@Phoebe Sorry, but definitely not those. That one was more like a vehicle-mounted CIWS with a single 4-5 barrel rottary cannon, while those you proposed here are heavy tanks armed with multiple 6-barrel gatlings.
American F-86 pilot: I seen a damned Mig-15 with variable sweep wing and canards, it scared me!
American psychologist: variable sweep and canard Mig-15 does not exist, it can't hurt you!
Variable Sweep and Canard Mig-15:
Greetings!
This plane is one of the greatest feats of USSR's aircraft design and manufacturing, despite you don't consider it to be one. The only actual resemblance of it with a Ta-183 are the single-engine layout, and even the T-shaped tail of it is quite different. By that "logic", just any single-engine jet fighter from F-86/MiG-15 to even F-35 can be labeled as a copycat of Ta-183. Also, the "RR Nene" engine on the BiS variant is a domestically manufactured and significantly modified variant of it and is called VK-1.
It might be easy to blame them for using british engine, but thou shall remember that this MiG was made only 5 years after the WW2, where USSR suffered losses of 26 million of people, 17 of whom were civilians, since the Nazi Germany managed to establish a deliberate and complex program of genociding women, children, and elders, mainly the Slavic and Jewish. The entire cities were totally wiped out, and the country was brutally torn by war. So, when the British offered their Nene engine, it was truly an unrefusable gift, allowing to save resources and time. The process of studying the Nene was one of the things needed to regenerate and upgrade the USSR's aircraft industry.
Also, this MiG of yours is awesome and special because it uses the 1.11 features.
Greetings! About roll, you can use clamp((Roll/(IAS/135)), -1, 1,) for ailerons. It gradually reduces your aileron input beginning from 135 m/s IAS. But, I think that the roll rate should be pretty high, because those ailerons are quite large. Also, you can watch the Growling Sidewinder on youtube, namely his dogfights witg Mig-15bis and F-86 Sabre. In the DCS, the Sabre has an astonishing roll rate. I thought the Scorpion can have it as well.
I apologise if Irritated you in some way.
About flaps, I hope you found the hidden flapcanards in the nose?
It has a flaws: namely the unworking flaps, unrealistic position of centers of mass and lift. Those flaps are really unworking: there's just sliced fuselage blocks, and no surface to simulate the lift increase flaps normally offer. The hidden wings have bjorken position and only a roll input. Here's even more realistic, FIXED VERSION, update pls! The apperance and part efficiency are awesome though.
Greetings mr. Tarpley! All my cannons somehow lost their target reticles.
I remember that the "cannon" part had it's own collimator-styled round reticle when in game, but now it doesn't. Is that a bug? CLICK TO THE FORUM POST WITH SCREENSHOTS
@PhilipTarpley
Greetings! I preventively apologise for possibly irritating question, but is it possible use those boolean writings to provide a fixed launch sequence for multiple units of custom ordnance? If it is, than how can I implement it? I am just asking because I'd like to implement the ordnance that uses small jet engines to realistically imitate the work of solid fuel engines and pyrocartridges, because i can freely modify the thrust of them, while our basic unguided rocket provides the unchangeable thrust of 500kgf. Also, as it seems to me, the launch sequence of ordnance is oftenly erratic, which is why am I asking you.
Greetings! How about to implement an opportunity to add a third/fourth flight control sliders along with making the said sliders to "retract" behind the screen? I think there could've been a lot of use for a third slider in many kinds of aircraft. For example, in a combat plane, if the VTOL is for flaps, Trim is for Elevator Trim, then the third slider could be allocated to adjust Roll Trim, control input sensitivity, or even something else, whether miscellaneous or functional.
And add the activation groups for fuel tanks pls... I mean, it's like when the fuel from said tank isn't consumed when it's deactivated.
Also, will it be hard for you to add some sort of "Detached from main aircraft" input/activator? It's like, if this input is implemented in the input/ag of a working part, the game checks whether the working part is connected to the main body that is connected to the main cockpit, then gives an input of 0 or -1 if it's attached, and input of positive 1 when it somehow happens to be detached from the main body whether by pylon/detacher or something else/attached only to the parts that don't have connection to "main body". I am asking for it because I don't want to saturate the 1-8 activation groups or use ammo number-based inputs.
