I rather explain in depth a single one instead of all of them, so I'll describe them so you can choose one.
.
Electric propeller:
There are actually two types, one uses angled wings attached to a rotator with a specific input and the other one has wings with modded control surfaces attached to an infinite rotator.
(It's possible to combine them in one, obviously)
Pros:
Easy to make and adjust. Also offer a smooth/realistic/nice performance.
Cons: You need two of them to avoid autoroll, since they use pretty big wings they affect flight performance a lot
Piston and airbrake:
Two types, one is an airbrake with positive input attached to a piston connected to a hinge which makes the engine turn 180° when you spawn the craft.
The other type uses an airbrake with negative input attached to a piston.
Pros:
Pretty easy to make and adjust, can provide a lot of thrust, compared to the electric prop.
Cons:
Since they use a piston to push air back, it isn't always producing thrust, so you will need another one to produce thrust when the first one doesn't.
The negative airbrake can be a bit annoying sometimes.
Adjusting the hinge-piston-airbrake type for a high maximum speed will result in an insane acceleration.
Negative airbrake:
An airbrake with a negative input. This one will only produce thrust when you are already in movement, so you need another engine to start moving.
It's highly recommended to develop an input with funky trees and some algebra to achieve a nice performance, since they normally would produce more and more thrust as the speed increases, eventually crashing the game.
Pros:
Highly customizable, only uses one part.
Cons:
Will crash the game if it touches the water while active.
If you aren't good at maths... It might be pretty difficult to figure out the best code/input for it.
Needs a "starter" engine.
.
.
There's also another engine, but it's a lot more complex and outdated.
.
Now choose one of them...
Since randomusername is inactive I'll try to explain.
.
It's all about pushing air back and there are different ways of doing it:
1. Wings attached to a rotator
2. Piston pushing an activated airbrake (pushing air back)
3. Airbrake with negative input
4. ...
I can explain them in depth, if you want.
@lemoose That's only to sign in with your account for the first time, after you've done that you should be able to activate all the mods and upload normally / do what I said.
To clarify, I suppose:
She took a wrong decision and thought that blocking literally everyone (except me) would be a good way of avoiding drama in the future.
Anyway, it's over and she knows she did things wrong.
And she probably won't be online for some months, depending on how the whole Covid-19 thing goes.
So yeah.
. (Yes, I actually follow all the posts related to her.)
Open the image(s) you want to have as thumbnail(s) with Designer Suite, move it/them far away from the actual build, and take the pre-upload screenshots of them.
@Brendorkus If you get any negative comments, they will probably be about the description.
.
And she is currently inactive until who-knows-when, so don't expect her to say anything.
Having a different input for the rotator, like sum(Input*x), where "Input" can be anything (Pitch, Roll...), and "x" a number that will make the speed higher or slower.
@WIZARD2017 You're welcome.
I think you misunderstood me, I actually mean that you should have removed even more drag to be able to reach high speeds without having such powerful engines, which would also make the acceleration more realistic.
At least you removed the drag from details, which is already good.
.
By the way, landings are pretty fun, but I think that the canards provide a bit too much lift, to be honest.
I can see the effort you put in this plane, it looks amazing and is very detailed.
However, it would have been nice if you had also done other things like adding trim tabs or making the elevons also move with trim and removing all that drag that makes it have an insane acceleration and a very poor glide ratio.
.
Anyways, looks amazing but I kinda wish it had a better flight model.
@TeraCotaYT Fuselage block units, same as one block that is 18 units in length. There isn't a "better way", since this is the most accurate way of doing it.
Make a horizontal stick with fuselage blocks that is as wide as the real aircraft, and scale the blueprint so that it "fits".
.
2 fuselage block units = 1m (3.28084 ft)
@Notaleopard In that specific case, it could be: clamp(Pitch * clamp01(Activate1) + VTOL * clamp01(Activate2), -1, 1)
Note that this also allows it go up, if you don't want that use this: clamp(clamp(Pitch, -1, 0) * clamp01(Activate1) + clamp(VTOL, -1, 0) * clamp01(Activate2), -1, 1)
.
And you can take a look at this for the second question you had.
@Notaleopard
For the first one, do you want the rotator to only activate when both AGs are on, or when any of those AGs is on?
.
I'll answer to the second question soon.
I rather explain in depth a single one instead of all of them, so I'll describe them so you can choose one.
.
Electric propeller:
There are actually two types, one uses angled wings attached to a rotator with a specific input and the other one has wings with modded control surfaces attached to an infinite rotator.
(It's possible to combine them in one, obviously)
Pros:
Easy to make and adjust. Also offer a smooth/realistic/nice performance.
Cons: You need two of them to avoid autoroll, since they use pretty big wings they affect flight performance a lot
Piston and airbrake:
Two types, one is an airbrake with positive input attached to a piston connected to a hinge which makes the engine turn 180° when you spawn the craft.
The other type uses an airbrake with negative input attached to a piston.
Pros:
Pretty easy to make and adjust, can provide a lot of thrust, compared to the electric prop.
Cons:
Since they use a piston to push air back, it isn't always producing thrust, so you will need another one to produce thrust when the first one doesn't.
The negative airbrake can be a bit annoying sometimes.
Adjusting the hinge-piston-airbrake type for a high maximum speed will result in an insane acceleration.
