安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题








Thanks so much for the observation and comment.
ENABLE_ATMOSPHERIC_ENTRYEFFECT = false
If you really add visual effects, Keen might beat you to it. Just something I thought you might want to know.
The mustang P-51 repllica only made it to a top speed of 300 mk\h - 186mph.
a real Mustang will top speed at 400mph
The B-25j Mitchell replica toped out at 100m\s -223mph
a reall B-25j will top speed at 272 mph
Granite the power to weight ratio is going to be a little scewed due to the 1 size engine I have to use. Also I dont know if you have less drag on angled blocks or if it consideres all block the same amount of drag.
Also I dont think you mentioned anything on the angle of the block or if that is possible to accommodate for. Anyway just wondering, It would be kool if aerodynamics made a difference instead of just for aesthetics.
(side note) I was doing more tests with top speed and whatnot. Since most of my planes use landing gear or rotors and have multiple grids I did a few test flights where I detached all other grids and had the same results as before.