I really like the engine placement on this and I'm always a fan of twin tail aircraft!
However, I think the tail would benefit with the use of a modded wing in order to prevent it bouncing around and a cockpit similar to your Fw-668-C-1 Bomber would look pretty damn good on this.
@TheOwlAce Going to be honest, I haven't seen your aircraft before. However, I like what I see, so I'll follow you (#stalkeralert) and upvote / give points for improvement where I see fit. Probably won't be the best at it, but it's the thought that counts!!
Recognition isn't gained in the space of a month. It's gained through persistence and integration with the community. Sure there are the odd ones who are lucky enough to be the exception to the rule.
I've been on this site for a year now and I was in more or less the same situation as you a few months ago. I've found that following people and consistently upvoting what you think are good aircraft (often from unrecognised users) will get you places.
Up until recently, I had barely followed anyone and pretty much never upvoted other people's aircraft. That was about 2 months ago, back when I had under 1000 points. But, then I started to make friends by upvoting people's aircraft and commenting on them. It doesn't necessarily have to be compliments, especially for younger users, who are picking things up, give them points to improve, etc... Hell, even help them out with creations. That's what I do. I'm even considering the possibility of collaborating with others to make an aircraft.
@CarlosDanger13 Doubt it. Could be a bug in the site or something deliberate by the Devs. Either way, I kind of like the "concept", or rather what I think the reasoning for it is... if there even is one.
This could be a good thing for the community. It seems that it displays "Anonymous" when showing the link to the page with the post, but in the post it displays the actual user name. This could be useful for those who make good planes, but don't get the recognition due to the fact they aren't a recognised member, like for example you, @TehDuck. So rather than allow people to pick and choose based on their community status, people are clicking on stuff because the actual content looks good.
@JacobHardy64 Thank you! I think it's publicly listed now, but I'm not too bothered about getting upvotes for it. I look forward to perhaps racing you again in future tournaments!
@Skua No problem. And that's what they all say, I think we both know you would have had a good chance of coming first! Very consistent times as well might I add, compared to mine which were all over the place XD
@BRuthless I made a design that completed the course in 1:22, but it was so temperamental due to the AI performance that it simply wasn't worth risking the upload. May upload all my variants at a later date though.
I'm a Squirrel with the secret life of a super hero.
In all seriousness though, I live in the UK and I'm currently studying Aerospace Technology with Management at university. Been on the site for over a year (ah yes those were the days) but have somehow kept a low profile and have only started to gain recognition in recent times (woohoo!).
I specialise in weird concept aircraft and occasionally create the odd replica... my personal favourite being the PAK FA. I currently have over 90 aircraft under my belt (some are privately listed).
I'm not a consistent builder, but rather one that builds from ideas. It can be anything from random to inspired. If it's inspired, I'll give credit for inspiration... Because I try to be a nice person! Once I've built the 'prototype' I'll test its flight characteristics and adjust where necessary. A running trend is that aircraft tend to pitch up slightly at full throttle at about 5 -10,000 ft. Once I'm happy (depending on the aircraft) I'll give it my personal colour scheme... Because white and blue are the finest colours that go together!
However, recently, I've found some aircraft perform poorly on PC because I designed them for mobile... Maybe that's where I went wrong!
Glad I'm not the only one with this problem. On occasion, my aircraft are graced by miracles and are given the power of God. And my aircraft flies the course in 1 minute and 4 seconds, which is pretty damn quick. But it's so inconsistent that I don't want to enter it because of how many times it crashes!
I think this is one of those hidden successor gems. The aircraft design, the description. You sir have not only nailed it, but got yourself a follower XD
It is true though. Less blades means more efficiency while more blades increases thrust. Hence why a single blade is the most efficient option. I can't remember the exact reason, but I think it was to do with the friction/drag forces of the prop blades (more blades mean more drag).
It was an experimental aircraft and it did fly. It completed 7 test flights and then crashed. More were ordered but then were cancelled in the mid 1930's.