Negative airbrake:
An airbrake with a negative input. This one will only produce thrust when you are already in movement, so you need another engine to start moving.
It's highly recommended to develop an input with funky trees and some algebra to achieve a nice performance, since they normally would produce more and more thrust as the speed increases, eventually crashing the game.
Pros:
Highly customizable, only uses one part.
Cons:
Will crash the game if it touches the water while active.
If you aren't good at maths... It might be pretty difficult to figure out the best code/input for it.
Needs a "starter" engine.
.
+2.
There's also another engine, but it's a lot more complex and outdated.
.
Now choose one of them...
Since randomusername is inactive I'll try to explain.
+1.
It's all about pushing air back and there are different ways of doing it:
1. Wings attached to a rotator
2. Piston pushing an activated airbrake (pushing air back)
3. Airbrake with negative input
4. ...
I can explain them in depth, if you want.
lol
+1You're welcome.
.
If you aren't in 1.9.205 yet, you will have to use
input*clamp01(67.056 - IAS)though.firingDelay, probably.In seconds.
input*clamp01(IAS<67.056)
.
I'm not sure if
clamp01is necessary though.The resizable wheels have an xml property called
+1brakeTorque, it's at 50 by default.@lemoose That's only to sign in with your account for the first time, after you've done that you should be able to activate all the mods and upload normally / do what I said.
+1To clarify, I suppose:
She took a wrong decision and thought that blocking literally everyone (except me) would be a good way of avoiding drama in the future.
Anyway, it's over and she knows she did things wrong.
And she probably won't be online for some months, depending on how the whole Covid-19 thing goes.
So yeah.
.
(Yes, I actually follow all the posts related to her.)
@QingyuZhou Pretty sad, indeed.
+1Open the image(s) you want to have as thumbnail(s) with Designer Suite, move it/them far away from the actual build, and take the pre-upload screenshots of them.
Hey, I actually have this set, very nice.
+2@Brendorkus If you get any negative comments, they will probably be about the description.
.
And she is currently inactive until who-knows-when, so don't expect her to say anything.
Lol
I wonder if ducks need them.
109Z?
Nope.
+3rate(RollAngle) * clamp01(IAS>x)xis the speed above which it activates.You're welcome :)
Clicky?
It shouldn't.
It should work as long as you are on 1.9.202 or any newer version.
@JakeSnakeMate
First of all, are you using the latest version (still in beta)?
An example would be
sum(Pitch*2)Having a different input for the rotator, like
+1sum(Input*x), where "Input" can be anything (Pitch, Roll...), and "x" a number that will make the speed higher or slower.lol
@WIZARD2017 If you are wanting to make a version with good aerodynamics, I suggest you watch this.
@WIZARD2017 You're welcome.
I think you misunderstood me, I actually mean that you should have removed even more drag to be able to reach high speeds without having such powerful engines, which would also make the acceleration more realistic.
At least you removed the drag from details, which is already good.
.
By the way, landings are pretty fun, but I think that the canards provide a bit too much lift, to be honest.
I can see the effort you put in this plane, it looks amazing and is very detailed.
However, it would have been nice if you had also done other things like adding trim tabs or making the elevons also move with trim and removing all that drag that makes it have an insane acceleration and a very poor glide ratio.
.
Anyways, looks amazing but I kinda wish it had a better flight model.
Yes, with a piston with
+3Fuelas input connected to something with mass.@ArcturusAerospace The engine, there are different designs.
@yizhe Putting the main wings (scaled) on rotators that only move around 5-10 degrees should work too.
@TeraCotaYT In front. If it ascends by itself and is unstable it's definitely tail-heavy.
.
Ps: You're welcome.
@vcharng already did some landing gear stuff recently.
Just make the entire horizontal stabilizers move.
@ArcturusAerospace Which one is it?
@DPSAircraft Read the first line of her bio...
.
Maybe I could help tomorrow.
You're welcome.
@TeraCotaYT Fuselage block units, same as one block that is 18 units in length. There isn't a "better way", since this is the most accurate way of doing it.
Take a look at this.
Make a horizontal stick with fuselage blocks that is as wide as the real aircraft, and scale the blueprint so that it "fits".
+3.
2 fuselage block units = 1m (3.28084 ft)
You can disable the halo or use two beacons, one resized but without halo and another one with halo but not resized.
+1I like how it looks.
@Minecraftpoweer Thanks :)
.
I'm not excited/happy due to something that happened this morning though...
Oh well.
I like it, please tag me when you post it.
+1@GeneralPatrick2 Set the tail rotor's "mode" to "Heading hold".
+3@Notaleopard Any amount you want, it's just adding inputs.
@Notaleopard In that specific case, it could be:
clamp(Pitch * clamp01(Activate1) + VTOL * clamp01(Activate2), -1, 1)Note that this also allows it go up, if you don't want that use this:
clamp(clamp(Pitch, -1, 0) * clamp01(Activate1) + clamp(VTOL, -1, 0) * clamp01(Activate2), -1, 1).
And you can take a look at this for the second question you had.
@JolyLoly You're welcome!
@Notaleopard
For the first one, do you want the rotator to only activate when both AGs are on, or when any of those AGs is on?
.
I'll answer to the second question soon.
+2clamp01(Throttle - 0.89) * 10orThrottle * sign(Throttle - 0.89)should work.