And to the people saying skill issue, can you not think of one intelligent thing to say?
not at that moment, cause I'm gonna be brutally honest, it's a fact.
but ok, here, what are you having problems with? connections not connecting? probably because it isn't a valid connection to begin with.
connection points have to be very specifically put onto another connection point for it to actually connect both parts, so maybe the issue you're having is you're not aligning both side of the connection point correctly, preventing it from connecting to one another.
alot of parts are like this, but some aren't, like fuselage parts. Though it's displayed that they only have 7-8 connection points, they have a lot of connection points that isn't visible, making it virtually connectable on almost every side. I say almost because there are very specific sides that it won't connect to. Not that I know where. But most often, if it's visually touching, it can most likely connect.
for other parts, you're only going to really have 1-2 connection points in average, so you can't be as free as using fuselages. This is because the devs ever rarely update a part, and also it's much simpler and easier to understand to have a single connection point than double, or triple the amount.
my honest tip? treat simpleplanes' building system like minecraft's, but slightly more complicated. Don't be afraid to mod your parts, don't be afraid to nudge 'em.
that's about it, Ig.
@Pakkoyan
apparently he's accusing of mods "hacking" his builds too
I'm gonna be honest with ya, does that make sense to your ears? cause it certainly didn't for me.
one thing missing imo is arresting wire and catapult stock parts
is it wrong to be able to land and takeoff (catobar ops) on your own carrier without funky magnet magic?
you're not wrong
sp drag is extremely overestimated, I found this out myself when I was switching to a different engine power method.
I think this is because when you make a pure non xml edited aircraft, they tend to be very light, and their engines tend to be very overpowered, so naturally they have a huge TWR, and so the drag is supposed to be huge to compensate for the overexaggerated TWR.
Idk, my theory might be wrong
as have been discussed multiple times before, mod support from v1.9 onward will only be for PC, and is discontinued with mobile
though some mods are available, they are extremely difficult to find across the site, since mod support for android is generally discontinued
as for the reason, I don't exactly understand why, but it has something to do about google being incompatible with sp android's game engine.
as for iOS, your luck was out the moment you start playing on apple devices, because apple policies made it extremely difficult to make mods compatible, I believe.
I found one source, saying that the RD-133 has a power of:
5040kgf dry (11,100lbf);
8300kgf afterburner (18,290lbf)
Idk if this is true or not, but it is close enough to the normal RD-33 engine power output so maybe it is
@TheNewSPplayer
no, they function like that so the aircraft stabilizes along with angle of attack
the canards try to be level with the angle of attack, so itself is almost always at 0° aoa
you dropped out of midschool since 14? holy shit that must've been hard for ya
can't say the same cause I'm born in a pretty capable family for our neighborhood
anyway, here's a cool motivator or smth:
Keep movin' forward, and regain everything you've lost. Because you deserve it more than anybody. Good luck, soldier!
sorry if I sound ingenuine, it runs in my blood xd
@TheCommentaryGuy
I'm not asking in general, I'm asking for whether someone has made a Part Efficient Aircraft F-14.
I would be stupid to think that there never was an F-14 on the site
to keep it short:
make it comfortable to play in vr.
controls shouldn't be too far from the camera, and the cockpit should be relative to the aircraft's size.
Idk if they're still handing out the curated status, but, that's the gist of it.
I wouldn't recommend it tbh
everyone makes mistakes, and not alot of people get as much upvotes as the higher skills
which is why you build on experience, not on popularity
try to learn from mistakes, take critiscism as a building material, not a boulder.
not at that moment, cause I'm gonna be brutally honest, it's a fact.
+2but ok, here, what are you having problems with? connections not connecting? probably because it isn't a valid connection to begin with.
connection points have to be very specifically put onto another connection point for it to actually connect both parts, so maybe the issue you're having is you're not aligning both side of the connection point correctly, preventing it from connecting to one another.
alot of parts are like this, but some aren't, like fuselage parts. Though it's displayed that they only have 7-8 connection points, they have a lot of connection points that isn't visible, making it virtually connectable on almost every side. I say almost because there are very specific sides that it won't connect to. Not that I know where. But most often, if it's visually touching, it can most likely connect.
for other parts, you're only going to really have 1-2 connection points in average, so you can't be as free as using fuselages. This is because the devs ever rarely update a part, and also it's much simpler and easier to understand to have a single connection point than double, or triple the amount.
my honest tip? treat simpleplanes' building system like minecraft's, but slightly more complicated. Don't be afraid to mod your parts, don't be afraid to nudge 'em.
that's about it, Ig.
