The Luftwaffe has a few propeller aircraft projects that uses the MG213 revolver cannon, which "would" require using the minigun part to simulate, is that okay?
airships are indeed being revived, usually for humanitarian usages as they can be designed to require less facilities than an airport, and can drop goods at a speed slower than fixed-wing aircrafts, while not requiring as much gas as helicopters.
Though modern airships are like wing-and-balloon hybrids. They use both wing mechanics and lighter-than-air flotations.
When flying over barren, disaster-struck areas, space is no longer a problem; and since those are for humanitarian purposes, you don't have to worry about enemy attacks. So this probably will indeed be the most advantageous field for airships.
Should be possible. From my experience in my G-2 (where I initially tried to make an actual reloading system for the Duka 280), the problem would be using piston to move the mass over a long distance (the piston would bend downwards)
@CoolPeach Oh so it's "I beg to differ".
Well unless you spawn your plane with gears retracted.
I think real world aircrafts are designed with gear up as default status (because that's how it is the most of the time the plane's running)
But for SP, since we have to spawn with gear down (or your propellers would hit the ground before your gears).... yeah I think having gear down as default (since the system itself also goes this way) would make more sense to me.
@SnoWFLakE0s Sincerely, I pledge to disagree (is that the correct polite way to say it?)
Planes start at gear down, but GearDown starts at 1, while LandingGear starts at 0. From this perspective it's still more intuitive to use LandingGear.
" when you spawn in the water make sure that your cockpit is submerged"
This makes the system determine that your build is DESTROYED. That's why the USS Beast fleet won't attack you.
tip: When making Japanese version of German planes, add more glass panes.
This is what happened with J8M Shusui, as Japanese glassmaking technique cannot match the German's.
@WNP78 Yeah it seems to be a problem of "boolean" or "float".
It doesn't break 1.9.1 LG expressions but obviously it does break 1.9.202 (the version with reversed expression).
@goboygo1 I was talking about the bending right before breaking. It's beyond recovery point and should be irreversible.
Making wings flexible in normal use is another issue, and it would have some in-game issue (collision model management, control surface distortion, etc)
What actually WTFs me, is that some people are buying BULLETS as a means of coronavirus prevention. like, what, the, F.
It almost sounds like the Americans are enjoying this, like they've been "preppers" for decades only to wait for this day to happen....
If we all stop talking about it, it won’t be an issue.
This sounds like ignoring a problem.
The coronavirus IS an issue whether you talk about it or not.
its just that we don't necessarily have to react THAT much.
I would say it's probably worse than quite a lot of other stuff, but yes, please keep it off here.
It's just like in my country.
Everyone says politics is important, and tries to talk politics to me everywhere.
Well yes it is, but that doesn't mean you should only talk about politics anytime, anywhere.
@goboygo1 The problem of using rotator is that it would be reversible. I.e. if I went to the verge of wingtip breaking and came back to normal speed, the wingtip would bend then "come back".
I think I'll instead angle the detacher to make it come of with a spin
@ChiChiWerx @Numbers This is just a technology demonstrator, the full release version of this Ju 288 will be made with better detail and realism.
Engine overheating (which was a real problem for Ju 288 IRL), landing gear damage (also), renewed control surface (already done)... etc.
@SnoWFLakE0s Well, yeah... I plotted these coordinates for.... assumed navigation crosspoints. Just posted it because you said you haven't verified the distances yet.
@asteroidbook345 I know.
I'm also investigating possibilities to enhance the function of these landing gears, so the update will come with the upgrade.
Bug report: (all contents of smooth function omitted)
a smooth function piston that takes the structure of:
smooth() < 0.99 & smooth() > 0.01 (in other words, extend the piston when smooth is > 0.01 and < 0.99)
would fail to function ONLY on the first time the smooth function was triggered.
2nd time and on it worked perfectly. I changed back to the old school sign(min(smooth() - 0.01, 0.99 - smooth())) and it worked first time, every time.
Not sure if the old bug report section on the 202 version post still works for 203 so I just posted it here.
@AndrewGarrison
@WNP78
LandingGear now acts exactly as it did before the previous beta
Uh, does it?
pre-beta it's -1 for off and 1 for on (that's why we can continue to use pre-202 beta FTs by reversing the sigh), in this version it seems to be 0 for off and 1 for on.
in other words:
Version<>down<>up
1.9.1xx<>-1<>1
1.9.202<>1<>-1
1.9.203<>0<>1
Because of this, my "fancy landing gear" has to be entirely re-programmed, rather than simply reverse the sign.
