@Dimkal sorry, funky trees are foreign to me, I don't even know where to start on formulating them. I did ask before but the "guides" that are available omit all the beginner stuff on the basis of "you went to school you should know this". All the FT stuff i use other kind users have given me. I enjoy plugging bits together to make aircraft, I use some basic maths to work out angles and the like, I use the xml editing stuff to alter ranges of movement etc. But FT is just beyond me and to be honest the introduction of it to this game has reduced my enjoyment quite a bit.
@Hedero I just saw your teaser and it reminded me of this, i did make the undercarriage you suggested and it worked well but the extended float looked aweful on this airframe so i put it to one side to be used later =)
@Madmaximus I quote from the description above, "Later versions were adapted for other tasks once the allies had complete air dominance all types of aircraft where being utilised in strange roles, in this instance 4 cannon were mounted to the fuselage sides to allow for interdiction missions."
@LoafOfBread its fine im just confused as to what you want from me, the first message said look at my stuka but then you sent me a link to a corsair and now you are saying you wanted me to look at your yak? I did the 2 tone on your corsair but proper camo takes time and planning. As I mentioned on your corsair the parts need altering to be 0 mass and drag so when you duplicate to form the 2 tone to start with it doesn't double weight and drag. After that you need to build the parts in a way that let's you panel on them, flat sections work best so the less awkward the shape the more benefit you get from the camo shapes. In essence you can't just build something and then go ,"im going to put camo on this" it has to be planned. See my camo guide here if you want ideas. Don't get me wrong, im trying to help but I only have so many hours in a day to do anything myself.
@AWESOMENESS360 the cockpit is in the pilots head like I did in another build, ill put it on AG8 in future (I never use cockpit view so didn't notice an issue)
@asteroidbook345 Thanks =) The main wheels are definately lightning, i just reversed the sides so they retract backwards instead of forwards to help with the COG balance. I didnt add any suspension as such, just for decoration hence it is a bit hard on landing (i find that suspension is more hassle than its worth on relatively light aircraft or very heavy aircraft)
@ChiChiWerx Thanks, i really appreciate the review and your comments, im glad you liked it as well. I just wanted something that wasnt so serious (or armed to the teeth) for a change. Just to clarify things, SP counts vertical surfaces when it calculates wing loading, so if you delete the actual fin/vertical stab from the build it gives a better representation of the actual wing loading (73 lbs/sq ft in this case)
@asteroidbook345 fair enough, the dragon was a single engine ee lightning fuselage (reduced in height due to one engine) and a draken style wing, nothing too outrageous there :p.
The thing is, the game let's you make whatever you want and you can make things fly that wouldn't necessarily in real life, thats part of the fun to me. Look at the artwork small-brown-dog produces, non of it would be work in real life but his art looks good with the whole concept being around imaginary lift devices.
I get that some of my concepts are less feasible than others but in the end they are just bits of art. On top of that I have seen a load of concept drawings for aircraft of all eras where you take one look and think "thats not going to work" but someone obviously thought differently. I like the saying "if it looks right it will fly right" but just because it looks wrong doesn't automatically mean it will fly wrong, look at the f4, the fairey gannet or the airtruk for instance, they all have non conventional aspects that just make them look wrong but they where successful aircraft.
@asteroidbook345 fair enough, im not disputing your opinion and I like feedback like this that we can discuss. In regards to gaps around control surfaces, these exist on real aircraft (have a look at a spitfire fin for instance) older aircraft where not built to the same tolerances as todays aircraft plus leaving a small gap (intentionally on my part) it accentuates the control surface and also has the added genetic of reducing part clashing. I'm curious which of my more recent aircraft you thought was implausible :)
@asteroidbook345 nah, my hottest builds where just because I was new, the only thing that has been added to that list of late was the kit challenge (and that's an oddity in itself). I use different styles and design completely different things all the time but there's always something else to work on :) votes are harder to come by when mods can't spotlight your work.
@tucan you still can, i havnt exactly built a replica, mine is much shallower in depth of fuselage, doesnt have the armament or the cockpit etc. I basically just used the photo for inspiration and then made my own thing. oh and if you want to do a proper link just put  without the exclamation mark
@Dimkal Thanks, glad you like it. Oh there is definately room for variants with this one, first im going to have to spend some time and rebuild the fuselage with panels and a working cargo door/bay so i can drop a jeep or 2 =) Then as you say there could be a special forces variant as well including all the biuts you mentioned as well as adding the refueling probe, possibly remake the cockpit area, obs blisters, etc. I was also thinking of a larger variant (more A400 size) with 4 wings / sets of rotors but that will take some work so will finish some more other builds first.
@asteroidbook345 I know its weird as on my computer screen it is bright and clear but on when its on a thumbnail it seems darker especially on my phone. I wont use sunrise in future =)
@NotErwin holy cow, how many forum posts have you got =) I think anytime that forum posts exceed number of builds is bad. Your builds are presentable though, just build some more.
@Hedero thanks, i still enjoy building, posting and typing the description is a chore though... Manueverability is always a compromise, most of ther time i build them too manuevrable and then tone it down to match my impression of the realistic aircraft.
