@AWESOMENESS360 Haha thank you, I think you could do it, just takes a lot more time than most people want to invest in SP. 13-16 hours for this, but it could be done faster if I didn't spend an hour trying to figure out how to make the front fan. I also included 2 hours of research into the design in the hour number I gave, as it's a necessary part of building. I use Wikipedia, as well as official sources from GE and training/maintenance manuals and diagrams.
Main fan: 480
Fan with leading edge strips: 730
entire fan and compressor assembly: 1430
Entire airplane so far: 1650
(And I still haven't done the high pressure and low pressure turbines yet)
very good visual model
(Most important) good flight maneuverability
good to see the landing gear behaving close to realistically (retraction/extension)
takeoff/landing speeds are good
Top speed and flight dynamic in cruise are good.
Proper range is very important, too many planes can only fly for 1 hour or 30 mins in this game.
Cons:
(Most Important) the airplane uses only 5,000 feet of runway at MTOW, it needs 11,800
weak brakes
landing gear retracts on ground
no registration or detail towards the rear of the fuselage (rear doors?)
tail wheel isn't quite realistic
airplane takes off in 3,000 feet
square engines would create a lot of drag (just needs a duct from the intake to the round engine fan)
rudder hinge fairings (look closely at right and left side)
technical thing: the landing gear couldn't be lowered with the visor fully up.
Final verdict:
This is a great airplane and concept, you did a good job with the visual model but there were a few parts missed with the systems and the smaller details. It's definitely your best Concorde to date, but it would have been nice to see the same paneling method as the A321 (with real windows, etc)
You sure made ECAM readouts a lot, lot easier.
Now my airplanes can finally notify the pilot when things go wrong or need attention without using 1 billion parts.
Looks pretty good but the nose and S-duct/tail do need some improvement.
Btw the engine blades for #2 can't be seen, the engine is at the end of the S-duct.
@YourAverageAviator doesn't sound too hard, just needs some missile effects that trail off the wings a bit. It would be great if we could change the parameters for it as well (activation G loading, but an FT input would be even better).
@SodiumIodide I can run 6,000 parts without lag, on an overclocked 9700K and a basic 1660. Yes, I bought a CPU that costs more than my GPU. Your CPU really dictates how many parts you can run smoothly, SP almost doesn't care about GPU. Keep in mind though, that the more single-core performance your CPU has, the better (not overall performance since SP only uses 1 core IIRC)
@WNP78 Sorry if I'm a bother, but did you guys consider the custom outputs and inputs for the switches/levers/etc? It would really make the cockpits more customizable.
A simple yes or no is cool.
(Thanks for all the hard work that you guys did, there's so much more than just VR coming and I'm so excited for it!)
@Dann810 You're right about the all-flying tail, which you did do very well. However, there is still a trim system for the all-flying tail. I can help with some FT if you like for your next plane. If I had to pick two most important things, it would be reverse thrust in the air and landing gear retraction on the ground. You can fix the reverse thrust in the air by using a *clamp01(AltitudeAgl (Lessthansign) 10) and fix the ground gear retraction using a *clamp01(AltitudeAgl (greaterthansign) 10).
Pros:
1. Good visual model, you got the 757'esque nose perfect
2. Suspension acts really nicely.
3. Pretty realistic acceleration and braking for the weight.
4. Flaps are realistic.
5. Low speed performance is good.
Cons:
1. Nose gear steering shouldn't need a lock, and it doesn't have quite enough traction for turning.
2. Outer wing spoilers should also act as speedbrakes. Click Here
3. Takeoff run distance isn't quite enough.
4. There's no Elevator Trim.
5. No overspeed flap load relief, which was a important feature Lockheed added (along with autoland).
6. Landing gear clips through gear doors at higher G loads.
7. Spoilers 2,3,6, and 7 stand straight up when turning and at max spoiler deployment.
8. Reverse Thrust can be used in air, Landing gear can be retracted on the ground.
@Hedero usually it's available for everyone.
Nice but you forgot to rename it lol
@WormWithLegs Thank you!
@AWESOMENESS360 Haha thank you, I think you could do it, just takes a lot more time than most people want to invest in SP. 13-16 hours for this, but it could be done faster if I didn't spend an hour trying to figure out how to make the front fan. I also included 2 hours of research into the design in the hour number I gave, as it's a necessary part of building. I use Wikipedia, as well as official sources from GE and training/maintenance manuals and diagrams.
@RandomBuilder8732 Go ahead!
+1@Heneepr Yep, I was very efficient!
@WormWithLegs Deleted
@Numbers2 There is no bypassing, deleted
@asteroidbook345 Thanks a lot!
@elevatormann I'll try and be nicer in the future
@Thecatbaron Extra work = Extra reward.
@theoplanes Only 11th gen I7.
@asteroidbook345 Yeah the thumbnail was wrong picture for the first one.
If anyone complains that one engine is 2,000 parts I'm gonna delete your comment lol
BTW- this engine works for the 100-1000 versions (all)
@CalebRepublic Lol, and it's just one out of 2 engines.
