based funky inputs. But there's also downsides: first, the base game doesn't respects that connection, so those connections will be lost if you mirror the missile, so you'll have to connect them again - as you see, I left the rotators to be exposed; second - this know-how might cease to work properly, if the aircraft has too much parts for your device: for my old and frail laptop the limit is somewhere near 600 parts, for you this limit will be higher. In case of that bug, the missile launches correctly, but detacher "forgets" to "free" the rotators, otherwise it's still fine to use. Also, the small rotators seem to be a bit more reliable for that compared to a hinges.
1-use plane with less parts/reduce the number of bomb racks on your plane.
2-If your money are not a concern for you, buy'n'try more powerful computer/smartphone.
3-try to ventilate your room to provide a bit cooler environment for your computer/smartphone,
@CorporalWojak Oh, violent roll when banking... I seen the same bug when trying to modify a Chinook. Also, would you pleae tell me which Helis are better with modifications?
@Planemodder1911 I almost didn't do "xml mods" here. This construction of mine capitalises on a bug-turned-feature that is enacted by uing a certain arrangement of munitions and a detacher. In the missile's AG there should be -Fireweapons, so those munitions could be dropped in a semi-auto mode. If there's no such thing in the AG, then they all will just drop simultaneously no matter how smoothly you press your fireweapons button.
@BENZAHEER Why would you want to use it as an air-to-air weapon instead of it's actual purpose? There is a plenty of actual and functional air-to-air missiles!
But unlike rocket pod, the singular rocket has a changeable burn timer and weight, through which you can affect it's ballistics. Also, you can use it as a rudimentary mean of propulsion that has an unchangeable thrust of 500kgf per rocket, can't be turned off until burnout, smokes until destruction, but is independent from air and fuel tanks, and also has instant response(that was handy before introduction of ThrottleResponse to jets). For example, the BogdanX used them as droppable take-off boosters in his Tu-14. I used them as starting boosters for Brimstone ATGMs in my Tempest.
(Damn, the mighty BogdanX got deleted with all his planes, WTF!?)
Damn, I think we need some sort of an automatic generator of fly-by-funky-trees code for corresponding parts that does not need much funky knowledge.
Imagine when you open that generator window, then just type in some various needed properties and desired specifications, then click "Generate flight controls", and voila, yer plane, whether stable or not, has a fly-by-funky system that makes the aircraft to fly as you want it to fly... I think it should have authority over part-specific properties of all the rotators, such as range of motion, speed and the dampermultiplier.
Greetings! I apologise for an unrelated comment, but would you please help me with a variant of your Funky Missile which uses fast-response thrust vectoring for better maneurability? I'll tag you at unlisted build.
@waylaymythz I dropped them from Viggen and wings deployed successfully. That Viggen had 718 parts when combined with 2 bomb racks. When I dropped them from a plane with a noticeably higher part count, namely the Daslan Delta, they failed to deploy. So, either use something with less parts or use a laptop/PC If you don't do this already.
I found a fitting music to this thing, Meteor-Letum
Also, you would be dead BEFORE hearing the BRRRRRRRT, since the shells are supersonic. If you hear the BRRRRRRRT, then you're not the target.
Вот это едрёное название...
@ShinyGemsBro Hehe, i found a solution though its still more complex than my other weaponry. Watch my recent weapon post for explanation. So, i took turbojets for this duty - and since unlike rotators and basic rockets they do not care about detachers, I had to find a way to manually designate their launch sequence, so that the ingame system of doing so wouldn't mess that up.
I accomplish this by adding a secondary missile(R-21 Counter)/bomb(ATGM Counter) to each ordnance unit, so these secondary munitions would act as an ammo counter instead of a actual, primary munition. R-21 has that in the front part of its nosecone, while ATGM has it right behind its nosecone. These "counters" also have their AGs to disable themselves when selected.
So, the actual munitions are only activated in a specific user-designated sequence, one at a time so the game wouldn't dare to launch the other one instead without firing its engine while the one with a working engine just remains attached to a plane. Also these secondary "counting" munitions better be made unlaunchable and undroppable by one and another way.
As for my finished soviet jet, i still need some time to write its description. Yes, i'm that slow.
Сусемь)
+1@mikoyanster Thanks alot for this comprehensive reply of yours, I'll now think if I should or shouldn't adapt my RD-7 engined MiG to the challenge...