@LoafOfBread originally i did the wing for a fighter which indeed needed the tip to lower down for clearance in the carrier, it helps on this one for hanger door clearance etc. i would imagine anyway
@Hedero thanks :) it looks like 27 upvotes is my limit of late. I appreciate all your upvotes and comments, im grateful for my return customers. I wonder what I have to earn more though?
@NightmareCorporation its definitely bits of harrier but the rest I made up really, its sort of similar in places to f18, mirage 2000 etc but I didn't model anything directly on them.
@DJ2keroni the original concept was to create a VTOL supersonic harrier with a delta wing but the VTOL bit frustrated me enough to abandon it in favour of this.
@X4JB I did thanks to edensk and it works, if I try anything it just freezes the rotator.... but then again I wouldn't normally put a capital letter in the middle of a command either (ignitionDelay for example) so maybe I'm just not cut out for the computing/maths bit ;)
@edensk thanks, i will play with that, you definately need to do that useful commands list with a little desciprtion as to what does what, I find the other guides out there overly complex =)
@WolfSpark now if only i knew how to code funky trees... or even knew you could do this with them in the first place =) Even the codes for BIDMAS that snowflake quotes are diffeerent to when i went to school lol.
@BogdanX did you delete the message where you gave me to the FT formula for releasing the detacher once it moves? My reply went, "good call, I will do that in the future. Just annoying that the game spawns at such a height that it rotates backwards without it... (I didnt want cog any further forwards, I like trundling up the runway with the nose in the air" and now i have the same problem to solve... If you have it i would appreciate it.
@smartypants help yourself
Please don't.
@supremedorian what about adding my camo design guide? here It seems to be popular when people can find it and covers the basics of camo application.
@TheManChan what do you mean? If your are talking about his eyes in the goggles I thought it was a nice touch, keeping his eyes peeled sort of speak.
@K2K why? It's physically smaller than a whirlwind.
@AWESOMENESS360 nah its just a display scheme, it's the Croatian flag. For normal military operations everything is a shade of boring grey.
+1Try this falkenwut did a challenge for just what you described.
+1@idk201011323 thanks :) it was fun to do (except when the game makes random connections). Bit of a flop on votes though.
@Dimkal sorry, funky trees are foreign to me, I don't even know where to start on formulating them. I did ask before but the "guides" that are available omit all the beginner stuff on the basis of "you went to school you should know this". All the FT stuff i use other kind users have given me. I enjoy plugging bits together to make aircraft, I use some basic maths to work out angles and the like, I use the xml editing stuff to alter ranges of movement etc. But FT is just beyond me and to be honest the introduction of it to this game has reduced my enjoyment quite a bit.
@ssenmodnar I hadn't left :) just been building things in the background, doesn't look like this was popular for some reason.
@Hedero nah you upvoted and commented on it hence I worked on an amphibious float as per your suggestion :)
@Hedero I just saw your teaser and it reminded me of this, i did make the undercarriage you suggested and it worked well but the extended float looked aweful on this airframe so i put it to one side to be used later =)
@Boygameit strange as i made this up, there isnt a real world version...
+1@Boygameit here, have a link
@Madmaximus I quote from the description above, "Later versions were adapted for other tasks once the allies had complete air dominance all types of aircraft where being utilised in strange roles, in this instance 4 cannon were mounted to the fuselage sides to allow for interdiction missions."
@LoafOfBread its fine im just confused as to what you want from me, the first message said look at my stuka but then you sent me a link to a corsair and now you are saying you wanted me to look at your yak? I did the 2 tone on your corsair but proper camo takes time and planning. As I mentioned on your corsair the parts need altering to be 0 mass and drag so when you duplicate to form the 2 tone to start with it doesn't double weight and drag. After that you need to build the parts in a way that let's you panel on them, flat sections work best so the less awkward the shape the more benefit you get from the camo shapes. In essence you can't just build something and then go ,"im going to put camo on this" it has to be planned. See my camo guide here if you want ideas. Don't get me wrong, im trying to help but I only have so many hours in a day to do anything myself.
+1@LoafOfBread everytime you mention one of your builds its a different aircraft to the previous message...
@AWESOMENESS360 the cockpit is in the pilots head like I did in another build, ill put it on AG8 in future (I never use cockpit view so didn't notice an issue)
Upload pic to discord, use link, easy.
I did one of those a long time ago, be nice to see another mine here
@asteroidbook345 Thanks =) The main wheels are definately lightning, i just reversed the sides so they retract backwards instead of forwards to help with the COG balance. I didnt add any suspension as such, just for decoration hence it is a bit hard on landing (i find that suspension is more hassle than its worth on relatively light aircraft or very heavy aircraft)
@ChiChiWerx Thanks, i really appreciate the review and your comments, im glad you liked it as well. I just wanted something that wasnt so serious (or armed to the teeth) for a change. Just to clarify things, SP counts vertical surfaces when it calculates wing loading, so if you delete the actual fin/vertical stab from the build it gives a better representation of the actual wing loading (73 lbs/sq ft in this case)
@RadiumOxide ?