And, at the end, woulf you please add customisable sounds to engines and gatling guns, or atleat replace the sound of an ingame minigun.
Awesome machine. The soviet armored brute with whole load of ordnance. I gonna check it out when I'll reach to my laptop.
P. S. Sorry, but you have a wrong translation from russian. The "front view" is "вид спереди", "rear view" is "вид сзади". Before writing something on russian, you better find'n'ask a russian-speaker, preferably a native one.
So, if you say that your future crafts will be approximately 2800 parts... Seems like those are detailed widebody airliners and/or dcs-grade combat aircraft with full suite of custom ordnance?
@MOPCKOEDNISHE Привет! Увы, недавно мне надо было отдать ноутбук на починку, отчего у меня пропали все поделки вместе с самой игрой. Игру я вернул, моды переустановил, а вот авиация моей постройки исчезла безвозвратно, благо, я выложил несколько образцов на сайт. Может, в будущем что-нибудь сострою/скачаю, да погляжу, исправно там или не очень.
Greetings! Is there a way to tune it for using high-drag unguided ordnance that falls at a much steeper trajectory than a normal low-drag bombs? Will the replacing the IAS with IAS/2 suffice?
Greetings! If your plane takes off too early, than it's very likely that it has too much thrust and/or too low wing loading(I. e. abundace of lift) possibly combined with abundance of drag. Thus I suspect that "acceleration of jet engine"(correct term is "spool-up time") is not your actual problem. IRL aircraft engines can spool up to full power from idle pretty fast after being started, especially if they're not very big. So, I suggest you to increase the plane's weight and combine it with reduction of engine thrust, parts drag, and wing area. Also, i suggest you to use some funky input that increases engine thrust with speed to a certain degree.
@Hedero
Gunnery Sgt. Hartman: Where are you from, anyway?
Pvt. Cowboy: SIR, TEXAS, SIR!
Gunnery Sgt. Hartman: TEXAS? Holy dogshit! Only steers and queers come from texas!! And you don't much look like a steer to me so that kind of narrows it down. Do you suck dick?
Pvt. Cowboy: SIR, NO, SIR!
Gunnery Sgt. Hartman: I BET YOU'RE THE KIND OF GUY WHO'D FUCK A MAN IN THE ASS AND NOT HAVE THE COMMON COURTESY TO GIVE HIM A REACH-AROUND.
P.S. I think it's the best Il-2 there, along with Bogdanx's. Immense balance of part count and details I can't match.
Greetings! I have a question about controlling of it. How do I accelerate this helicopter to the stable forward speed of 250-300 km/h? I tried but failed at doing more than 140-150 km/h. Is there a way of doing so without changing construction?
@MOPCKOEDNISHE Понимаю. Если возможности провести соответствующую доработку мода не предвидится, искренне прошу уведомить об этом. К сожалению, единственная помощь, которую я могу оказать, это выписать пару-тройку глуповатых пожеланий насчет обустройства мода.
I suggest you to allow jet engines for two reasons:
1 - they are very good for simulating propwash of the wings and control surfaces(check newest JamesPLANESii builds)
2 - IRL there is jet-powered ultralights, like jet-powered variant of Cri-Cri ultralight plane...
@MrSilverWolf I heard this method before, and I do admit that it partially mitigates the issue. But, your "re-attach the stuff by hand then nudge back in" is essentially what I normally do. Also, if i move the stuff away to mirror, there's again a hefty probability of a mirrored part/parts failing to connect. And, as you have possibly deduced, I am asking for a radical solution from developers or modders, I.E. overhaul of mirror tools to a more consistent and comfortable state. I suggest you to look at the small blue link in my post if you didn't, whole-half/individual mirror tool just fails to comprehend this kind of manual connection, and I wish the modders or developers to do something with it. But, I got an update several minutes ago, so I gonna look what's there. Tell me if I want too much...
@MintLynx Well, seems like I wrote my post a bit incorrectly... I should've point out that i'm talking about both mirror tools, for both of them tend to suffer those issues when certain conditions are met. My bad.