@jamer57108 something I remembered on the course I'm on. A single prop blade is the most efficient set up for a prop engine, but it isn't implemented due to vibration issues (for obvious reasons). But we, at Squirrel Industries have ""solved"" the vibration issues and implemented it to create the world's best aircraft.
@Makcoink try implementing more guns onto it and decrease the size of the control surfaces. Also activators 1-4 should give it the edge against your F/A-18. Those should solve the problem.
@LeoBrasi I'm not exactly sure how many aircraft I have in total, but I have 81(including unlisted) uploaded thus far and probably about another ten in the works of being uploaded...
I really like the engine placement on this and I'm always a fan of twin tail aircraft!
However, I think the tail would benefit with the use of a modded wing in order to prevent it bouncing around and a cockpit similar to your Fw-668-C-1 Bomber would look pretty damn good on this.
@RedHawk Thanks for the upvote!
@TheOwlAce No problem!
This plane... I love it!
@TheOwlAce Going to be honest, I haven't seen your aircraft before. However, I like what I see, so I'll follow you (#stalkeralert) and upvote / give points for improvement where I see fit. Probably won't be the best at it, but it's the thought that counts!!
Quitting because your not recognised?
Recognition isn't gained in the space of a month. It's gained through persistence and integration with the community. Sure there are the odd ones who are lucky enough to be the exception to the rule.
I've been on this site for a year now and I was in more or less the same situation as you a few months ago. I've found that following people and consistently upvoting what you think are good aircraft (often from unrecognised users) will get you places.
Up until recently, I had barely followed anyone and pretty much never upvoted other people's aircraft. That was about 2 months ago, back when I had under 1000 points. But, then I started to make friends by upvoting people's aircraft and commenting on them. It doesn't necessarily have to be compliments, especially for younger users, who are picking things up, give them points to improve, etc... Hell, even help them out with creations. That's what I do. I'm even considering the possibility of collaborating with others to make an aircraft.
As they say, you get what you give!
@CarlosDanger13 Doubt it. Could be a bug in the site or something deliberate by the Devs. Either way, I kind of like the "concept", or rather what I think the reasoning for it is... if there even is one.
Actually... Just had a thought.
This could be a good thing for the community. It seems that it displays "Anonymous" when showing the link to the page with the post, but in the post it displays the actual user name. This could be useful for those who make good planes, but don't get the recognition due to the fact they aren't a recognised member, like for example you, @TehDuck. So rather than allow people to pick and choose based on their community status, people are clicking on stuff because the actual content looks good.
Just a thought though.
yep
@@Pauciloquent Thank you!
@JacobHardy64 Thank you! I think it's publicly listed now, but I'm not too bothered about getting upvotes for it. I look forward to perhaps racing you again in future tournaments!
@Skua No problem. And that's what they all say, I think we both know you would have had a good chance of coming first! Very consistent times as well might I add, compared to mine which were all over the place XD
An awesome aircraft. I'm sure this would have won if it was new props only!
@BRuthless I made a design that completed the course in 1:22, but it was so temperamental due to the AI performance that it simply wasn't worth risking the upload. May upload all my variants at a later date though.
@Thehtmguy Thank you!!! I'll have to take a look at yours when I'm next on SP. :)
@Nickasaurus That's nothing compared to the Jedi squirrels:
About me:
I'm a Squirrel with the secret life of a super hero.
In all seriousness though, I live in the UK and I'm currently studying Aerospace Technology with Management at university. Been on the site for over a year (ah yes those were the days) but have somehow kept a low profile and have only started to gain recognition in recent times (woohoo!).
I specialise in weird concept aircraft and occasionally create the odd replica... my personal favourite being the PAK FA. I currently have over 90 aircraft under my belt (some are privately listed).
