Added. Very nice aesthetics and function. The design is a little off though.
@SigmaTwelve That's the Marge livery. It's a pretty well-known P-38 color scheme.
@Booster456 Worth mentioning: Lockheed Martin was formed as a merger in 1995, long after the P-38 was built. Before that is was just Lockheed. Calling it "Lockheed Martin P-38 Lightning" is a little inaccurate. Also, I'd like to know how you judge the weapons category. My armament is 100% accurate, right down to the characteristics of the guns and the operation of the HVARs.
@Booster456 Oh, I totally forgot about this. I finished that thing I was working on, but I didn't make it a successor. Anyway, you can find it HERE. It's a replica P-38. The engines are a little fine-tuned to give it a more realistic top speed, so don't know if it breaks that rule or not.
In the XML file, the second line looks like this: Aircraft name="Backwood" url="W44G3I" theme="Custom" size="14.92,5.386051,9.379889" boundsMin="-7.460002,1.357301,-4.688878" xmlVersion="4"
The phrase "url="W44G3I"" only populates when that specific aircraft is downloaded from its page on the site and converted into the game.
The little snippet of code "W44G3I" corresponds to the plane's page on the site. In this case, my Backwood, located at https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/W44G3I/. Any plane uploaded with W44G3I as its url code (basically, anything downloaded and edited from the same cockpit) will be registered as W44G3I's successor when it is uploaded.
Additionally, the url line can be edited into any url manually to register an upload as a successor to literally any plane on the site. It can also be deleted, to sneak around the successor system, but that's very impolite.
Wings are supposed to do that. But I think you can fix it by using structural wings IIRC. Or hook something to the wingtip, which is then also hooked to the main fuselage by something.
It is possible.
Someone did it already themselves. VIDEO
The major hurdles for an official release would be framerate, synchronicity, and dedicated server maintenance.
You could probably keep the lag down by making the game generate special models for MP that are only a single piece. That way the game has to only draw one object per player. Anyone who has tried spawning in several planes with high part-counts at once knows how much that would help.
As for synchronicity, all you need is a good netcode. The devs would probably need to outsource to find the help they need for that if they don't have the know-how for it.
Finally, the most important factor in making a game multiplayer is keeping servers running. Dedicated game servers can be pretty expensive, and letting the community establish and maintain servers can be unreliable.
An official MP release is probably far off.
@Zackattack0623 The following changes improve the flight characteristics.
-Remove fuel from the wings, and add the same amount to the fuselage that runs from the trailing edges to the tailcone.
-Add 300 lbs dead weight to aftmost fuselage piece.
-Invert, increase size 1 notch, and enable trim on elevators
-Increase propeller size
@Supercraft888 There's only a small handful of airworthy survivors that do exhibitions at airshows. Tracking them down to go see them close to where you might live is difficult. There's lots of places with them on static display though. I've seen the one dynamically posed on a pedestal at Lackland AFB. That one is mostly only a shell though. It's missing a lot of internal parts from what I understand.
@Sarpanitu I know exactly what you mean. That sort of thing is what turns people into aviation enthusiasts. I know my neck gets sore from looking at the sky all the time!
@Treadmill103 Thanks. It really was.
I came close to hating it trying to get the nose landing gear to not mess up though.
If you look really close at it, you can see I made a compromise or two.
@Sarpanitu Which one? There are only 9 total airworthy survivors, sadly. It's very rare for a plane that was manufactured in the thousands, and saw relatively few combat losses. My favorite is Skidoo, even though it's a J, not an L.
Also, thanks!
@Typhlosion130 The rear landing gear is precisely as long as it should be. 70 inches static from the ground to the fuselage reference line, main strut tilted forward exactly 9 degrees. The center of mass is also close to where it should be. The Lightning was a very precisely-engineered plane. The weight of one person sitting on the tail is enough to lift the nosewheel.
Also, yes. The bounce is the result of the unfortunate wheel physics compared to the well-behaved landing gear parts. It's the price I pay for building with detail.
