@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken yes i learned more from you in 20 minutes than in school about aerodynamic's. I actually listend. Maybe the problem is that i didint care about school but care about my planes not fucking up but that is besides the point. We need teachers like u man
@@cwypto4488 well im glad i could help? i honestly don't know if what i do counts as much teaching since its more like tidbits and fun facts rather than a full lesson which can actually be used.
yeah. also this is very much just a few small details in the physics. i also think people dont make them because you can just search irl plane stuff and it transfer 1:1. here is a good video on it, just be aware that for roll its not just dihedral but rather moving center of drag upwards as a whole. th-cam.com/video/7oy3jXu_DmY/w-d-xo.html
I've managed to make a logic control assisted aircraft. When you press D in your keyboard it will roll, of course, but the moment you lift your finger, the control system maintains that angle. I've done it as well with pitch but not yet on the yaw. The idea is that when my wings are shot heavily, I can still fly without repairing mid-air as long as the control system is still intact.
I made a swing wing system that based its position on if you were pitching or rolling because a high aspect wing is better for pitch and low aspect is better for roll
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTakenI've made worse for a a10 but on console I have a process to start engines and start a taking off procedure with a after take off procedure with ways to combat with it and a custom hud built into the cockpit.
so thats a zero drag glitch. basically if you cover a block with another block, but then detach the covering block they aerodynamics will not update so it will "forget" to have drag. there are many tutorials online. those blocks getting detached are the covering blocks getting thrown off.
@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken it's the low mic quality. Its still bad enough that it comedic, but jut good enough that every word is clear and understandable. Honestly, I recommend you never change it.
what part was most horrific? the fact that i had so many in-development saves or the fact that i know how to make folders and did not put them into one? :)
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken copies or not its just constant plane models...lol Ive been wondering if i could get on a server with you sometime and we could talk planes... i could probably learn some good tips from you.
@@stonethemason12 i mean if you have specific questions i can answer them but just got to the vehicle dissuasion channel on the trailmakers discord and watch engineering content on TH-cam. thats all you nee.
@@DoctorIce_ yeah uh, for one I don't like you for using that particular glitch For Two, the devs patched it, and made sure it was gone for good. There is no way you can recreate it unless some of the new parts coming in the Motorhead DLC don't work right. (A real possibility with trailmakers)
@@Zane12ai I don't know what happened, but I was using a spinner that I had made a long time ago, and when I put the cab on top of it instead of on the bottom, it stayed connected to the anchor pin on the bottom of the spinner, but I haven't seen it happen since. I didn't use any detachable blocks on the build.
You should try to build a bomb sight, either for the bomb bays(would be easyer, its always the same bomb) or for a custom bomb. By bomb sight i mean something that takes speed, altitude etc into consideration
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken you can cheat it With multiple altitude and speed sensors, to tell you how fast and high you are, you can point a camera to almost pre determined spots, and work from there
@@leonardosousa297 i guess thats true. if its just ouputting stored values its doable but then it needs lots of test data if i want a high amount of acuracy. actually i think there is a way to cheese this.
@@leonardosousa297 actually it turns out the math block does nothing i could not do before. a single logic gate can already multiply by any decimal from -1 to 1 and also sending multiple signals through an AND gate already adds them. what i need to make this a viable size is a way to multiply 1 variable by another variable. THAT is whats lacking. and no, i tested it and the math blocks cant do it.
there are ways to, but due to them relying on some physics engine interactions instead of pure logic, it does not work well. best solution right now when making stuff at high speeds and/or high precision it is best to use multiple speed sensors all at different speeds. if you need to detect a sudden speed change then seeing if multiple sensors deactivate within x seconds of each other should work.
So I have been experimenting with two speed sensors on front and back of my planes and I hooke them up to xor gates to make them stop triggering gyros when I’m putting an input in but I can’t find any way to keep it from doing tiny little wobbles besides making it less strong do you think that you could try doing the same thing and find a way to make it function better
so i dont think there is a reason to have it like this but what you want is to have a gap between the sensors. look at the x 29 and x 36 in the video as examples.