Greetings, dear developers! Is it possible for you to fix the mirror tool so it could always mirror all the part connections evenly? It fails to do that on a regular basis, especially if tasked to mirror the parts that are interlapping/very close to each other/have many connections/rotated to certain degree at certain axis. This failure oftenly results in undesired drag asymmetry, moving parts malfunction, and parts falling out in flight. Reconnecting the parts manually can be a pain in the butt if there's more than 400-600 parts.
@AndrewGarrison
@PhilipTarpley
@GuyFolk Ah, sorry for being a bit rude and unclear in that comment. I mean, that time i've only used afterburner for initial climbing and acceleration up to 12 km alt and 1300 km/h TAS, then i flew and accelerated without it, at 94% throttle, as intended.
@GuyFolk Understood, and thanks for your answer. I tested it a second time, and successfully acquired supercruise of 1700km/h TAS at 14km, after accelerating the plane with AB. By the way, i'm making an X-44 MANTA with thrust vectoring inputs that are tightly based on your "Mister Blue Revenge" Wyvern. Soon I'll post that in unlisted and tag you. Maybe 14th or 15th, i hope...
@Phoebe Sorry, but definitely not those. That one was more like a vehicle-mounted CIWS with a single 4-5 barrel rottary cannon, while those you proposed here are heavy tanks armed with multiple 6-barrel gatlings.
+1That Comanche ate too much hamburgers...
Hmm, seems good for target practice.
+2Seems like i finally found an "IRL" counterpart to Jundroo's AA Tank.
Greetings! Could you please elaborate what "block" of F-16a is it exactly? Is that a block 15 ADF?
+1I seriously think it can serve as a better and rightful replacement for the default tutorial plane.
+1American F-86 pilot: I seen a damned Mig-15 with variable sweep wing and canards, it scared me!
+1American psychologist: variable sweep and canard Mig-15 does not exist, it can't hurt you!
Variable Sweep and Canard Mig-15:
Greetings!
+8This plane is one of the greatest feats of USSR's aircraft design and manufacturing, despite you don't consider it to be one. The only actual resemblance of it with a Ta-183 are the single-engine layout, and even the T-shaped tail of it is quite different. By that "logic", just any single-engine jet fighter from F-86/MiG-15 to even F-35 can be labeled as a copycat of Ta-183. Also, the "RR Nene" engine on the BiS variant is a domestically manufactured and significantly modified variant of it and is called VK-1.
It might be easy to blame them for using british engine, but thou shall remember that this MiG was made only 5 years after the WW2, where USSR suffered losses of 26 million of people, 17 of whom were civilians, since the Nazi Germany managed to establish a deliberate and complex program of genociding women, children, and elders, mainly the Slavic and Jewish. The entire cities were totally wiped out, and the country was brutally torn by war. So, when the British offered their Nene engine, it was truly an unrefusable gift, allowing to save resources and time. The process of studying the Nene was one of the things needed to regenerate and upgrade the USSR's aircraft industry.
Also, this MiG of yours is awesome and special because it uses the 1.11 features.
@A319enjoyer 🅱️enis 🅱️180 🅱️a🅱️andi
Greetings! About roll, you can use clamp((Roll/(IAS/135)), -1, 1,) for ailerons. It gradually reduces your aileron input beginning from 135 m/s IAS. But, I think that the roll rate should be pretty high, because those ailerons are quite large. Also, you can watch the Growling Sidewinder on youtube, namely his dogfights witg Mig-15bis and F-86 Sabre. In the DCS, the Sabre has an astonishing roll rate. I thought the Scorpion can have it as well.
I apologise if Irritated you in some way.
About flaps, I hope you found the hidden flapcanards in the nose?
It has a flaws: namely the unworking flaps, unrealistic position of centers of mass and lift. Those flaps are really unworking: there's just sliced fuselage blocks, and no surface to simulate the lift increase flaps normally offer. The hidden wings have bjorken position and only a roll input. Here's even more realistic, FIXED VERSION, update pls! The apperance and part efficiency are awesome though.
Greetings mr. Tarpley! All my cannons somehow lost their target reticles.