I'm not a consistent builder, but rather one that builds from ideas. It can be anything from random to inspired. If it's inspired, I'll give credit for inspiration... Because I try to be a nice person! Once I've built the 'prototype' I'll test its flight characteristics and adjust where necessary. A running trend is that aircraft tend to pitch up slightly at full throttle at about 5 -10,000 ft. Once I'm happy (depending on the aircraft) I'll give it my personal colour scheme... Because white and blue are the finest colours that go together!
However, recently, I've found some aircraft perform poorly on PC because I designed them for mobile... Maybe that's where I went wrong!
@SteadfastContracting No not at all. Quite the opposite! XD
Got to love the bridge destroying guns!
Also, nice design
...but that cockpit view. Weapons, weapons everywhere XD
Thanks for the upvote! @SteadfastContracting
@AndrewGarrison Would it be possible to have two winners? i.e. one for those using the old props and one for those using the new engines?
Just it seems rather unfair on those who assumed and only used the new ones, that and I don't want to spend time redoing an aircraft!
@Akshay25 Glad you enjoyed it!
@Jetliner101 thank you! Thinking of doing an updated version, but I'm still on the wall about it. Also, thank you for the upvote!
@Jetliner101 XML mod. Export the part as an accessory, find the part in some sort of file explorer and Edit the relevant value.
@CarlosDanger13 @JetstreamAeroEngineering @MrSilverWolf
Glad I'm not the only one with this problem. On occasion, my aircraft are graced by miracles and are given the power of God. And my aircraft flies the course in 1 minute and 4 seconds, which is pretty damn quick. But it's so inconsistent that I don't want to enter it because of how many times it crashes!
@AMDpwnedU No problem!
I think this is one of those hidden successor gems. The aircraft design, the description. You sir have not only nailed it, but got yourself a follower XD
@jamer57108 The dissatisfaction in that reply XD
It is true though. Less blades means more efficiency while more blades increases thrust. Hence why a single blade is the most efficient option. I can't remember the exact reason, but I think it was to do with the friction/drag forces of the prop blades (more blades mean more drag).
It was an experimental aircraft and it did fly. It completed 7 test flights and then crashed. More were ordered but then were cancelled in the mid 1930's.
Give this article a read
Great build though.
@SteadfastContracting ah yes, the world's best plane XD
Somehow that's now one of my most popular aircraft. Should make sarcastic planes more often. :D
Also, thanks for the upvote on that too!
@SteadfastContracting no problem!!
@SteadfastContracting no problem!
@jamer57108 something I remembered on the course I'm on. A single prop blade is the most efficient set up for a prop engine, but it isn't implemented due to vibration issues (for obvious reasons). But we, at Squirrel Industries have ""solved"" the vibration issues and implemented it to create the world's best aircraft.
Love the concept and the handling of this!
@waffaw glad you got a laugh out of it!
@jamer57108 yep. It is well and truly the world's best aircraft XD
@Makcoink try implementing more guns onto it and decrease the size of the control surfaces. Also activators 1-4 should give it the edge against your F/A-18. Those should solve the problem.
@Seeras Thank you and thanks for the upvote!!
@salvador3031 cool
@bjac0 Thanks for the upvote!
@salvador3031 Thank you for the upvote. Hope you gave the description a read too XD
@Layne Thank you! and thanks for the upvote!!
@XVIindustries just don't make the wingspan longer than 203 meters XD
Perhaps I will have the record for the widest weaponised aircraft?
@FlyingForm no problem! :)
Very unique, I like it.
I foresee a challenge
@SteadfastContracting My PC lags if the graphics setting are not on low and I fire the gun. It's a comprimise. Total devastation vs lag.
Also, thank you for the upvote!!
Nice ship, it handles really well!
@Sirstupid I know none what so ever. I do CAD work and 3D modelling, but that's as close as I get to any kind of game development.
@LeoBrasi I'm not exactly sure how many aircraft I have in total, but I have 81(including unlisted) uploaded thus far and probably about another ten in the works of being uploaded...
I just need to find them XD