Weird, because in my testing a rotator with PitchAngle/cos(RollAngle) seems to work. Although again, this also seems to be limited to small angles of deviation.
Probably mostly how to teach. Trying to teach concepts to a wide variety of people is something I haven't had the opportunity to really get otherwise, and it's also forced me to learn some new skills to supplement that.
@WNP78
.
Yeah, good point. Maybe I could create a color edition and have it graph that separately. Although, it really isn't good enough until i can figure out either how to increase resolution efficiently or fix antialiasing.
@AN2Felllla
.
Check your brackets. FT tries to auto-complete if possible, sounds like that might be the case. Are you using implicit multiplication as well?
@MrShenanigans
.
It's not 100% accurate. I haven't included drag force calculations when this was made.
You also might be using custom bombs, which don't have the same trajectory as simply bombs.
@AN2Felllla
.
Please, I challenge you, point out where I have been needlessly verbose. If you can simplify my words without changing the meaning or making it too long, I'll gladly accept the proposition that I'm doing this verbose thing intentionally.
.
I forgot to mention, please drop the openly mocking attitude. It helps no-one.
@AN2Felllla
.
Ah, also spefy and Bacon are far better mathematicians than I am. If I have somehow presented myself as otherwise, I apologize. I am nowhere near as qualified to talk about mathematics on a higher degree than basic calculus.
@11qazxc
.
Unfortunately, my paneling skills aren't as good enough, or neither is brute forcing minute increments of rotations and positions well worth my time. By performing calculations, I can ensure that the shape is accurate and no errors are incurred in the process. Besides I can practice some unique geometry I don't really get to touch otherwise, and I also get a kick out of having everything planned out and watching it all click into place. The rod rotation method was attempted actually, but I was quite dissatisfied with the eventual result and resorted to calculation.
Hope that clarifies the reasoning behind my methodology. My aim was to create a perfect (almost) shape. Something as good as a render.
@GuyFolk
.
Yeah! I first saw it on the Doom game that came up some months ago. It's useful but seems kinda gimmicky for moving components.
Still, this seems very well done.
+1Whoa! Interested in how you would've done the bouncing algorithm. Got a headache and gave up the last time I tried.
+1I object.
+1@Topgun757
.
Oh hey! Good for you bud.
Neat.
@girlsandpanzer
.
Probably because you may need to deal with Euler angles for fully accurate correction. Try PitchAngle/cos(RollAngle), it's the system used on my tank here.
Weird, because in my testing a rotator with
PitchAngle/cos(RollAngle)seems to work. Although again, this also seems to be limited to small angles of deviation.@WAR122
.
What obligation does he have to care about mobile users?
bomb sight goes brrr
Probably mostly how to teach. Trying to teach concepts to a wide variety of people is something I haven't had the opportunity to really get otherwise, and it's also forced me to learn some new skills to supplement that.
kthnxbye
+1For all practical purposes, yes.
+3@ChrisPy
.
Like to use FT Yaw for rotation and trim for elevation. Check how I did my Challenger 2.
@ChrisPy
+2.
Personally disagree, I like to use WASD for movement controls. Throttle really doesn't make sense at all to me.
@AzureCorp
.
Existing
@skullshredder
+2.
Only took around a week from idea to product! Maybe 10 man-hours.
@Giantwhale
.
Yep! Just enter your desired equation in the equation display screen and press graph.
@Dathcha
+1.
Maybe! I'll see what I can do to make a barebones computer.
@FeiWu @K2K
.
Incorrect. If you'd download it you can find out! Actually are airbrakes with code in them.
@Vukasin123king
.
For any inquiries regarding our product please contact support@jundrooinstruments.com.
@asteroidbook345
.
Ti-Nspire.
@Hyperloop
.
Oh wow hello!
@WNP78
.
Yeah, good point. Maybe I could create a color edition and have it graph that separately. Although, it really isn't good enough until i can figure out either how to increase resolution efficiently or fix antialiasing.
@asteroidbook345
.
Perhaps. IDK about how I would implement it though.
@HosmiAurus
.
Unfortunately, not yet. Maybe later.
@NightmareCorporation
+5.
Someone stole it while I wasn't looking in math class.
@PioThePioneer
.
Don't be. Just do it.
@Sadboye12
+1.
Yeahhhhh!!
@ZWLenning
.
Thank you! It really isn't that difficult conceptually. I just happened to think of actually making it.
@ZWLenning
.
It graphs equations.
If you're looking for a bombsight, there is a functional system that will work on all aircraft.
@JaeBeansS
+2.
Rip. Well, I'll see what I can do. Maybe.
@JaeBeansS
+7.
It's been aggressively optimized so should run fine on modern devices.
@AN2Felllla
+1.
Check your brackets. FT tries to auto-complete if possible, sounds like that might be the case. Are you using implicit multiplication as well?
Ok this is actually good
+2How about scalars
@klm747klm747
.
Wait for release to see ;)
@klm747klm747
.
Completely incorrect! Ding dong!
No rotators, no pistons. All fully digital, pixel based display.
@RC1138Boss
+1.
Quite literally a graphing calculator.
@MrShenanigans
.
It's not 100% accurate. I haven't included drag force calculations when this was made.
You also might be using custom bombs, which don't have the same trajectory as simply bombs.
@Blaze77gunYT
.
Go ahead.
Amazing job. Simply perfect shape.
Excellent. Have I created a copypasta?
@Vincent_
+1.
Oh no! What am I gonna do now???
Kino's Journey!
+1Illegal, DeezDucks uploading
@spefyjerbf
+4.
Indeed entertaining. I think I've provided a lot of people with decent popcorn.
@AN2Felllla
+1.
Please, I challenge you, point out where I have been needlessly verbose. If you can simplify my words without changing the meaning or making it too long, I'll gladly accept the proposition that I'm doing this verbose thing intentionally.
.
I forgot to mention, please drop the openly mocking attitude. It helps no-one.
@AN2Felllla
+3.
Ah, also spefy and Bacon are far better mathematicians than I am. If I have somehow presented myself as otherwise, I apologize. I am nowhere near as qualified to talk about mathematics on a higher degree than basic calculus.
@11qazxc
+6.
Unfortunately, my paneling skills aren't as good enough, or neither is brute forcing minute increments of rotations and positions well worth my time. By performing calculations, I can ensure that the shape is accurate and no errors are incurred in the process. Besides I can practice some unique geometry I don't really get to touch otherwise, and I also get a kick out of having everything planned out and watching it all click into place. The rod rotation method was attempted actually, but I was quite dissatisfied with the eventual result and resorted to calculation.
Hope that clarifies the reasoning behind my methodology. My aim was to create a perfect (almost) shape. Something as good as a render.