+1I remember that the "cannon" part had it's own collimator-styled round reticle when in game, but now it doesn't. Is that a bug? CLICK TO THE FORUM POST WITH SCREENSHOTS
@PhilipTarpley
Greetings! What variant of PT6 is it?
Greetings! I preventively apologise for possibly irritating question, but is it possible use those boolean writings to provide a fixed launch sequence for multiple units of custom ordnance? If it is, than how can I implement it? I am just asking because I'd like to implement the ordnance that uses small jet engines to realistically imitate the work of solid fuel engines and pyrocartridges, because i can freely modify the thrust of them, while our basic unguided rocket provides the unchangeable thrust of 500kgf. Also, as it seems to me, the launch sequence of ordnance is oftenly erratic, which is why am I asking you.
Butt Explosive Shit Head?
+1Maybe call it "Я ненавижу самого себя?"
+2Greetings! How about to implement an opportunity to add a third/fourth flight control sliders along with making the said sliders to "retract" behind the screen? I think there could've been a lot of use for a third slider in many kinds of aircraft. For example, in a combat plane, if the VTOL is for flaps, Trim is for Elevator Trim, then the third slider could be allocated to adjust Roll Trim, control input sensitivity, or even something else, whether miscellaneous or functional.
+6And add the activation groups for fuel tanks pls... I mean, it's like when the fuel from said tank isn't consumed when it's deactivated.
Also, will it be hard for you to add some sort of "Detached from main aircraft" input/activator? It's like, if this input is implemented in the input/ag of a working part, the game checks whether the working part is connected to the main body that is connected to the main cockpit, then gives an input of 0 or -1 if it's attached, and input of positive 1 when it somehow happens to be detached from the main body whether by pylon/detacher or something else/attached only to the parts that don't have connection to "main body". I am asking for it because I don't want to saturate the 1-8 activation groups or use ammo number-based inputs.
And, at the end, woulf you please add customisable sounds to engines and gatling guns, or atleat replace the sound of an ingame minigun.
Awesome machine. The soviet armored brute with whole load of ordnance. I gonna check it out when I'll reach to my laptop.
+1P. S. Sorry, but you have a wrong translation from russian. The "front view" is "вид спереди", "rear view" is "вид сзади". Before writing something on russian, you better find'n'ask a russian-speaker, preferably a native one.
So, if you say that your future crafts will be approximately 2800 parts... Seems like those are detailed widebody airliners and/or dcs-grade combat aircraft with full suite of custom ordnance?
@CNOceanLin The Tracks2 mod is SUPERIOR fot it offers a proper tank tracks. Better go try the game at PC or laptop.
@MOPCKOEDNISHE Привет! Увы, недавно мне надо было отдать ноутбук на починку, отчего у меня пропали все поделки вместе с самой игрой. Игру я вернул, моды переустановил, а вот авиация моей постройки исчезла безвозвратно, благо, я выложил несколько образцов на сайт. Может, в будущем что-нибудь сострою/скачаю, да погляжу, исправно там или не очень.
Greetings! Is there a way to tune it for using high-drag unguided ordnance that falls at a much steeper trajectory than a normal low-drag bombs? Will the replacing the IAS with IAS/2 suffice?
I am pretty sure you'll win the challenge.
Greetings! If your plane takes off too early, than it's very likely that it has too much thrust and/or too low wing loading(I. e. abundace of lift) possibly combined with abundance of drag. Thus I suspect that "acceleration of jet engine"(correct term is "spool-up time") is not your actual problem. IRL aircraft engines can spool up to full power from idle pretty fast after being started, especially if they're not very big. So, I suggest you to increase the plane's weight and combine it with reduction of engine thrust, parts drag, and wing area. Also, i suggest you to use some funky input that increases engine thrust with speed to a certain degree.
@Hedero
Gunnery Sgt. Hartman: Where are you from, anyway?
Pvt. Cowboy: SIR, TEXAS, SIR!
Gunnery Sgt. Hartman: TEXAS? Holy dogshit! Only steers and queers come from texas!! And you don't much look like a steer to me so that kind of narrows it down. Do you suck dick?
Pvt. Cowboy: SIR, NO, SIR!