About the swing wing, most of the time you are upside down you are also in a turn and the wings should stay extended. Also moving the wings based on lift is not always the best idea, it would be way better to move the wings based on turn performance. The F14 and Panavia tornado use an computer to calculate how much the wings should be swept to maximize turn performance. However i don't think that calculating turn performance is easy to do in trailmakers. Personally i like to control my swing wings manually since i can both maximize turn performance while also keeping complexity low. Getting hit by an EMP or loosing logic in trailmakers is already devastating for swing wing aircraft, having a punch of logic that makes the problem worse isn't worth it
when you are upside down and flaying level, it tucks them in. when pitching upside-down it adds lift, its intentional. unlike real life where g limiters exist, there is no point to calculate the optimal swing to pull exactly 9 Gs. in trailmakers, the more they are swung forwards the more lift and the faster turning due to less stability. so yeah, it really is as simple as just going off of lift. and yeah, the emp point is definitely valid, but its actually not any more threating compared to manual control. the reason why is because there ARE no logic gates. sensors like speed sensors cant be emped if i remember correctly and because they link right to the swing wing there are no extra gates that could fail.
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken Its not about Gs Aircraft, its about keeping your momentum, the horizontal stabilizers make more drag than the wings, so not having to use the vertical stabilizers and only relying on lift is better than sweeping the wings back and immediately using the horizontal stabilizers. Also the logic required is kinda useless in my opinion, since you almost never fly upside down and it only adds unnecessary weight and complexity. About logic, it doesn't matter if your logic is stateless or not, EMPs trigger 90% of you logic, so the more logic you have the susceptible your aircraft becomes to EMPs. I personally fly my aircraft with an controller so i can fine tune the amount of roll and pitch i am sending, i also like to fly aircraft with an low thrust to weight ratio so keeping my momentum is really helpful. edit: how did you make the aircraft automatically unfold its wings when you are upside down and pitching up. Also how is manual control more dangerous?
@@redstone_orange 1: thanks for the clarification, i was wrong about the g forces and i definitely can see how swinging the wings to use lift to pitch would be more beneficial at times. in which case yes my system fails and the best simple option would still be manual. however i also prefer to have high thrust to weights with minimal controls so what works for me is clearly different from what works for you. i will definitely consider it more in the future. 2: its a single 1x1x2 speed sensor so the weight gain is practically not even there. 3: its a single speed sensor. the only things that can be triggered are the hinges on the wings but those will be there in a swing wing with manual controls or with speed sensor controls regardless. also, armor can actually reduce the chances of EMPs, yes this is backed up by testing. 4: yeah, i think this is just a case of different preferences. as i said above, i like high thrust so drag and efficiencies are not as much of a concern for me. 5: again, the method i was proposing in the video requires a single speed sensor pointing up or pointing down (inverted settings as needed.) when flying level, if you have more lift than weight the speed sensor will register an upwards drift and thus tuck the wings which lowers lift until a balance is met. in turns, due to the high AOA, the speed sensor feels as if it was falling very quickly and so it flicks out the wings in sharp turns regardless of rotation or direction.
Considering Arodynamics? I just hit it with a Hammer and slam on Gyros untill it works. Also, did you know that spoilers produce the most lift for both size and weight? They have the same lift as the large modular wing, and weigh 0.1kg for a 2x4 block, both those stats are stupid good. On another note, I encourage you to play arround with that piston "Gearshift" mechanic I discovered.
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken what about the wight though, they weigh the same as the 1x2 connectors! Gotta consider that they are lighter than your eyebrows! Another neat thing i found about them, often times they make roll More stable. Atleast in my experiance, I've heared people say they reduce controllability, and I belive them with trailmakers physics. But me personally, they seem to directly increase stability.
