@BeastHunter Thanks, really appriciate it! I wish it got some more upvotes but it's been a bit slow here on Simpleplanes for me. Having a rough time gaining likes. Oh well, who cares, if only a handful of people really enjoy it, I'm happy :)
@T8flightcrafts Yes it's quite cool in VR! Not that much you can do with it in in SimplePlanes but still very cool to fly. Thanks for the compliment, glad you like it!
Hey, this mod is awesome, thanks for making it! I'm just wondering, could you make a HUD with just the transparent glass and without the frame? For custom HUDs basically?
@Walvis Gok dat je ook een Nederlander bent met die naam? :P
So, I copied the codes for the gear animations from forums and stuff but as I'll try to explain it as far as I understand it.
.
I use two of different "codes", one for delaying the retracting of the gear covers and one for delaying the extension of the main gear.
.
For the gear covers retraction: -clamp01(ceil(smooth(clamp01(GearDown), 0.15)))+1
And for the main gear retraction: clamp01(smooth(LandingGear, 0.5) * 2)
.
I can try and explain the meaning of the words and stuff but it's better explained here: https://www.simpleplanes.com/Forums/View/1042680/Funky-Trees
.
The only number I change in the codes are the 0.15 and 0.5. So in essence:
-clamp01(ceil(smooth(clamp01(GearDown), x.xx)))+1
clamp01(smooth(LandingGear, x.xx) * 2)
Where x.xx can be anything equal to or less than 1.
The way they seem to work is that they are a substract of 1. So the smaller the number, the longer the timer.
.
That's all I understand about it to be honest. I basically just play around with the numbers until I get the result I want.
.
Hope that somewhat clears things up, probably doesn't, lol... Wish I could be more helpful :)
@SupremeDorian No, I don't see the problem with my question. You can have multiple shooters about different subjects. DOOM is fictional and you kill demons, Left 4 Dead you kill zombies, other games again are in WW2, others in modern times, etc etc. You can have tons of FPS shooters, each about their own unique subjects.
Space flight is just one subject. It doesn't matter how you dress it up, it's just one subject. Unless you make it for example "futuristic and fictional". Now you have a unique concept. But this is not what Jundroo is doing. They are making something that looks different but is roughly the same. Which, I mean, is fine by me, it's not my company. But why they do this, instead of focussing on SimplePlanes, which IS their unique software, truly boggles my mind.
Microsoft Flight Simulator is not even remotely a comperrison. The world of Flight Simulation was already a decade behind in tech and nobody knew how to make a modern one properly. Thus, Microsoft did it themselves again and nailed it together with Asobo and Simul.
Also, yeah, SR2 might have some things that KSP doesn't have. But what stops Squad from adding this later? Or perhaps as soon as they see this feature in SR2? Now SR2 isn't unique once again and KSP's huge player base stays where they are amd don't bother switching to learn a new game with different controls.
So, now SR2 is depending on new players. People who haven't played a space sandbox game and want to try it. But guess what are the two first things that pop up when I Google "Space Game PC"? KSP and KSP 2. SR2 is not even in the list, even though it has been available for what, a year now?
Again, Jundroo is not my company. But if it was, I sure as hell would focus on something else. And that is speaking from years of AAA studio experience, including Asobo on the last flight sim.
@SupremeDorian Why SimpleRockets in the first place when there's already KSP and KSP2 coming up? Like, I play KSP a lot. A LOT! And I tried SimpleRockets 2 as well but I really don't see the point of it to be honest. SR2 doesn't bring me anything that I'm missing from KSP.
Why not focus on something that Jundroo is unique in, like SimplePlanes? Make a new one based on a newer game engine with better graphics and better physics?
@Grroro necessary, no. Feasible, not currently, no.But if I gave you the choice to travel from whereever you are to your holiday destination on the other side of the planet, either in 14 hours or 5 hours, what would you pick? (Regardless of the price).
Also, aircraft manufacturers and instances such as NASA all know that shape and material are massive factors in both sonic boom noise and power needed for supersonic flight.
