This plane seems great, good to see DC-9 getting some action on the site. Which version is this specifically? I'm going to be building a DC-9-50 later on this year, probably in Delta livery.
I like it, but fuselage cutting (especially in areas like the engine kangaroo) would definitely help you:
A. Lower your part count with the same detail, or
B. Increase your detail for the same part count.
This is the original rocket. You did a good job. I compared it to a real one I see every day, the similarity is almost perfection. The fuselage has the right curves, and it seems a little weird in real life but it flows very well here.
It looks okay but the flight characteristics are extremely unrealistic. I don't know any 757s that can do 1,027 mph in level flight and take off in under 600 feet.
@PlaneFlightX I am here
I like this, it's really cool and could definitely be used in some really nice finished creations. Kind of like a return-to-home feature!
Thing I like:
1. Startup feature
2. There is some cockpit modeling (interior)
3. The usage of text to save windows parts
4. The livery is quite realistic
5. Flight dynamics are pretty good, except for the speeds.
Things that could use work:
1. The autopilot cannot actually turn the plane to a heading, climb to an altitude, or anything besides fly in a straight line. It's kind of a gimmick since we already have the default game autopilot.
2. The airplane has slides but no doors
3. The slide behind the wing goes straight through the flaps if they are both down.
4. Cargo doors on both sides of the airplane.
5. Landing gear retracts on the ground.
6. Reverse thrust works in midair
7. You can't use the speedbrakes in midair without cutting all engine power and reversing the engines?
8. No flap load relief system (not that big of a deal but it takes 0 parts)
9. Registration is a 747-400
10. livery isn't quite accurate on the tail section.
11. The paneling on the upper nose and "cheeks" could be better, we have fuselage cutting after all
12. The landing gear collides with the other gears when retracting
13. The takeoff run is way, way too short.
14. the low speed ailerons don't lockout.
15. no gear tilt :(
16. all the ailerons are just flat panels with no depth
17. The spoilers don't help with roll
18. No suspension
19. Body gears don't assist steering below 15 knots
20. Nose gear steering turns 90 degrees
21. Nose gear steering doesn't unlock until 35 knots, instead of 60 on the real 748
22. This plane uses an absurd amount of fuel idling, 12.5 Liters/second
23. The airplane is able to climb at 12,200 feet a minute from sea level fully loaded??
24. The weight of the aircraft is much too light for the amount of fuel that's displayed on the cockpit instrument panel.
25. The nose landing gear doors clip through everything when it's extended or retracted.
Not sure how nice you wanted this plane to be, but it could really use some more work. The idea is good, but the execution could be a bit better.
Oh yeah and by the way there's no such engine as the GENX 71-B
@realSavageMan I'm taking an A321 in two days, American A321T actually. Then an A319, and then in early January I'll be flying on an A350, 717, and another A319. Let me know if you need specific pictures of anything for when you build new airliners
Big question: can I use my own computer's computing power for the crafts I see in VR? Does the Oculus use an hdmi from your computer and you computer's CPU and GPU, or does it rely on the headset processing power? I need to run like 5000 parts and need to know if it will work properly. I got a fast computer just for SP and don't want to buy a VR headset and the new SPVR if I can't use high part count airplanes with it.
@asteroidbook345 I think that more AGs would be a much simpler and more intuitive way to do it. Then you will be able to actually use variables just like you would current funky trees. Basically you won't have to learn how to do anything new.
@Thorne In that case, I believe that the Easter egg is literally just the Easter Egg on the left side.
+1@asteroidbook345 you're probably right
+1I recognize this codeeeee
+1FINALLY A GOOD DC-9!!!!
+1Sneak Peek of mine
Btw, nose gear brakes make it hard to taxi.
104 foot wide PC12 lol
+1@qcwl ahh alright
+1This plane seems great, good to see DC-9 getting some action on the site. Which version is this specifically? I'm going to be building a DC-9-50 later on this year, probably in Delta livery.
+1Just say who it is so we can all see if they're terrible and report them as wel
+1First comment and first upvote
+1not bad at all
+1yo this is pretty nice
+1@BarrowAircraft Sure! Expect 4-5 months release date and 5000 parts max. (Maybe 5555)
+1@X99STRIKER Expected to be done before May 5.
+1@asteroidbook345 thank you, my first airplane with fully openable doors and extra features.
@X99STRIKER yep, it's gone now tho because it's obsolete due to 1.11.
+1@SheriffHackdogMCPE yep.
+1@SheriffHackdogMCPE this is a bug on PC too. quite annoying.
+1I like it, but fuselage cutting (especially in areas like the engine kangaroo) would definitely help you:
+1A. Lower your part count with the same detail, or
B. Increase your detail for the same part count.
@realSavageMan yes.