@Pakkoyan
+2apparently he's accusing of mods "hacking" his builds too
I'm gonna be honest with ya, does that make sense to your ears? cause it certainly didn't for me.
general bynamics.
unironically great design
+1Idk why lmfao
the words "cool maneuverability" is a bit concerning when you consider the fact that it's still a 104 xd
+1never was that person
+4lmfao
respectfully, skill issue
+7one thing missing imo is arresting wire and catapult stock parts
+1is it wrong to be able to land and takeoff (catobar ops) on your own carrier without funky magnet magic?
yooo isn't this @VeroViper's?
bro at the very least give him credits
yoo holy shit I just remembered this
+1@NavalGunnery
you can get around it, but I'm just more concerned about whether I should really post how or not.
@Graingy
believe it or not, it's still.underpowered compared to the F119, which is the F-22's engines.
@Nerfaddict
I haven't extensively tested it, since I only really tested my previous device limit, around 800 parts
suffice to say, it runs very well.
@Rb2h
+1don't need to
just move the files on.
you're not wrong
sp drag is extremely overestimated, I found this out myself when I was switching to a different engine power method.
I think this is because when you make a pure non xml edited aircraft, they tend to be very light, and their engines tend to be very overpowered, so naturally they have a huge TWR, and so the drag is supposed to be huge to compensate for the overexaggerated TWR.
Idk, my theory might be wrong
short answer, yes.
as have been discussed multiple times before, mod support from v1.9 onward will only be for PC, and is discontinued with mobile
+2though some mods are available, they are extremely difficult to find across the site, since mod support for android is generally discontinued
as for the reason, I don't exactly understand why, but it has something to do about google being incompatible with sp android's game engine.
as for iOS, your luck was out the moment you start playing on apple devices, because apple policies made it extremely difficult to make mods compatible, I believe.
zoltraak.
+1tis' aight. better to save on your health than to risk it
@LunarEclipseSP
+1I believe so when I first made it.
this is great
+1my only suggestion is move the main wing a bit backward, but other than that, this is ballin
I found one source, saying that the RD-133 has a power of:
+15040kgf dry (11,100lbf);
8300kgf afterburner (18,290lbf)
Idk if this is true or not, but it is close enough to the normal RD-33 engine power output so maybe it is
not bad.
+1people will always find anime characters to be put onto things that they're not supposed to be in and I'm all in for it
+7@SuperSuperTheSylph
+1damn right you are.
@TheNewSPplayer
no, they function like that so the aircraft stabilizes along with angle of attack
the canards try to be level with the angle of attack, so itself is almost always at 0° aoa
@VeroViper
+2<< Got a Yellow! >>
this makes me want to do a j20
+1you dropped out of midschool since 14? holy shit that must've been hard for ya
can't say the same cause I'm born in a pretty capable family for our neighborhood
anyway, here's a cool motivator or smth:
Keep movin' forward, and regain everything you've lost. Because you deserve it more than anybody. Good luck, soldier!
sorry if I sound ingenuine, it runs in my blood xd
@TheCommentaryGuy
sorry I'm not into any jokes today
@OrangeConnor2
maybe read the title more carefully again?
@TheCommentaryGuy
I'm not asking in general, I'm asking for whether someone has made a Part Efficient Aircraft F-14.
I would be stupid to think that there never was an F-14 on the site
poster child of resing
@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26
a heads up, I'm taking the D
@TheUltimatePlaneLover
+1oh aight
add one to the list.
to keep it short:
make it comfortable to play in vr.
controls shouldn't be too far from the camera, and the cockpit should be relative to the aircraft's size.
Idk if they're still handing out the curated status, but, that's the gist of it.
@Aghsan22
very funny
no.
+3@SuperSuperTheSylph
+2@TheUltimatePlaneLover
certified supra resing
+1@TsukasaYuzaki
sure, as long as you credit me.
I wouldn't recommend it tbh
everyone makes mistakes, and not alot of people get as much upvotes as the higher skills
which is why you build on experience, not on popularity
try to learn from mistakes, take critiscism as a building material, not a boulder.
@MTDP
sure
don't tag me, but do please credit me, leaving auto-credit works.
the similarities are too uncanny
+1dudeduwdudedudedudedudeduduw
+1DREU
wuuuuuuuuuUUUUEEEEEEEEEEW-
@RealMicroZackSP
no.
@L3FT2R1GHT
+2@rorrE
@Rjenteissussy
+3@Zhixunlin23
@TheUltimatePlaneLover
@DatFiat126Fan19
+3@SuperSuperTheSylph
@Lem113
@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26
self explanatory intakes that form an S shaped duct to the engine
comment below explains it.
you can use something called PAT, which essentially is just stacking 2 cut fuselages atop of one another.