Supersonic flight is likely going to make a return in the near-future. This because the sound of the sonic boom is going to be greatly reduced and because there's going to be less powered required (thus less fuel) to reach supersonic speeds.
See the "Lockheed Martin X-59 QueSST" for reducing the sonic boom or look at "BOOM Supersonic" for passenger supersonic flight without the need of afterburner engines.
@FearTheLoli I wouldn't say it flies horribly. I'd say it flies sassy... To be fair, the B-58 IRL wasn't a nice aircraft to fly at all. Lots of crashes haunt the aircraft. So, I'd say mine flies pretty realistically :P
@AzureCorp Hey! I'd love to join the group, you guys seem to have a real passion for aviation and so do I. I've send you a friend request on Discord, Joeri#9161.
@BeastHunter
+1@Bryan5
+1Thanks for all the upvotes everybody, really appreciate it!
+1@Hedero I don't know why but I really would love to own that thing irl. It's just so cool haha.
+1@CaptainSquadronLeaderX Thanks man, really appreciate it!
+1@WolfHunter9111 Hah, I was actually thinking about calling it that. It was either Andromeda or Centaurus.
+1@BeastHunter Thanks, really appriciate it! I wish it got some more upvotes but it's been a bit slow here on Simpleplanes for me. Having a rough time gaining likes. Oh well, who cares, if only a handful of people really enjoy it, I'm happy :)
+1Very nice build, keep 'm coming!
+1Thanks for the spotlight! @BeastHunter
+1@T8flightcrafts Yes it's quite cool in VR! Not that much you can do with it in in SimplePlanes but still very cool to fly. Thanks for the compliment, glad you like it!
+1@Bryan5
+1@BeastHunter
+1@bilibilimofeifeiyou of course! It's a technological miracle!
+1@Kittofighter2 Thanks a lot, glad you like it!
+1@d0mokun Hah, thanks dude!
+1Hey, this mod is awesome, thanks for making it! I'm just wondering, could you make a HUD with just the transparent glass and without the frame? For custom HUDs basically?
+1Very cool! Love the stairs!
+1Awesome design!
+1@CatAircraftmanufacturer2 Thanks!
+1@TatsuTheDemonLord Thanks!
+1@IceCraft Not in this version, I do have another one though with driveable car. Check out my profile.
+1@IdnManufacturer Thanks! :)
+1@Strikercritsilver Thanks! :)
+1@Walvis Gok dat je ook een Nederlander bent met die naam? :P
So, I copied the codes for the gear animations from forums and stuff but as I'll try to explain it as far as I understand it.
+1.
I use two of different "codes", one for delaying the retracting of the gear covers and one for delaying the extension of the main gear.
.
For the gear covers retraction: -clamp01(ceil(smooth(clamp01(GearDown), 0.15)))+1
And for the main gear retraction: clamp01(smooth(LandingGear, 0.5) * 2)
.
I can try and explain the meaning of the words and stuff but it's better explained here: https://www.simpleplanes.com/Forums/View/1042680/Funky-Trees
.
The only number I change in the codes are the 0.15 and 0.5. So in essence:
-clamp01(ceil(smooth(clamp01(GearDown), x.xx)))+1
clamp01(smooth(LandingGear, x.xx) * 2)
Where x.xx can be anything equal to or less than 1.
The way they seem to work is that they are a substract of 1. So the smaller the number, the longer the timer.
.
That's all I understand about it to be honest. I basically just play around with the numbers until I get the result I want.
.
Hope that somewhat clears things up, probably doesn't, lol... Wish I could be more helpful :)
@Zott No, thank you! I love the 109 and yours looks amazing and flies great! Love it! :D
+1@MTFearless Cheers, appriciate it!
+1@Ergithe And thanks for the spotlight! Appriciate it!
+1@Ergithe Thanks!
+1@mLk17 Cheers!
+1@marxman28 Ah right, I see. Thanks for the explanation! Awesome build :)
+1@SupremeDorian No, I don't see the problem with my question. You can have multiple shooters about different subjects. DOOM is fictional and you kill demons, Left 4 Dead you kill zombies, other games again are in WW2, others in modern times, etc etc. You can have tons of FPS shooters, each about their own unique subjects.