How about working with Meteor and Hello Meteor? These are two different musicians. The first one can make you combat aircraft music, the second one can make a music for peaceful flying.
https://meteormusic.bandcamp.com/track/smoke-trails
https://hellometeor.bandcamp.com/track/and-returns
It is to be noted that this plane is surprisingly easy to handle and aim. When sinking a USS Tiny for ∞th time, I didn't enable its auto-aim despite playing with a keyboard.
You don't need foldable wings or landing hook if the plane is small enough, and has a landing speed of less than 100 km/h.
Ah, forgot to ask - do you imagine it to be powered by the same engines as the Su-25?
Hey pss, have you considered using a helicopter rotors as a propellers as well as for simulating prop wash on wings and empennage? https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/jNtQFS/Lautern-Skyly-J-2-Teacher
Bogdanx would approve this one.
+1@mikoyanster Would you please clarify the "significant" and "insignificant" rule breach, especially about the guns? Is putting 6 NR-23 guns instead of 4 a "significant breach", even if the plane is sufficiently bulky for that? Is using an N-37 cannons a "significant breach"? If you disqualify for having an N-37, than you basically terminate almost any remotely notable soviet fighter plane of that era from your challenge, same goes for NR-30, unless yer ADEN is also supposed to be the "NR-30". If i utilise a gun that isn't among allowed weaponry, but has realistic specs and was widely used on many fighters of this era, will that be a red ticket? Is altering yer guns to be more inline with their IRL counterparts a "major breach"?
Thank you for lifting the weight limit to 19 metric tons, this one makes sense. I also had some more some more critical thoughts about your gun limits and a Simpleplanes AI-vs-AI dogfight as an evaluation method. I'll share this critique and expanded suggestions here.
This is what happened when they sent Andrey Tupolev to make a small fighter jet.
@marcox43 Yep, especially the Scorpion and the Super Sabre, they exceed that in their empty weight.
Greetings! I found that this plane has a longitudinal array of low-power gyroscopes in its spine behind the airbrake. Would you please explain the principles and benefits of this solution instead of using a single, more powerful gyro, gyros on rotators, or not using gyroscopes in the first place? These gyros somehow don't seem to restrict maneurability in any way.
Oh heck, I just checked the specs of these guns you provided, and they don't correspond with their IRL counterparts at all. For example, your 30mm DEFA has almost the same damage as yer M39 with its 2.5 times lighter shell, among other discrepancies.
+1Would you please allow other models of aircraft machine guns and autocannons as long as they correspond with their real-life counterparts in the same way as your guns do? Your cannon selection lacks two iconic weapons of that era: a .50 cal AN/M3 and a 37mm N-37 cannon, found respectively on an F-86 Sabre and a MiG-15. Allowing the NR-30(soviet answer to that DEFA 30) would be good as well.
Hello there, I've recently tried to solve the same problem, and found a solution when trying to make a launch sequence that's controlled by none but myself. The only downside is that you need atleast two units of ordnance and a detacher per each munition unit. I'll post it soon.
Greetings! Have you considered making something relatively small and simple, perhaps an ATGM with a PLOS guidance such as FGM-172? And since we'll be mostly using it from our aircraft, there's no real need for top-attack trajectory and lofting, and even terrain avoidance can be omitted as well.
This plane is perfect for those who like their F-16s but still want a much bigger plane. Upvote.
+1The line between a "Missile" and an "Unmanned Aerial Vehicle" is quite blurry. I came to think that this thing may be classified as a rocket-powered air defence drone rather than a missile, since it's reusable.
+1@SleepyKitty It's a J-20 and Su-33 hybrid. Also more people should've seen this one, it's a pity author didn't tagged this creation.
+1Looks like a small and affordable stealth jet that would cost like 1/2 of an F-35.
Now that's what you call a "flying tank".
@SPWithLizzie Who is Serj?
Author, please don't stop and make more such things. Weird Aircraft Matter! I actually think that ability of making such stuff is one of the main appealing features of this game.
+1Hi. Don't you think these missiles are a bit MARASMatic?
Huh , i think you should've given it a deadline of several months due to multiple reasons. Since the design of a stealthy aircraft requires panelling, the fuselage slicing is much less helpful compared to a normal, non-stealthy creations. And it also requires a fancy internal bays for weaponry and landing gear, and a some funky equations for flight control, thus that kind of airplane can face long delays much like their real-life counterparts, albeit still a bit shorter. As you probably see, all the creations of the participants look rushed. My own Tempest took me a lot of time, and it still lacks some features i'd want to implement.
Dear developers, thank you for for this labor of yours! I'll check it all out as soon as possible.
