No Tags
No description.
Specifications
Spotlights
- Ren 1.8 years ago
General Characteristics
- Successors 1 airplane(s) +14 bonus
- Created On Android
- Wingspan 33.5ft (10.2m)
- Length 53.3ft (16.2m)
- Height 20.1ft (6.1m)
- Empty Weight 20,455lbs (9,278kg)
- Loaded Weight 28,625lbs (12,984kg)
Performance
- Power/Weight Ratio 1.766
- Wing Loading 60.4lbs/ft2 (294.9kg/m2)
- Wing Area 473.9ft2 (44.0m2)
- Drag Points 2649
Parts
- Number of Parts 49
- Control Surfaces 6
- Performance Cost 342
@OrderlyHippo i just started building the nose today,it was difficult to build,i spent more than 4 hours creating the nose (only the nose!!)heres the progress
Smol nose
Yeah, I'll help you with anything on it, if I can. Just tag me on the post
I can make VTOL nice and functional if that’s what you mean by “VTOL engine help.” Basically just transfer stuff from my current build and improving it a lot. I want it to be clean and low part count (or at least have a low part count version like this post).
@OrderlyHippo Thats a very good idea.I can only build body but the VTOL engine,did you mean you can help me build it?
Man, listen. There’s not a single respectable F-35B with good part count to looks ratio on this site. Lemoose’s build is the best I’ve found but it’s not as clean looking as this one (originally by Emodude) closely followed by this one. The reason so many people fail is because it has a lot of unique qualities like your Blackhawk. I honestly think you can build one under 200 parts that’s as good looking and clean as this post. I might just make a challenge for it to happen…probably won’t get a lot of success though. I've studied the body of this aircraft so much I can tell you exactly how it should be and how to convert the 35A to a 35B variant but I'm bad at building. I just want to program flight controls for the 35B on a plane that doesn't suck.
I've seen literally all of them on this site. These are all the 1/2 decent ones and a lot are dated without the new build tools:
you
can
build
better
than
all
these
builds
if
you
HAVE GOOD PART COUNT! I'm done ranting. Thanks for reading
BRO THIS IS NUTS
so uh…… what was happened?
So, anyone want some popcorn?
Nice build btw
@Pigeony physics in simpleplanes are complicated for me, I don't think it's a bad game, because I enjoy it more than anyone else for miles around...although .... if I have some aircraft with wings in arrow angle (osea that should not be so maneuverable) with a maneuverability higher than that of a plane with a wing in neutral arrow, even a bomber (quite ugly) that weighs a lot only reaches 400mhp and has arrow angle but has a maneuverability worthy of any aircraft of fifth generation, I think even more maneuverable than a pigpen.
@NEWCOUNTVIA so why would you say SimplePlanes is bad when you where the weak link, not the game?
@Pigeony because when I downloaded it I tried to make it more maneuverable, and it was a little bit difficult...👍
I cant accept this for 2 reasons, 1. It’s a not a successor 2. It has to be strictly 50 parts with no deadweights
@NEWCOUNTVIA why would you say that here
simpleplanes shit game..... your airplane is very nice
@SimpleTankers oh ok
@SimpleTankers are you german?