@OpenHere Lmao yea ur right but the B1B Lancer program wasn’t introduced in 1985. The Tu95 Bear was introduced in 1956. Almost 30 years apart, so I am comparing it today with modern standards. But you are right in the way that you are describing it.
@Graingy but heres the thing, yes the B52 is good but doesn’t have the speed or survivability in heavier circumstances. I almost started laughing when I heard the term, “Tu-95”. The thing looks like it is stuck in 1947. It still has turboprops for some weird reason, the engineers must’ve thought, “hmm, I am definitely 100% positive a turboprop bomber that wont stand a real chance against modern fighters within 20-30 years of the first deployment will be a great idea compared to a jet bomber with engines to be refined further in the years to come!” The Tu-95 literally needs to have tires strapped to its wings and fuselage to stop any missiles from causing any damage over Ukraine. The tires don't even help they just contribute to drag, limit maneuverability and evasive maneuvers, make it heavier, pose a hazard to pretty much everything because if it is hit by a missile or whatever the flammable rubber and structural integrity side effects the tires bring just make it an easier target. Can’t believe they actually think tires are effective defensive measures lmao. (Btw I don’t want to cause a debate, I am just talking about my opinion backed up with factual evidence and stuff, dont take it too seriously :D)
@TalonTheCRTguy does the T-38C Talon have variable sweep wings, internal weapons bays, heavy bombing capability, low radar visibility, and nuclear capability?
@TheNewSPplayer like lag and processing power im pretty sure.
Right now it’s at 425 which isn’t bad. My BS61-100 however… well I think we can tell how many people on a phone can’t play with it right here. Just look at the very last “parts” detail in the specifications
@TheMouse its not a teaser it’s a meme lmao
@TheUltimatePlaneLover behold: the USS Gyatt
@TheUltimatePlaneLover fantum
@toorbokkot perhaps
@TheNewSPplayer
@NominalSituation
@LoganTheGameDev
@DatFiat126Guy19
@EasternAviation2015
@BYardley
@Delta243
@Christiant2
@SLSD11ph
@TheMouse
@Mav3r1ck
@IzzyTheCat
If you want to be tagged on any future builds, comment T on the teasers or ask to be put on my tagging list. The link is given by clicking on any word in this comment
@TheUltimatePlaneLover lmao
@Rb2h yes, but you need a description and instructions in the description
@A380lover800 i have no faith in humanity
@A380lover800 vape flavored with bacon
@PannerTerkins yes
@theNoobCountry2 im from manhattan …
@NominalSituation lmao
@TheMouse yea it does help a lot
if you want to be tagged on any future builds, comment T on the teasers or ask to be put on my tagging list. The link is given by clicking (here)
@TheMouse
@Mav3r1ck
@IzzyTheCat
@RolyBuilds
@LoganTheGameDev
@TheUltimatePlaneLover
T
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
PEA frenzy, can’t loom anywhere without seeing some PEA
@FOXHOUND26 probably like June to august or something, don't have much planned for plane building in the summer
T
@LoganTheGameDev any time ;)
@LoganTheGameDev yes
Note: not carrier operable. The aircraft carrier images are just cool in my opinion
@TalonTheCRTguy does look badass though and lives up to the reputation
@FOXHOUND26 its not just that, they lack the technology to make one that can now compete with the West
@TheMouse yea
@TheMouse
@OpenHere Lmao yea ur right but the B1B Lancer program wasn’t introduced in 1985. The Tu95 Bear was introduced in 1956. Almost 30 years apart, so I am comparing it today with modern standards. But you are right in the way that you are describing it.
@Graingy a bit less is an understatement
@FOXHOUND26 … (I mean I don't want to fight against that it’s good enough, Ill take it)
@Graingy but heres the thing, yes the B52 is good but doesn’t have the speed or survivability in heavier circumstances. I almost started laughing when I heard the term, “Tu-95”. The thing looks like it is stuck in 1947. It still has turboprops for some weird reason, the engineers must’ve thought, “hmm, I am definitely 100% positive a turboprop bomber that wont stand a real chance against modern fighters within 20-30 years of the first deployment will be a great idea compared to a jet bomber with engines to be refined further in the years to come!” The Tu-95 literally needs to have tires strapped to its wings and fuselage to stop any missiles from causing any damage over Ukraine. The tires don't even help they just contribute to drag, limit maneuverability and evasive maneuvers, make it heavier, pose a hazard to pretty much everything because if it is hit by a missile or whatever the flammable rubber and structural integrity side effects the tires bring just make it an easier target. Can’t believe they actually think tires are effective defensive measures lmao. (Btw I don’t want to cause a debate, I am just talking about my opinion backed up with factual evidence and stuff, dont take it too seriously :D)
@TalonTheCRTguy does the T-38C Talon have variable sweep wings, internal weapons bays, heavy bombing capability, low radar visibility, and nuclear capability?
just my opinion, ;) don’t take it too seriously if you simp for the Tu160
@Apollo018362 W helicopter
@Christiant2 no cockpit on the CT-4? :(
@Christiant2 nope
@TheMouse yes
if you want to be tagged on any future builds, comment T on the teasers or ask to be put on my tagging list located (here)
@TheMouse
@Mav3r1ck
@IzzyTheCat
Lmao, I made this but in a glass
MiG-29 lookin’ ahh
@AeroCheese 18 downloads*
@TheNewSPplayer like lag and processing power im pretty sure.
Right now it’s at 425 which isn’t bad. My BS61-100 however… well I think we can tell how many people on a phone can’t play with it right here. Just look at the very last “parts” detail in the specifications
@Christiant2 chonker
@Christiant2 big chungus