@Mrfoxus help yourself
@asteroidbook345 fair enough, the dragon was a single engine ee lightning fuselage (reduced in height due to one engine) and a draken style wing, nothing too outrageous there :p.
The thing is, the game let's you make whatever you want and you can make things fly that wouldn't necessarily in real life, thats part of the fun to me. Look at the artwork small-brown-dog produces, non of it would be work in real life but his art looks good with the whole concept being around imaginary lift devices.
I get that some of my concepts are less feasible than others but in the end they are just bits of art. On top of that I have seen a load of concept drawings for aircraft of all eras where you take one look and think "thats not going to work" but someone obviously thought differently. I like the saying "if it looks right it will fly right" but just because it looks wrong doesn't automatically mean it will fly wrong, look at the f4, the fairey gannet or the airtruk for instance, they all have non conventional aspects that just make them look wrong but they where successful aircraft.
@asteroidbook345 fair enough, im not disputing your opinion and I like feedback like this that we can discuss. In regards to gaps around control surfaces, these exist on real aircraft (have a look at a spitfire fin for instance) older aircraft where not built to the same tolerances as todays aircraft plus leaving a small gap (intentionally on my part) it accentuates the control surface and also has the added genetic of reducing part clashing. I'm curious which of my more recent aircraft you thought was implausible :)
@asteroidbook345 nah, my hottest builds where just because I was new, the only thing that has been added to that list of late was the kit challenge (and that's an oddity in itself). I use different styles and design completely different things all the time but there's always something else to work on :) votes are harder to come by when mods can't spotlight your work.
@tucan you still can, i havnt exactly built a replica, mine is much shallower in depth of fuselage, doesnt have the armament or the cockpit etc. I basically just used the photo for inspiration and then made my own thing. oh and if you want to do a proper link just put  without the exclamation mark
@Dimkal Thanks, glad you like it. Oh there is definately room for variants with this one, first im going to have to spend some time and rebuild the fuselage with panels and a working cargo door/bay so i can drop a jeep or 2 =) Then as you say there could be a special forces variant as well including all the biuts you mentioned as well as adding the refueling probe, possibly remake the cockpit area, obs blisters, etc. I was also thinking of a larger variant (more A400 size) with 4 wings / sets of rotors but that will take some work so will finish some more other builds first.
+1@asteroidbook345 I know its weird as on my computer screen it is bright and clear but on when its on a thumbnail it seems darker especially on my phone. I wont use sunrise in future =)
What is thanksgiving? Is it some American thing that they expect the rest of the world to understand?
@BagelPlane totally agree, I gave up with it as the ui was horrible.
@LittleTOADY sorry but I don't have any interest in low part count builds. This works fine in my mobile as well.
@Hedero i might have a go, have you seen how small the prop is on a Grumman duck? next a corsair here
@Hedero yeah I could do that, it would be a proper amphibian then :)
@NotErwin holy cow, how many forum posts have you got =) I think anytime that forum posts exceed number of builds is bad. Your builds are presentable though, just build some more.
+1@Hedero thanks, i still enjoy building, posting and typing the description is a chore though... Manueverability is always a compromise, most of ther time i build them too manuevrable and then tone it down to match my impression of the realistic aircraft.
@LoafOfBread as I said before just give me a link so I can see what you have built.
@LoafOfBread originally i did the wing for a fighter which indeed needed the tip to lower down for clearance in the carrier, it helps on this one for hanger door clearance etc. i would imagine anyway
Who doesn't test them? I know I've had the odd glitch slip through but no ones perfect. Most users I've downloaded from seem to test.
@Hedero thanks :) it looks like 27 upvotes is my limit of late. I appreciate all your upvotes and comments, im grateful for my return customers. I wonder what I have to earn more though?
@NightmareCorporation its definitely bits of harrier but the rest I made up really, its sort of similar in places to f18, mirage 2000 etc but I didn't model anything directly on them.
@CommandPuppy2 no issue for me and no-one else has reported an issue, you reloaded and tried again?
@LoafOfBread I thought you wanted me to look at a ju87?
@DJ2keroni the original concept was to create a VTOL supersonic harrier with a delta wing but the VTOL bit frustrated me enough to abandon it in favour of this.
@X4JB I did thanks to edensk and it works, if I try anything it just freezes the rotator.... but then again I wouldn't normally put a capital letter in the middle of a command either (ignitionDelay for example) so maybe I'm just not cut out for the computing/maths bit ;)
@BogdanX thanks bogdan, im lost on commands at present (and funky trees don't compute with me ever).
@edensk thanks, i will play with that, you definately need to do that useful commands list with a little desciprtion as to what does what, I find the other guides out there overly complex =)
@WolfSpark now if only i knew how to code funky trees... or even knew you could do this with them in the first place =) Even the codes for BIDMAS that snowflake quotes are diffeerent to when i went to school lol.
@BogdanX did you delete the message where you gave me to the FT formula for releasing the detacher once it moves? My reply went, "good call, I will do that in the future. Just annoying that the game spawns at such a height that it rotates backwards without it... (I didnt want cog any further forwards, I like trundling up the runway with the nose in the air" and now i have the same problem to solve... If you have it i would appreciate it.