Space flight is just one subject. It doesn't matter how you dress it up, it's just one subject. Unless you make it for example "futuristic and fictional". Now you have a unique concept. But this is not what Jundroo is doing. They are making something that looks different but is roughly the same. Which, I mean, is fine by me, it's not my company. But why they do this, instead of focussing on SimplePlanes, which IS their unique software, truly boggles my mind.
Microsoft Flight Simulator is not even remotely a comperrison. The world of Flight Simulation was already a decade behind in tech and nobody knew how to make a modern one properly. Thus, Microsoft did it themselves again and nailed it together with Asobo and Simul.
Also, yeah, SR2 might have some things that KSP doesn't have. But what stops Squad from adding this later? Or perhaps as soon as they see this feature in SR2? Now SR2 isn't unique once again and KSP's huge player base stays where they are amd don't bother switching to learn a new game with different controls.
So, now SR2 is depending on new players. People who haven't played a space sandbox game and want to try it. But guess what are the two first things that pop up when I Google "Space Game PC"? KSP and KSP 2. SR2 is not even in the list, even though it has been available for what, a year now?
Again, Jundroo is not my company. But if it was, I sure as hell would focus on something else. And that is speaking from years of AAA studio experience, including Asobo on the last flight sim.
+1@SupremeDorian Why SimpleRockets in the first place when there's already KSP and KSP2 coming up? Like, I play KSP a lot. A LOT! And I tried SimpleRockets 2 as well but I really don't see the point of it to be honest. SR2 doesn't bring me anything that I'm missing from KSP.
Why not focus on something that Jundroo is unique in, like SimplePlanes? Make a new one based on a newer game engine with better graphics and better physics?
+1@mLk17 Yeah, thanks to you mate! Cheers :) I uploaded a special thanks! https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/Lku4bA/Thanks-for-3000-points
+1@mLk17 Nah, I'll just keep S U C C I N G
+1@SyntheticL I believe it means speed :) From the football team and Google Translate.
+1banter
+1@Grroro You and me both! Hah, thanks! Have a good one :)
+1@Grroro necessary, no. Feasible, not currently, no.But if I gave you the choice to travel from whereever you are to your holiday destination on the other side of the planet, either in 14 hours or 5 hours, what would you pick? (Regardless of the price).
Also, aircraft manufacturers and instances such as NASA all know that shape and material are massive factors in both sonic boom noise and power needed for supersonic flight.
Supersonic flight is likely going to make a return in the near-future. This because the sound of the sonic boom is going to be greatly reduced and because there's going to be less powered required (thus less fuel) to reach supersonic speeds.
See the "Lockheed Martin X-59 QueSST" for reducing the sonic boom or look at "BOOM Supersonic" for passenger supersonic flight without the need of afterburner engines.
+1@DimitriIqbal91 As a wise man once said:
+1"SPEED AND POWER" - Jeremy Clarkson
@ThomasRoderick Thanks!
+1@AzureCorp Makes things go "boom"!
+1@Kangy Thanks!
+1Can't really zoom in in SimplePlanes but the best views are at 0:54 seconds.
+1Is this that poaching thing National Geographic is always on about?
+1@AzureCorp Yeah, Very strong! Definitely didn't tweak the XML or anything like that..! Haha ha hah.. *Avoids eye contact
+1I was like: What does he means "makes no sense", this thing looks awesome. An airplane like this could have plenty of purposes!
Then I saw the door opening...
Anyway, wicked aircraft! Love it!
+1@AzureCorp And thank you very much for the compliment!
+1@FearTheLoli I wouldn't say it flies horribly. I'd say it flies sassy... To be fair, the B-58 IRL wasn't a nice aircraft to fly at all. Lots of crashes haunt the aircraft. So, I'd say mine flies pretty realistically :P
+1@AzureCorp Hey! I'd love to join the group, you guys seem to have a real passion for aviation and so do I. I've send you a friend request on Discord, Joeri#9161.
+1Flies really nice and looks awesome!
+1