Please confirm whether this change is permenant, I have been forced to modify LG input twice, I really hope I don't have to do it a third time...
Problem with JU-88 A-1:
Almost Impossible for me to complete the undercarriage and a working cockpit is a bit above my abilities currently.
You can check my Ju288 LG demonstrator. Its cockpit is made in reference of Ju88 cockpit, and its landing gear should be more complicated than the Ju88, you only need to simplify it a bit.
well for larger planes they do take longer...
If you want quick adjustment of power you should really consider using propeller pitch rather than throttle to control the output.
My WWII planes with constant-speed propellers usually respond to changes within 2 seconds (but you need to know what pitch is the best at different speed and altitude)
as for manual pitch and manual throttle, they respond even faster, close to the 1 second you are hoping for.
As another person who has limited success in Funky Trees (check my landing gear post), I suggest Funky Foresters.
We don't cut down the tree, we plant them and cultivate them, therefore foresters instead of lumberjacks.
yeah with these we can have totally custom guided weapons...
I'd suggest "AngleToTarget", "PitchToTarget" and "DistanceToTarget"
And maybe a second series of "AngleToAiming" and so on.
So that we can make SACLOS missiles.
@WarHawk95
@MrPorg137
@Random40
The Luftwaffe has a few propeller aircraft projects that uses the MG213 revolver cannon, which "would" require using the minigun part to simulate, is that okay?
Please give us destructable Kraken... I made a bloody 280mm "flying dinosaur gun" for large targets, and I certainly can do with a Kraken.
Vertical stablizer is probably too small for SP physics...
airships are indeed being revived, usually for humanitarian usages as they can be designed to require less facilities than an airport, and can drop goods at a speed slower than fixed-wing aircrafts, while not requiring as much gas as helicopters.
Though modern airships are like wing-and-balloon hybrids. They use both wing mechanics and lighter-than-air flotations.
When flying over barren, disaster-struck areas, space is no longer a problem; and since those are for humanitarian purposes, you don't have to worry about enemy attacks. So this probably will indeed be the most advantageous field for airships.
@ArcturusAerospace Well you might want to check your PC hardware... I'm running on 1.9.20X beta with my 500+ parts plane and it doesn't crash.
@asteroidbook345 I tried, increasing the piston's mass does not make it less prone to bending.
Should be possible. From my experience in my G-2 (where I initially tried to make an actual reloading system for the Duka 280), the problem would be using piston to move the mass over a long distance (the piston would bend downwards)
@CoolPeach Oh so it's "I beg to differ".
Well unless you spawn your plane with gears retracted.
I think real world aircrafts are designed with gear up as default status (because that's how it is the most of the time the plane's running)
But for SP, since we have to spawn with gear down (or your propellers would hit the ground before your gears).... yeah I think having gear down as default (since the system itself also goes this way) would make more sense to me.
@SnoWFLakE0s Sincerely, I pledge to disagree (is that the correct polite way to say it?)
Planes start at gear down, but GearDown starts at 1, while LandingGear starts at 0. From this perspective it's still more intuitive to use LandingGear.
I prefer wheel skis. Functionality FTW.
" when you spawn in the water make sure that your cockpit is submerged"
This makes the system determine that your build is DESTROYED. That's why the USS Beast fleet won't attack you.
Suggestion: Make a cosmetic wing and use a jet engine facing downwards (lol)
That's probably the easiest.
tip: When making Japanese version of German planes, add more glass panes.
This is what happened with J8M Shusui, as Japanese glassmaking technique cannot match the German's.
Don't actually detach it, link it with a very long winch or something.
@WNP78 Yeah it seems to be a problem of "boolean" or "float".
It doesn't break 1.9.1 LG expressions but obviously it does break 1.9.202 (the version with reversed expression).
I love that leek tail.....
@Natedog120705 Don't worry, I do know that not every American is a prepper.
@goboygo1 I was talking about the bending right before breaking. It's beyond recovery point and should be irreversible.
Making wings flexible in normal use is another issue, and it would have some in-game issue (collision model management, control surface distortion, etc)
What actually WTFs me, is that some people are buying BULLETS as a means of coronavirus prevention. like, what, the, F.
It almost sounds like the Americans are enjoying this, like they've been "preppers" for decades only to wait for this day to happen....
If we all stop talking about it, it won’t be an issue.
This sounds like ignoring a problem.
The coronavirus IS an issue whether you talk about it or not.
its just that we don't necessarily have to react THAT much.
I would say it's probably worse than quite a lot of other stuff, but yes, please keep it off here.
