|
Author
|
Topic: new plane building standard?
|
li'l bastard
Pilot
|
posted 02-15- 04:42 PM
   
We've seen the good ju 88 DM, then the La 7 project w/ breaking panels...
Shouldn't we decide for a new standard of plane building, trying to upgrade the old ones too? I know that would be a big job, but i think we should do something like the engine damage pack just released...so what, guys? li'l b ------------------
IP: Logged |
Nat
Pilot
|
posted 02-15- 05:01 PM
Lil B, Tail is currently writing up what we've done to bring the aircraft upto this standard. The big problem though is that most current aircraft would almost have to be completely rebuilt to bring them upto this level, which is a daunting prospect to say the least.What we're hoping for is that people building new aircraft can look at our methods and use some or all of them on thier project since it's easy to do when you "plane" to build this way from the start. I don't think it should be laid out as a hard and fast "build it like this", but more like, "hey look what you can do if you build it like this" We're just trying our very best to make SDOE as realistic as possible... and IMO we've done a great job so far and I hope that others will follow the lead, but it's all down to the builder  IP: Logged |
wakeup tailgunner
Pilot
|
posted 02-15- 05:33 PM
It's also a question of how many people can build planes to this standard. If you are just starting out, and you see this sort of stuff as the required standard....could be a little offputting!The talk of minimum specs for planepacks was based around whether planes worked properly. That is the only standard you really need. And...check out my post on a current model build. It has all the stuff built in, and took over 8 hours solid modelling time to build the basic model. IP: Logged |
Snickers
Pilot
|
posted 02-16- 11:24 AM
Building a plane is tough enough without trying to match a standard (which will move over time anway...) In the end, the community decides what will be flown on line and off line, if you don't like it, dont fly it. I would rather that people like WTG "adopt" a plane like the B17 in his case and bring it up to standard. I dont think you will ever see a mass conversion.I am working on the PBY (along with the other members of the team) for the love of the plane. Thats part of the reason its taking longer than expected to get out the Beta release... We will build it to whatever is the current "best" practice (except of the cases where we push the envelope and create new best practices  )
------------------
Snickers
=FC=
 IP: Logged |
Harman_5
Pilot
|
posted 02-16- 12:53 PM
Regarding the Ju88 DM, anyone wanting to add similar effects to an existing plane need only download my DM tutorial which focuses primarily on modelling visual damage effects (the same methods used on my Ju88 DM), basic and intermediate engine DM are explained too.Anyone wanting to experiment with these effects, maybe "adopt" a plane as Snickers said above just to improve its DM, should get this tutorial and try! Even if you're unfamiliar with Openplane, with the Openplane documentation and this tutorial, you can learn!:
http://members.nbci.com/harman_5/DM_Tutorial.zip ------------------
Visit FS:SDOE Online [This message has been edited by Harman_5 (edited 02-16-2001).] IP: Logged |
Maury Markowitz
Pilot
|
posted 02-17- 02:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Nat:
What we're hoping for is that people building new aircraft can look at our methods and use some or all of them on thier project since it's easy to do when you "plane" to build this way from the start. I don't think it should be laid out as a hard and fast "build it like this", but more like, "hey look what you can do if you build it like this"
I think that would be a huge help. Rght now you have to sort of collect all these little ideas from all over the place. A document that said... a) getting the controls to move
b) making an opening canopy
c) getting the gear to break etc. would make the whole process that much easier. Maury
IP: Logged |
Werner Molders
Pilot
|
posted 02-17- 02:24 PM
I agree completely with Maury. Rather than have an OP newbie find one of the more experienced guys to act as mentor (thus slowing down both people) in order to learn how to build a plane, division of labour holds great potential. So maybe all a person ever learns to do is make canopies slide, but hey, if that were me I'd be proud of it. Werner ------------------
Visit Abbeville Field Today!
 IP: Logged |
Lothar
Pilot
|
posted 02-17- 02:42 PM
How about a rating system for planes which would account for advanced flight modeling, damage modeling, etc. When someone wants to design a mission they will know which planes are roughly comparible in accuracy. People who are only interested in highly accurate planes with pitot tubes modeled, etc. will easily be able to avoid simpler planes.IP: Logged |
ArgonV
Pilot
|
posted 02-17- 02:56 PM
Werner, seems people team up quite a bit these days to get planes done. Its rarely a one man thing anymore.IP: Logged |
Nat
Pilot
|
posted 02-17- 04:59 PM
Maury, a doc like that would be excellent, hell I could use it quiet often, maybe if someone really had some time on their hands they could compile this info. Tail at the moment is writing up what we've done to move to this level, and not really everything that needs to be done from sctarch, but what could be done to improve the whole aircraft you're building (i.e. not really for a newbie, it's like saying "ok, you know how to build an aircraft and make it fly.. but this is what you can do to make a better aircraft" like prior general knowledge is needed.IP: Logged |
Snickers
Pilot
|
posted 02-18- 12:21 AM
I envy the people who are able to (and have the time to) do a plane on their own.... Without the team, I am afraid the PBY would never have gotten past the original model by Pete Hawk... (designer emeritus )------------------
Snickers
=FC=
IP: Logged |
Maury Markowitz
Pilot
|
posted 02-18- 11:18 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Werner Molders:
[I agree completely with Maury. Rather than have an OP newbie find one of the more experienced guys to act as mentor (thus slowing down both people) in order to learn how to build a plane, division of labour holds great potential. So maybe all a person ever learns to do is make canopies slide, but hey, if that were me I'd be proud of it.
Exactly. I mean what if someone just went around to all of the planes and added sliding canopies. That alone would make the game better! So I have to disagree with you wakeup, I think having a single document (or single collection anyway) would make the job _way_easier_ to get into. As it stands you have to run hither and yon just to find the _tools_ let alone the knowledge. I know for myself I would love to play around with the He 100 (one of the great what-ifs) but I've found the process unbelievably complex. I have SO MANY questions that my few attempts so far involved single 25k messages of little questions like "how do I move this gun", "how can I rename this" etc. If we had a single source for this I could have done _something_ anyway. (not that I try especially hard, I do a lot of writing too). Maury
IP: Logged |
Maury Markowitz
Pilot
|
posted 02-18- 11:21 AM
By the way I should point out that I _am_ good at documentation. I would be very happy to act as editor of such a documentation effort - notably because it would likely be a wonderful way to learn OP at the same time.Is this something you would all be interested in? If so, just send me any little notes you have, all the existing docs, anything. Feel free to point out threads here too. I can start work almost right way, my updated He 100 document will be completed this afternoon and that gives me a clean plate. You do sign away your life in one sense though, I reserve the right to ask questions, no matter how stupid! Maury IP: Logged |
wakeup tailgunner
Pilot
|
posted 02-18- 06:02 PM
Maury....I got no problem with documenting and spreading knowledge. I am doing just that at the moment! I have documented and written up a step by step build of the P51 I posted a shot of. I have also been helping a few people get started on plane building... nope, no doubt, tutorials help EVERYONE. What I posted back up the thread was about makign this sort of thing a STANDARD. That means everyone HAS to do it. That I don't agree with. On the subject of Mentoring.... I have found that happens anyway! Been helping Hawk get up and modelling so he can pursue his 'Grand Scheme'. I learnt by asking questions here....So in effect, the Forum is a collective Mentor. IP: Logged |
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