THE CREATIONS ARE LINKED IN THE DESCRIPTION.
also yes i am still taking suggestion on video topics.
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken how about how to make mechs that actually function
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken how to make suspension
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken how to make really good guns (as in edit their scource code)
@@ValhallaZeroFour function in what way?
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken how to make it walk with a lot less trial and error
I love how you make trailmakers sound like a school learning enviroment.
i do what now???
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken yes i learned more from you in 20 minutes than in school about aerodynamic's. I actually listend. Maybe the problem is that i didint care about school but care about my planes not fucking up but that is besides the point. We need teachers like u man
@@Mr_meower wild
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken literally what i feel rn. ive been sitting super still listening but at school as in today i couldnt focus at ALL
@@cwypto4488 well im glad i could help? i honestly don't know if what i do counts as much teaching since its more like tidbits and fun facts rather than a full lesson which can actually be used.
At this point your just teaching us how to build real life planes, love these vids tho keep it up.
Thx man this was helpfull. we need more people who can do this like you.
The builds are getting better, keep it up 👍
thx
I've been looking for a video on the physics of aircraft building in Trailmakers for so long. It turns out no one wants to make videos like this.
yeah. also this is very much just a few small details in the physics. i also think people dont make them because you can just search irl plane stuff and it transfer 1:1.
here is a good video on it, just be aware that for roll its not just dihedral but rather moving center of drag upwards as a whole.
th-cam.com/video/7oy3jXu_DmY/w-d-xo.html
W channel w video
X-29, X-36, and Gripen detected in thumbnail.
10/10 I approve
i was just making as many single engine fighters with distinct forms, glad you like them.
wait x-29 is the forward swept one, X-31 is the TVC one
oops
I've managed to make a logic control assisted aircraft.
When you press D in your keyboard it will roll, of course, but the moment you lift your finger, the control system maintains that angle.
I've done it as well with pitch but not yet on the yaw.
The idea is that when my wings are shot heavily, I can still fly without repairing mid-air as long as the control system is still intact.
nice
I made a swing wing system that based its position on if you were pitching or rolling because a high aspect wing is better for pitch and low aspect is better for roll
thats pretty interesting.
Thanks, your system was an interesting idea I hadn’t thought of, now I’m inspired to make an flight control system tomorrow
@@yapyarlpthegrunt glad to help and inspire.
If I show you all the control surfaces on my SU-57 you'd have a stroke
i think i made worse before
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTakenI've made worse for a a10 but on console I have a process to start engines and start a taking off procedure with a after take off procedure with ways to combat with it and a custom hud built into the cockpit.
@@gearedgamer im sorry, what
@@ValhallaZeroFour what do you mean are you confused
we need this man to get a better pc for this. thank you so much, my planes always fly unstable and now i can maybe make them work right!
i see your fps drop quite a lot
i swear it runs above 20 fps normally, its just when it is recording it drops the frames.
I KNOW RIGHT? i swear this applies to everything. @@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken yeah that happened to me too. I recorded it in obs.
@@Mr_meower same
Why are there so many blocks that fall off, and what are they
so thats a zero drag glitch. basically if you cover a block with another block, but then detach the covering block they aerodynamics will not update so it will "forget" to have drag. there are many tutorials online. those blocks getting detached are the covering blocks getting thrown off.
How do you make folders like that?
in your blueprints folder in the files you can create folders and then you drag and drop your blueprints in and now you have folders
there arnt many channels that focus on how to better your builds that are entertaining.
i still refuse to believe my deranged ramblings count as "entertaining".
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken deranged rambling is fun though
@@ValhallaZeroFour real
@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken it's the low mic quality. Its still bad enough that it comedic, but jut good enough that every word is clear and understandable. Honestly, I recommend you never change it.
@@Zane12ai am never planning on it
When you opened your builder i said HOLY HELL outloud
what part was most horrific? the fact that i had so many in-development saves or the fact that i know how to make folders and did not put them into one? :)
also its just as bad in my new videos as well
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken copies or not its just constant plane models...lol
Ive been wondering if i could get on a server with you sometime and we could talk planes... i could probably learn some good tips from you.