It's just like in my country.
Everyone says politics is important, and tries to talk politics to me everywhere.
Well yes it is, but that doesn't mean you should only talk about politics anytime, anywhere.
@goboygo1 The problem of using rotator is that it would be reversible. I.e. if I went to the verge of wingtip breaking and came back to normal speed, the wingtip would bend then "come back".
I think I'll instead angle the detacher to make it come of with a spin
@ChiChiWerx @Numbers This is just a technology demonstrator, the full release version of this Ju 288 will be made with better detail and realism.
Engine overheating (which was a real problem for Ju 288 IRL), landing gear damage (also), renewed control surface (already done)... etc.
@SnoWFLakE0s Well, yeah... I plotted these coordinates for.... assumed navigation crosspoints. Just posted it because you said you haven't verified the distances yet.
@asteroidbook345 Yo, a new version is up, I tagged you.
@asteroidbook345
@starxiao Did you choose a wrong beta option or something?
@UFNNICF5TF No, it directly reads your coordinate from the game engine. The game engine does the satellite part.
@UFNNICF5TF No, it directly reads your coordinate from the game engine. The game engine does the satellite part.
@BlackBoA Didn't find it. Only found an old post stating that there were a hoax about Snowstone convoy.
@BlackBoA !? WUT? Where? I never noticed!
Though I think I should've included USS Tiny Two fleet in Krakabloa...
Get well and stay safe, brother.
Feel free to contact me for tips about how to live a happy(ier) indoors life.
@SovietBun Which is why I have to introduce some new features. Just fixing the bugs is something everyone can do.
@asteroidbook345 I know.
I'm also investigating possibilities to enhance the function of these landing gears, so the update will come with the upgrade.
Bug report: (all contents of smooth function omitted)
a smooth function piston that takes the structure of:
smooth() < 0.99 & smooth() > 0.01 (in other words, extend the piston when smooth is > 0.01 and < 0.99)
would fail to function ONLY on the first time the smooth function was triggered.
2nd time and on it worked perfectly. I changed back to the old school sign(min(smooth() - 0.01, 0.99 - smooth())) and it worked first time, every time.
Not sure if the old bug report section on the 202 version post still works for 203 so I just posted it here.
@AndrewGarrison
@WNP78
Hmm I didn't see the picture...
@robloxweponco Yes, we use what we call "biological retraction device" to produce power for the GPS system. lol.
@robloxweponco I'd say it's science, hehehe
I loled at the name.....
LandingGear now acts exactly as it did before the previous beta
Uh, does it?
pre-beta it's -1 for off and 1 for on (that's why we can continue to use pre-202 beta FTs by reversing the sigh), in this version it seems to be 0 for off and 1 for on.
in other words:
Version<>down<>up
1.9.1xx<>-1<>1
1.9.202<>1<>-1
1.9.203<>0<>1
Because of this, my "fancy landing gear" has to be entirely re-programmed, rather than simply reverse the sign.
Please confirm whether this change is permenant, I have been forced to modify LG input twice, I really hope I don't have to do it a third time...
@AndrewGarrison
@WNP78
@SnoWFLakE0s Yeah I think I'm going to get a full list of all airports' coordinates, I'm probably gonna make a VOR/DME navigation system from that.
@AndrewGarrison great, thanks
Problem with JU-88 A-1:
Almost Impossible for me to complete the undercarriage and a working cockpit is a bit above my abilities currently.
You can check my Ju288 LG demonstrator. Its cockpit is made in reference of Ju88 cockpit, and its landing gear should be more complicated than the Ju88, you only need to simplify it a bit.
The devs said about a "if~ Then~ Else~" clause in 1.9.202 beta, but I have yet to make it work.
But you also have 21.9K upvote now....
well for larger planes they do take longer...
If you want quick adjustment of power you should really consider using propeller pitch rather than throttle to control the output.
My WWII planes with constant-speed propellers usually respond to changes within 2 seconds (but you need to know what pitch is the best at different speed and altitude)
as for manual pitch and manual throttle, they respond even faster, close to the 1 second you are hoping for.
As another person who has limited success in Funky Trees (check my landing gear post), I suggest Funky Foresters.
We don't cut down the tree, we plant them and cultivate them, therefore foresters instead of lumberjacks.
yeah with these we can have totally custom guided weapons...
I'd suggest "AngleToTarget", "PitchToTarget" and "DistanceToTarget"
And maybe a second series of "AngleToAiming" and so on.
So that we can make SACLOS missiles.
@asteroidbook345 hole pieces is basically what I said as "part subtraction"...