+1Ahh yes the 757 is getting some more attention (and only 803 parts, very impressive)
+1@tarikGR we are playing on 1.12.118.3 lol
+1This is the original rocket. You did a good job. I compared it to a real one I see every day, the similarity is almost perfection. The fuselage has the right curves, and it seems a little weird in real life but it flows very well here.
+1It looks okay but the flight characteristics are extremely unrealistic. I don't know any 757s that can do 1,027 mph in level flight and take off in under 600 feet.
+1@PlaneFlightX I am here
+1I like this, it's really cool and could definitely be used in some really nice finished creations. Kind of like a return-to-home feature!
@PlenBoi has a point.
+1It's still a good plane, but it could be so much more efficient and smoother if it used fuselage cutting.
Thing I like:
1. Startup feature
2. There is some cockpit modeling (interior)
3. The usage of text to save windows parts
4. The livery is quite realistic
5. Flight dynamics are pretty good, except for the speeds.
Things that could use work:
1. The autopilot cannot actually turn the plane to a heading, climb to an altitude, or anything besides fly in a straight line. It's kind of a gimmick since we already have the default game autopilot.
2. The airplane has slides but no doors
3. The slide behind the wing goes straight through the flaps if they are both down.
4. Cargo doors on both sides of the airplane.
5. Landing gear retracts on the ground.
6. Reverse thrust works in midair
7. You can't use the speedbrakes in midair without cutting all engine power and reversing the engines?
8. No flap load relief system (not that big of a deal but it takes 0 parts)
9. Registration is a 747-400
10. livery isn't quite accurate on the tail section.
11. The paneling on the upper nose and "cheeks" could be better, we have fuselage cutting after all
12. The landing gear collides with the other gears when retracting
13. The takeoff run is way, way too short.
14. the low speed ailerons don't lockout.
15. no gear tilt :(
16. all the ailerons are just flat panels with no depth
17. The spoilers don't help with roll
18. No suspension
19. Body gears don't assist steering below 15 knots
20. Nose gear steering turns 90 degrees
21. Nose gear steering doesn't unlock until 35 knots, instead of 60 on the real 748
22. This plane uses an absurd amount of fuel idling, 12.5 Liters/second
23. The airplane is able to climb at 12,200 feet a minute from sea level fully loaded??
24. The weight of the aircraft is much too light for the amount of fuel that's displayed on the cockpit instrument panel.
25. The nose landing gear doors clip through everything when it's extended or retracted.
Not sure how nice you wanted this plane to be, but it could really use some more work. The idea is good, but the execution could be a bit better.
+1Oh yeah and by the way there's no such engine as the GENX 71-B
@realSavageMan I'm taking an A321 in two days, American A321T actually. Then an A319, and then in early January I'll be flying on an A350, 717, and another A319. Let me know if you need specific pictures of anything for when you build new airliners
+1@TheUnsinkableSam This is the old version actually. New version has more detail for cheaper part count.
+1Big question: can I use my own computer's computing power for the crafts I see in VR? Does the Oculus use an hdmi from your computer and you computer's CPU and GPU, or does it rely on the headset processing power? I need to run like 5000 parts and need to know if it will work properly. I got a fast computer just for SP and don't want to buy a VR headset and the new SPVR if I can't use high part count airplanes with it.
+1@SimpleAviation yeah this is important
+1@IdnManufacturer The gun should probably be disabled then if the weapon bay is closed- Thanks for the response tho
If I don't have any targets, I can't use the gun?
+1Cool, a plane that blows itself up when you try and shoot the gun
+1Alright so because you included my comment I'll make a list of things to fix:
There's a few more but they would take a lot of effort to fix.
+1Nice nose shape.
@WiFly not the wing, but the whole airplane so far.
+1Why are all the capital C's replaced with O?
+1@Sparky6004 (comment deleted)
+1Really quite cool
+1lol I made mine work on Yeager but it was a pain
+1one day
+1I just saved 397 parts with this. I will definitely save over 2,000 in the end, You're a legend for thinking of this. @IshiMoss
+1@V time to rivet the entire 767 wings
+1@asteroidbook345 I think that more AGs would be a much simpler and more intuitive way to do it. Then you will be able to actually use variables just like you would current funky trees. Basically you won't have to learn how to do anything new.
+1@BaconEggs this is definitely important, we need to be able to click these.
+1@ChiChiWerx Mass and Friction scaling are the answer. I've got a single gear that can support 400,000 pounds, using it on something custom.
+1@PlaneFlightX I would delete your comment, but since you added more substance you're good XD
I can run 2 of these, my max is about 7,000.
+1@Khanhlam Sure, just credit if you post it.
+1@RandomBuilder8732 Go ahead!
+1@Heneepr Yep, I was very efficient!
@PapaKernels I definitely tagged the wrong person lol
+1@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
+1Glad to help and you'll see a review soon!
+1