+4@BoiExist This construction of mine capitalises on a bug-turned-feature that is enacted by uing a certain arrangement of munitions and a detacher. In the missile's AG there should be -Fireweapons, so those munitions could be dropped in a semi-auto mode. If there's no such thing in the AG, then they all will just drop simultaneously no matter how smoothly you press your fireweapons button.
@Kelvinusher Here's my answer
When you launch the missile, the detacher disconnects everything that has been connected to it's upper end, thus freeing the rotators to unfold the wings and tail. The good side of it - you don't need ammo-based funky inputs. But there's also downsides: first, the base game doesn't respects that connection, so those connections will be lost if you mirror the missile, so you'll have to connect them again - as you see, I left the rotators to be exposed; second - this know-how might cease to work properly, if the aircraft has too much parts for your device: for my old and frail laptop the limit is somewhere near 600 parts, for you this limit will be higher. In case of that bug, the missile launches correctly, but detacher "forgets" to "free" the rotators, otherwise it's still fine to use. Also, the small rotators seem to be a bit more reliable for that compared to a hinges.
1-use plane with less parts/reduce the number of bomb racks on your plane.
2-If your money are not a concern for you, buy'n'try more powerful computer/smartphone.
3-try to ventilate your room to provide a bit cooler environment for your computer/smartphone,
@tarikGR Um, you want to strap this under U-2 plane?
+1@CorporalWojak Oh, violent roll when banking... I seen the same bug when trying to modify a Chinook. Also, would you pleae tell me which Helis are better with modifications?
@Planemodder1911 I almost didn't do "xml mods" here. This construction of mine capitalises on a bug-turned-feature that is enacted by uing a certain arrangement of munitions and a detacher. In the missile's AG there should be -Fireweapons, so those munitions could be dropped in a semi-auto mode. If there's no such thing in the AG, then they all will just drop simultaneously no matter how smoothly you press your fireweapons button.
@BENZAHEER Why would you want to use it as an air-to-air weapon instead of it's actual purpose? There is a plenty of actual and functional air-to-air missiles!
Hmm, i see my JASSM here...
Which is good.
COCONUT DOGGY!
+1If the Project Wingman had a Tu-22M3...
But unlike rocket pod, the singular rocket has a changeable burn timer and weight, through which you can affect it's ballistics. Also, you can use it as a rudimentary mean of propulsion that has an unchangeable thrust of 500kgf per rocket, can't be turned off until burnout, smokes until destruction, but is independent from air and fuel tanks, and also has instant response(that was handy before introduction of ThrottleResponse to jets). For example, the BogdanX used them as droppable take-off boosters in his Tu-14. I used them as starting boosters for Brimstone ATGMs in my Tempest.
+2(Damn, the mighty BogdanX got deleted with all his planes, WTF!?)
Damn, I think we need some sort of an automatic generator of fly-by-funky-trees code for corresponding parts that does not need much funky knowledge.
Imagine when you open that generator window, then just type in some various needed properties and desired specifications, then click "Generate flight controls", and voila, yer plane, whether stable or not, has a fly-by-funky system that makes the aircraft to fly as you want it to fly... I think it should have authority over part-specific properties of all the rotators, such as range of motion, speed and the dampermultiplier.
♂️FISTING♂️ IS THREE HUNDRED ♂️BUCKS♂️
+1That's how we shall have Genshin without gacha mechanics.
+1Greetings! I apologise for an unrelated comment, but would you please help me with a variant of your Funky Missile which uses fast-response thrust vectoring for better maneurability? I'll tag you at unlisted build.
+1@waylaymythz I dropped them from Viggen and wings deployed successfully. That Viggen had 718 parts when combined with 2 bomb racks. When I dropped them from a plane with a noticeably higher part count, namely the Daslan Delta, they failed to deploy. So, either use something with less parts or use a laptop/PC If you don't do this already.
@GuyFolk I strongly recommend you to use this on your F-35!
I found a fitting music to this thing, Meteor-Letum
+2Also, you would be dead BEFORE hearing the BRRRRRRRT, since the shells are supersonic. If you hear the BRRRRRRRT, then you're not the target.
Greetings again! I just remembered that I have a subassembly of an easy-to-use GBU-53 on a BRU-61 quad-rack. I'll give a link here soon...
Yay, that huge Boeing with fancy mouth from meme!
+1@BaconAircraft Ah, I also made a variant of this that is fires by FireWeapons without activationgroups.