@JoddyFubuki788 @cobalT @Liquidfox
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I worked hard on improving it.
Give it another month before I decide even this one isn't good enough :P
@LuKorp I tested it. And yes. You pretty much have to fly banked at all times to keep your altitude and heading steady. That take off is a little tricky, and landing can be messy though.
I like planes that accomplish a lot without too many parts.
Anyone can make a replica look nice with 1000 parts.
But making it look nice in under 200, THAT takes skill.
I also like things that are just generally fun to fly.
Excellent improvement. I have no complaints outside of very small details. Nothing needs to be changed.
Also, lol at trusting google. When I build replicas, I make sure to find documents made by the designers themselves. With old warplanes, it's pretty easy to find T.O.'s and maintenance handbooks. If they have detailed technical drawings, you can get the accuracy of the size and shape of your replica to within fractions of an inch.
@ACMECo1940 Link it.
Yes. This funny-looking box of a plane. The trick is high detach force on the pylons to kick the missile out of the bay before it moves forward.
@Joseph2579 Sweet. Then consider that plane my submission.
@jimaerospace That's a really old one. I'll review it for you, but it probably won't get very good marks in the looks department.
Can we enter old designs?
Because I made this replica of Tails' biplane from Sonic 2.
Added. Very nice aesthetics and function. The design is a little off though.
@SigmaTwelve That's the Marge livery. It's a pretty well-known P-38 color scheme.
@steynschipper Thanks.
Yes! 50 upvotes. Thank you to everyone in that long list to the right. Your support is greatly appreciated!
@MediciAviation243 Don't see why not. Should make for a fun build.
@MediciAviation243 lol
Great improvement.
@Insertname You beat me this time. Thanks.
@Booster456 Worth mentioning: Lockheed Martin was formed as a merger in 1995, long after the P-38 was built. Before that is was just Lockheed. Calling it "Lockheed Martin P-38 Lightning" is a little inaccurate. Also, I'd like to know how you judge the weapons category. My armament is 100% accurate, right down to the characteristics of the guns and the operation of the HVARs.
@Insertname I was pretty quick on this one. Already added it.
@Booster456 Oh, I totally forgot about this. I finished that thing I was working on, but I didn't make it a successor. Anyway, you can find it HERE. It's a replica P-38. The engines are a little fine-tuned to give it a more realistic top speed, so don't know if it breaks that rule or not.
In the XML file, the second line looks like this:
Aircraft name="Backwood" url="W44G3I" theme="Custom" size="14.92,5.386051,9.379889" boundsMin="-7.460002,1.357301,-4.688878" xmlVersion="4"The phrase "url="W44G3I"" only populates when that specific aircraft is downloaded from its page on the site and converted into the game.
The little snippet of code "W44G3I" corresponds to the plane's page on the site. In this case, my Backwood, located at https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/W44G3I/. Any plane uploaded with W44G3I as its url code (basically, anything downloaded and edited from the same cockpit) will be registered as W44G3I's successor when it is uploaded.
Additionally, the url line can be edited into any url manually to register an upload as a successor to literally any plane on the site. It can also be deleted, to sneak around the successor system, but that's very impolite.
Hope that was informative enough.
Wings are supposed to do that. But I think you can fix it by using structural wings IIRC. Or hook something to the wingtip, which is then also hooked to the main fuselage by something.
@Bryan7885 Thank you.
@ACMECo1940 That's a popular one. I bet there's lots.
It is possible.
Someone did it already themselves. VIDEO
The major hurdles for an official release would be framerate, synchronicity, and dedicated server maintenance.
You could probably keep the lag down by making the game generate special models for MP that are only a single piece. That way the game has to only draw one object per player. Anyone who has tried spawning in several planes with high part-counts at once knows how much that would help.
As for synchronicity, all you need is a good netcode. The devs would probably need to outsource to find the help they need for that if they don't have the know-how for it.
