@XEPBAM So-o-o, i guess it's basically what am i doing now, i.e. figuring it out through a good ol' trial and error. But thanks for that post link, somehow I haven't seen this one despite doing my bit of search. I was simply asking if someone got any extra-special fancy knowledge that i couldn't think of.
Edit: I've been already following most of the stuff in that link, especially the measurement units.
So, which flight programming system would be easier for a novice to start with? OG Funky Trees or these Python Trees? I'm just not sure. I've used a bit of Funky Trees, but Python has way more available literature for it(though i didn't read any of that stuff).
So, i hope we will be able to change the form and angles of that boolean box, just like we do with fuselages. In my past proposal, i've been specifically describing circular openings, namely airliner windows and wheel wells, since these are more part-consuming on average.
@Mineglacier7251yt It is just unrealistic and fundamentally senseless. Real-life business jets use pre-made engines and avionics, and business jets of different makers oftenly have engines and avionics of the same model from the same manufacturer. Usage of subassemblies should be allowed as it is in real-life planes. Also you still didn't reveal how will you grade the contestants.
And another proposal for when SP2 becomes mature enough: add an Aeroelasticity(or just elasticity) option to wings and fuselages to imitate certain IRL materials and technologies, like flexible wings of B787 and Wright Flyer.
Greetings again! Have you considered to implement a basic option to cut multiple holes/"windows" in the fuselage walls, as well as edit the shape, size, angle, and position of those holes relatively to fuselage? I'm sure that the passenger plane builders will love that, also it will be easier to make access panels(and some other details) on most military aircraft as well. For example, a passenger fuselage with 15 windows on each side would need atleast 32 parts, but such function may reduce that to 2-3parts. And it may give us easier process of making some landing gear doors and even some weapon bays along with even less parts spent on them. Ya know, Kamov Ka-50 and Boeing 737 have one similarity: they retract their landing gear into their hatchless, circular wheel wells.
Also tampering with this mechanism greatly helped me to understand PIDs in general.
@XEPBAM Luckily i am no stranger to that kind of empirical stuff.
+1@XEPBAM So-o-o, i guess it's basically what am i doing now, i.e. figuring it out through a good ol' trial and error. But thanks for that post link, somehow I haven't seen this one despite doing my bit of search. I was simply asking if someone got any extra-special fancy knowledge that i couldn't think of.
Edit: I've been already following most of the stuff in that link, especially the measurement units.
@PrussianAirWorks Oops, i red the rules again, spotted the prohibition. My apologies for unneeded question.
+1Yep, thats a good drawing.
If i perform some NFS MW grade tuning on whills F-15C(give it a body kit and bigger engines), will that count?
+1Count me out, I'm currently engrossed in tinkering with Whills F-15C.
+1This may be a bit better than a real one, since it has a better sidewards-down visibility for both pilot and WSO.
+1Looks like a normal japanese SAM truck, or a license-built japanese Roland.
+1Is that an AEW&C plane? Looks like some beautiful alien.
+1@Mitterbin I honestly don't know, i myself was joking. Apologies if this joke is bad.
+1Though i know you've made it after Il-40, this plane still looks too British to be of Soviet Origin.
+1This may be the best sailfighter I've seen. The solution to thrust center alignment is interesring.
Hmm, does this good plane of yours have a dedicated ordnance catapult-ejector? I'm going to need it then.
Strange name for an F-4 Phantom replica.
+1Hey pss, have you seen a Hendrickson "Big Henry" truck? It would make a nice addition to your collection of aircraft and vehicles.
+1I'll try that one. Looks more fleshed out than Whills one but still doesnt exceed 1000 parts.
Whoops, my browser didn't load an image, i'll try from laptop as soon as i can.
I use that on my newest drone, albeit my variant has a reverse pitch and rpm limiter.
@Chubsy judging by recent discoveries about TESLA's quality of design and build, that BYD is probably better.
+1Quadratisch. Praktisch. Gut.
+1So, which flight programming system would be easier for a novice to start with? OG Funky Trees or these Python Trees? I'm just not sure. I've used a bit of Funky Trees, but Python has way more available literature for it(though i didn't read any of that stuff).
Let there be a MiG-25MLD.
+1@PZLAgencies Thou shall not underestimate people's creativity.
Thanks @PlanariaLab, @DwiAngkasaAeronautics, and @PyrrhaNikos for HUDs and Camera. I took it frome them.
If you want missile to stop smoking, then go to Overload and give it a MaxSpeed of "INF". Yes, you can type those letters in there.
+1"С хорошим двигателем и ворота полетят" (с) Глушко.
Стакан - дело хорошее.
PRAISE THE SUN!
+2\\ [Ť] //
So, i hope we will be able to change the form and angles of that boolean box, just like we do with fuselages. In my past proposal, i've been specifically describing circular openings, namely airliner windows and wheel wells, since these are more part-consuming on average.
These airliners will no longer need thousands of parts, and the lesser part count per plane we have, the more planes can be spawned as a traffic!
+4Yay, thank you for implementing that proposal!
Should we call it "Harvey Hornet"?
Reminds me of the Haunted Astolfo Bean Plushie that sucks your cucumber and calls you gay.
+3Greetings! So, i tried that Stormvark. Is the threshold of stable cannon fire rate still tied to to the ingame FPS?
@Mineglacier7251yt It is just unrealistic and fundamentally senseless. Real-life business jets use pre-made engines and avionics, and business jets of different makers oftenly have engines and avionics of the same model from the same manufacturer. Usage of subassemblies should be allowed as it is in real-life planes. Also you still didn't reveal how will you grade the contestants.
Time to steal its CF34s for an A-10...
+1Now we can play American Truck Simulator when playing Simpleplanes. Xzibit is proud of you!
People say its just a PzH2000, I say its a PzH2000 with a heaped tablespoon of Maus.
@SuperSuperTheSylph Which is fitting, IRL this thing would probably fly with a modified turbojet engine from a Tu-144D.
+1Plane of Vlodiborg Zeliboba.
+1Hmm, the description looks like a typical entry about Soviet 6x6 trucks. Also its name corresponds with certain off-roading game i used to play.
+1"Proportional" as in "Predicted line of sight"? Might be very good choice for some corrected rockets.
It looks aerotransportable.
As they say, "it ain't much, but it's honest work".
Also it reminded me of an International FTTS-UV with a teaspoon of Rheinmetall Gefas.
I like this hybrid of an F-4 Phantom and Su-25 Rook. IRL it would be a potent strike plane.
+1@UnguidedCylinder One of my favourite attackers. So, if an IRL A-10 used GE TF34s, this plane would've used a pair of Rolls-Royce RB.183 Tay engines?
And another proposal for when SP2 becomes mature enough: add an Aeroelasticity(or just elasticity) option to wings and fuselages to imitate certain IRL materials and technologies, like flexible wings of B787 and Wright Flyer.
Greetings again! Have you considered to implement a basic option to cut multiple holes/"windows" in the fuselage walls, as well as edit the shape, size, angle, and position of those holes relatively to fuselage? I'm sure that the passenger plane builders will love that, also it will be easier to make access panels(and some other details) on most military aircraft as well. For example, a passenger fuselage with 15 windows on each side would need atleast 32 parts, but such function may reduce that to 2-3parts. And it may give us easier process of making some landing gear doors and even some weapon bays along with even less parts spent on them. Ya know, Kamov Ka-50 and Boeing 737 have one similarity: they retract their landing gear into their hatchless, circular wheel wells.
+7Count me out of the contest, i've encountered some very specific landing gear problems which i don't know how to solve.