@asteroidbook345 just in case you needed it
Updates:
Added front fan stators
Main fan: 480
Fan with leading edge strips: 730
entire fan and compressor assembly: 1430
Entire airplane so far: 1650
(And I still haven't done the high pressure and low pressure turbines yet)
@elevatormann Airliners are from real life but ok (I'm pretty sure he's shooting for realism)
@WiniMii it works fine, you need to control altitude yourself
@se34ruy it works perfectly fine wth
Pros:
very good visual model
(Most important) good flight maneuverability
good to see the landing gear behaving close to realistically (retraction/extension)
takeoff/landing speeds are good
Top speed and flight dynamic in cruise are good.
Proper range is very important, too many planes can only fly for 1 hour or 30 mins in this game.
Cons:
(Most Important) the airplane uses only 5,000 feet of runway at MTOW, it needs
11,800weak brakes
landing gear retracts on ground
no registration or detail towards the rear of the fuselage (rear doors?)
tail wheel isn't quite realistic
airplane takes off in 3,000 feet
square engines would create a lot of drag (just needs a duct from the intake to the round engine fan)
rudder hinge fairings (look closely at right and left side)
technical thing: the landing gear couldn't be lowered with the visor fully up.
Final verdict:
This is a great airplane and concept, you did a good job with the visual model but there were a few parts missed with the systems and the smaller details. It's definitely your best Concorde to date, but it would have been nice to see the same paneling method as the A321 (with real windows, etc)
@se34ruy sure
Looks good, gotta test it
@MrZa You could make it a bit better shaped without adding parts, just changing the shape forward of the cockpit windows.
@se34ruy if you have to go into it go ahead
This update is truly amazing an I can't wait to be able to make low part glass cockpits. I just hope the numbers have an option to glow.
+5You sure made ECAM readouts a lot, lot easier.
+2Now my airplanes can finally notify the pilot when things go wrong or need attention without using 1 billion parts.
The plane passed 15000 recently @Gundamboy
@PapaKernels I definitely tagged the wrong person lol
+1@PapaKernels that moment when the harrier isn't in the build :(
Looks pretty good but the nose and S-duct/tail do need some improvement.
Btw the engine blades for #2 can't be seen, the engine is at the end of the S-duct.
Nose could be shaped a bit better but it's good, check mine out if you need
@GuianLorenzo We can have a competition on the CRJ-900
Mine will probably take 10x as long to build though :(
(I actually already started a -700 but it was deleted when my game crashed and I failed to back it up. I've since learned my lesson.)
+1It's really good, I like it and I think I would make an American airlines CRJ-900 next
+1@YourAverageAviator doesn't sound too hard, just needs some missile effects that trail off the wings a bit. It would be great if we could change the parameters for it as well (activation G loading, but an FT input would be even better).
@AirbusAndBoeing150 Sure, just credit. I have better version tho, Here it is.
Glad to help and you'll see a review soon!
+1@abollogames 大声笑它可能更少
@BaconEggs why the nose so pointy
+1@SodiumIodide I can run 6,000 parts without lag, on an overclocked 9700K and a basic 1660. Yes, I bought a CPU that costs more than my GPU. Your CPU really dictates how many parts you can run smoothly, SP almost doesn't care about GPU. Keep in mind though, that the more single-core performance your CPU has, the better (not overall performance since SP only uses 1 core IIRC)
Some of these builds you just look at and wonder "why?"
+1@BaconEggs I'll be waiting for you to restart airliner production when this update comes out.
@WNP78 Sorry if I'm a bother, but did you guys consider the custom outputs and inputs for the switches/levers/etc? It would really make the cockpits more customizable.
A simple yes or no is cool.
(Thanks for all the hard work that you guys did, there's so much more than just VR coming and I'm so excited for it!)
@realSavageMan asked the question everyone's wondering
+3(this might be one of the most influential updates in this game's history)
@KnightOfRen I love the smooth turnoffs. I would be great to see some more high-speed turnoffs like at international airports.
5300
@jamesPLANESii What are your system specs?
@abollogames 该飞机的零件总数约为 20,000 个。
-Google translate again
Hey why is there no gif here
@realSavageMan
@Dann810 You're right about the all-flying tail, which you did do very well. However, there is still a trim system for the all-flying tail. I can help with some FT if you like for your next plane. If I had to pick two most important things, it would be reverse thrust in the air and landing gear retraction on the ground. You can fix the reverse thrust in the air by using a
+1*clamp01(AltitudeAgl (Lessthansign) 10)and fix the ground gear retraction using a*clamp01(AltitudeAgl (greaterthansign) 10).@Dann810
Pros:
1. Good visual model, you got the 757'esque nose perfect
2. Suspension acts really nicely.
3. Pretty realistic acceleration and braking for the weight.
4. Flaps are realistic.
5. Low speed performance is good.
Cons:
+11. Nose gear steering shouldn't need a lock, and it doesn't have quite enough traction for turning.
2. Outer wing spoilers should also act as speedbrakes. Click Here
3. Takeoff run distance isn't quite enough.
4. There's no Elevator Trim.
5. No overspeed flap load relief, which was a important feature Lockheed added (along with autoland).
6. Landing gear clips through gear doors at higher G loads.
7. Spoilers 2,3,6, and 7 stand straight up when turning and at max spoiler deployment.
8. Reverse Thrust can be used in air, Landing gear can be retracted on the ground.
is it a B model?
Get ready for a long review.... Coming soon