@@stonethemason12 i mean if you have specific questions i can answer them but just got to the vehicle dissuasion channel on the trailmakers discord and watch engineering content on TH-cam. thats all you nee.
Built cockpits will make them look way better
nuh uh
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken yuh huh
@@FirstOrder-le9isnah uh
@@Rocketcraft7167 you just have to get good with them
This video is a reminder of why I will never be good at making planes
but you can learn! just try and you will learn a lot. that's why i build so many jets, quantity help learning.
Yeah trial and error with things that are actually coded to work will probably be better than trying to recreate my floating block glitch
@@DoctorIce_ yeah uh, for one I don't like you for using that particular glitch
For Two, the devs patched it, and made sure it was gone for good. There is no way you can recreate it unless some of the new parts coming in the Motorhead DLC don't work right. (A real possibility with trailmakers)
@@Zane12ai I don't know what happened, but I was using a spinner that I had made a long time ago, and when I put the cab on top of it instead of on the bottom, it stayed connected to the anchor pin on the bottom of the spinner, but I haven't seen it happen since. I didn't use any detachable blocks on the build.
is this john trailmakers????
indeed it is
It is John trailmaker himself
You should try to build a bomb sight, either for the bomb bays(would be easyer, its always the same bomb) or for a custom bomb.
By bomb sight i mean something that takes speed, altitude etc into consideration
cant calculate ballistics, trust me i want to.
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken you can cheat it
With multiple altitude and speed sensors, to tell you how fast and high you are, you can point a camera to almost pre determined spots, and work from there
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken maybe the new logic blocks could help? I'm thinking the +/-/×/÷/ block, it could be used for more complex calculations
@@leonardosousa297 i guess thats true. if its just ouputting stored values its doable but then it needs lots of test data if i want a high amount of acuracy. actually i think there is a way to cheese this.
@@leonardosousa297 actually it turns out the math block does nothing i could not do before. a single logic gate can already multiply by any decimal from -1 to 1 and also sending multiple signals through an AND gate already adds them. what i need to make this a viable size is a way to multiply 1 variable by another variable. THAT is whats lacking. and no, i tested it and the math blocks cant do it.
Is there a logic system where it can detect an abrupt change in speed? Also maybe an ability to change the range of speed before it outputs a signal?
there are ways to, but due to them relying on some physics engine interactions instead of pure logic, it does not work well. best solution right now when making stuff at high speeds and/or high precision it is best to use multiple speed sensors all at different speeds. if you need to detect a sudden speed change then seeing if multiple sensors deactivate within x seconds of each other should work.
So I have been experimenting with two speed sensors on front and back of my planes and I hooke them up to xor gates to make them stop triggering gyros when I’m putting an input in but I can’t find any way to keep it from doing tiny little wobbles besides making it less strong do you think that you could try doing the same thing and find a way to make it function better
so i dont think there is a reason to have it like this but what you want is to have a gap between the sensors. look at the x 29 and x 36 in the video as examples.
I needed that
F-8 crusader I believe
yeah, i was thinking of the company that made it for som e reasn
how do i stop my plane from becoming super maneuverable near their top speed
...make it less manuverable? shift the the center of drag back.
You should try odd width builds
no
About the swing wing, most of the time you are upside down you are also in a turn and the wings should stay extended.
Also moving the wings based on lift is not always the best idea, it would be way better to move the wings based on turn performance. The F14 and Panavia tornado use an computer to calculate how much the wings should be swept to maximize turn performance.
However i don't think that calculating turn performance is easy to do in trailmakers.
Personally i like to control my swing wings manually since i can both maximize turn performance while also keeping complexity low.