Gunnery Sgt. Hartman: I BET YOU'RE THE KIND OF GUY WHO'D FUCK A MAN IN THE ASS AND NOT HAVE THE COMMON COURTESY TO GIVE HIM A REACH-AROUND.
P.S. I think it's the best Il-2 there, along with Bogdanx's. Immense balance of part count and details I can't match.
Greetings! Add the "Attack" tag please.
Greetings! I have a question about controlling of it. How do I accelerate this helicopter to the stable forward speed of 250-300 km/h? I tried but failed at doing more than 140-150 km/h. Is there a way of doing so without changing construction?
+1Huh, bootleg Comanche...
Tags?
@ppp00000yugdu Not even this, for I am inexperienced and uninterested with those. Sorry if i disappoint you.
Why no tags? Fighter, France, Interceptor, Jet, etc
@ppp00000yugdu Sorry, but no. I am making a BAe Tempest with custom ordnance for it, and I feel overally uninterested in making watercraft.
Мирный советский трактор...
@MOPCKOEDNISHE Понимаю. Если возможности провести соответствующую доработку мода не предвидится, искренне прошу уведомить об этом. К сожалению, единственная помощь, которую я могу оказать, это выписать пару-тройку глуповатых пожеланий насчет обустройства мода.
Здравствуйте. Нет ли возможности сообщить, когда ожидать обновления для мода Turret Control?
I suggest you to allow jet engines for two reasons:
1 - they are very good for simulating propwash of the wings and control surfaces(check newest JamesPLANESii builds)
2 - IRL there is jet-powered ultralights, like jet-powered variant of Cri-Cri ultralight plane...
@MrSilverWolf I heard this method before, and I do admit that it partially mitigates the issue. But, your "re-attach the stuff by hand then nudge back in" is essentially what I normally do. Also, if i move the stuff away to mirror, there's again a hefty probability of a mirrored part/parts failing to connect. And, as you have possibly deduced, I am asking for a radical solution from developers or modders, I.E. overhaul of mirror tools to a more consistent and comfortable state. I suggest you to look at the small blue link in my post if you didn't, whole-half/individual mirror tool just fails to comprehend this kind of manual connection, and I wish the modders or developers to do something with it. But, I got an update several minutes ago, so I gonna look what's there. Tell me if I want too much...
@MintLynx Well, seems like I wrote my post a bit incorrectly... I should've point out that i'm talking about both mirror tools, for both of them tend to suffer those issues when certain conditions are met. My bad.
@Gestour So, only test'n'reconnect manually? So be it, good thing I constantly use designersuite.
@MrSilverWolf "Individual" mirroring tool suffers those issues as well.
Why didn't you name it after a flower, like the rest of cold war/modern soviet/russian artillery?
+1@WNP78
Wut? Why are you banned again? Is there any reason behind it?
Greetings, dear developers! Is it possible for you to fix the mirror tool so it could always mirror all the part connections evenly? It fails to do that on a regular basis, especially if tasked to mirror the parts that are interlapping/very close to each other/have many connections/rotated to certain degree at certain axis. This failure oftenly results in undesired drag asymmetry, moving parts malfunction, and parts falling out in flight. Reconnecting the parts manually can be a pain in the butt if there's more than 400-600 parts.
+3@AndrewGarrison
@PhilipTarpley
This thing is two times bigger than IRL bomb.
Gud work, but why no "Attack" tag?
So, what are the changes?
@GuyFolk So, I tagged you. Have you received the notification for that plane?
@GuyFolk Ah, sorry for being a bit rude and unclear in that comment. I mean, that time i've only used afterburner for initial climbing and acceleration up to 12 km alt and 1300 km/h TAS, then i flew and accelerated without it, at 94% throttle, as intended.
@GuyFolk Understood, and thanks for your answer. I tested it a second time, and successfully acquired supercruise of 1700km/h TAS at 14km, after accelerating the plane with AB. By the way, i'm making an X-44 MANTA with thrust vectoring inputs that are tightly based on your "Mister Blue Revenge" Wyvern. Soon I'll post that in unlisted and tag you. Maybe 14th or 15th, i hope...