Finally, the most important factor in making a game multiplayer is keeping servers running. Dedicated game servers can be pretty expensive, and letting the community establish and maintain servers can be unreliable.
An official MP release is probably far off.
To anyone concerned, I made a slightly more detailed updated version here. It's unlisted.
@goboygo1 Thanks!
Theoretically possible with a totally lossless engine.
No energy lost to heat or friction. Just pure rotational torque.
LOL
But yeah, car engines are a bit strong in this game.
@corsair013 Thanks!
@Treadmill103 Thanks.
@Treadmill103 @Bryan7885 Thanks.
@Bryan7885 Thanks.
Welcome to the community.
@Zackattack0623 The following changes improve the flight characteristics.
-Remove fuel from the wings, and add the same amount to the fuselage that runs from the trailing edges to the tailcone.
-Add 300 lbs dead weight to aftmost fuselage piece.
-Invert, increase size 1 notch, and enable trim on elevators
-Increase propeller size
@Tully2001 Thanks.
@CALVIN232 Go ahead. Consider any parts off my planes free to use.
Added.
Kinda late, don't know how I forgot this one.
@Tully2001 Thanks!
@jamesPLANESii Congrats on being the upvote that made me reach 10k.
Thank you so much!
@AwesomeDesign717 Those are called slats. And yeah, I've seen them on a few planes.
@SHCow @RedBeard66 @corsair013 Thanks!
@Supercraft888 There's only a small handful of airworthy survivors that do exhibitions at airshows. Tracking them down to go see them close to where you might live is difficult. There's lots of places with them on static display though. I've seen the one dynamically posed on a pedestal at Lackland AFB. That one is mostly only a shell though. It's missing a lot of internal parts from what I understand.
@ChaMikey Of course! The more Lightnings, the better.
@Sarpanitu I know exactly what you mean. That sort of thing is what turns people into aviation enthusiasts. I know my neck gets sore from looking at the sky all the time!
@Treadmill103 Thanks. It really was.
I came close to hating it trying to get the nose landing gear to not mess up though.
If you look really close at it, you can see I made a compromise or two.
@Supercraft888 It is.
I've checked.
@Supercraft888
Thanks a lot!
@Sarpanitu Ooh, I'm jealous. Tangerine is another one of my faves. That one is an L.
@Sarpanitu Which one? There are only 9 total airworthy survivors, sadly. It's very rare for a plane that was manufactured in the thousands, and saw relatively few combat losses. My favorite is Skidoo, even though it's a J, not an L.
Also, thanks!
@mikoyanster Thank you.
@Typhlosion130 The rear landing gear is precisely as long as it should be. 70 inches static from the ground to the fuselage reference line, main strut tilted forward exactly 9 degrees. The center of mass is also close to where it should be. The Lightning was a very precisely-engineered plane. The weight of one person sitting on the tail is enough to lift the nosewheel.
Also, yes. The bounce is the result of the unfortunate wheel physics compared to the well-behaved landing gear parts. It's the price I pay for building with detail.
@Ihatelava123isacommunist Thanks! Glad you like it!
@JoddyFubuki788 @cobalT @Liquidfox
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I worked hard on improving it.
Give it another month before I decide even this one isn't good enough :P
@CaesiciusPlanes Thanks for the spotlight.
@LuKorp I tested it. And yes. You pretty much have to fly banked at all times to keep your altitude and heading steady. That take off is a little tricky, and landing can be messy though.
I like planes that accomplish a lot without too many parts.
Anyone can make a replica look nice with 1000 parts.
But making it look nice in under 200, THAT takes skill.
I also like things that are just generally fun to fly.
Excellent improvement. I have no complaints outside of very small details. Nothing needs to be changed.
Also, lol at trusting google. When I build replicas, I make sure to find documents made by the designers themselves. With old warplanes, it's pretty easy to find T.O.'s and maintenance handbooks. If they have detailed technical drawings, you can get the accuracy of the size and shape of your replica to within fractions of an inch.
lol