Getting hit by an EMP or loosing logic in trailmakers is already devastating for swing wing aircraft, having a punch of logic that makes the problem worse isn't worth it
when you are upside down and flaying level, it tucks them in. when pitching upside-down it adds lift, its intentional.
unlike real life where g limiters exist, there is no point to calculate the optimal swing to pull exactly 9 Gs. in trailmakers, the more they are swung forwards the more lift and the faster turning due to less stability. so yeah, it really is as simple as just going off of lift.
and yeah, the emp point is definitely valid, but its actually not any more threating compared to manual control. the reason why is because there ARE no logic gates. sensors like speed sensors cant be emped if i remember correctly and because they link right to the swing wing there are no extra gates that could fail.
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken
Its not about Gs Aircraft, its about keeping your momentum, the horizontal stabilizers make more drag than the wings, so not having to use the vertical stabilizers and only relying on lift is better than sweeping the wings back and immediately using the horizontal stabilizers.
Also the logic required is kinda useless in my opinion, since you almost never fly upside down and it only adds unnecessary weight and complexity.
About logic, it doesn't matter if your logic is stateless or not, EMPs trigger 90% of you logic, so the more logic you have the susceptible your aircraft becomes to EMPs.
I personally fly my aircraft with an controller so i can fine tune the amount of roll and pitch i am sending, i also like to fly aircraft with an low thrust to weight ratio so keeping my momentum is really helpful.
edit: how did you make the aircraft automatically unfold its wings when you are upside down and pitching up.
Also how is manual control more dangerous?
@@redstone_orange
1: thanks for the clarification, i was wrong about the g forces and i definitely can see how swinging the wings to use lift to pitch would be more beneficial at times. in which case yes my system fails and the best simple option would still be manual. however i also prefer to have high thrust to weights with minimal controls so what works for me is clearly different from what works for you. i will definitely consider it more in the future.
2: its a single 1x1x2 speed sensor so the weight gain is practically not even there.
3: its a single speed sensor. the only things that can be triggered are the hinges on the wings but those will be there in a swing wing with manual controls or with speed sensor controls regardless. also, armor can actually reduce the chances of EMPs, yes this is backed up by testing.
4: yeah, i think this is just a case of different preferences. as i said above, i like high thrust so drag and efficiencies are not as much of a concern for me.
5: again, the method i was proposing in the video requires a single speed sensor pointing up or pointing down (inverted settings as needed.) when flying level, if you have more lift than weight the speed sensor will register an upwards drift and thus tuck the wings which lowers lift until a balance is met. in turns, due to the high AOA, the speed sensor feels as if it was falling very quickly and so it flicks out the wings in sharp turns regardless of rotation or direction.
I open this thread to read comments and see a wall of text, lovely conversation that i didnt read.
this is a great video! if you are up to the challenge, could build a small RC missile
i think already did that in a previous video but it might be interesting to make another version
My brother in christ there is much easier ways to stay level
hah hah. no.
i dont care if i am over engineering something thats useless, its not about if i should, its about if i can.
Considering Arodynamics? I just hit it with a Hammer and slam on Gyros untill it works. Also, did you know that spoilers produce the most lift for both size and weight? They have the same lift as the large modular wing, and weigh 0.1kg for a 2x4 block, both those stats are stupid good.
On another note, I encourage you to play arround with that piston "Gearshift" mechanic I discovered.
real and true and yeah i did know of the spoiler thing. i still dont like how thin they are.
@@ThisIsDumbAllTheNamesAreTaken what about the wight though, they weigh the same as the 1x2 connectors! Gotta consider that they are lighter than your eyebrows! Another neat thing i found about them, often times they make roll More stable. Atleast in my experiance, I've heared people say they reduce controllability, and I belive them with trailmakers physics. But me personally, they seem to directly increase stability.
@@Zane12ai that really depe3nds on mass distribution and other factors. its complicated.
if you use gyros for stability then ehh why not, but for the controls i despise them
good vid but add music
Im still waiting on your response on your last video
You need to get better at building cockpits
nuh uh