You should add a few pictures to description. Many of us are not able to enjoy this great ship in game, as it is too big, so we'd like to at least see its features on pictures.
Your post has been removed. Please read these rules about posting planes.
Please try to make major changes to a plane before posting it. Simply painting an object a different color, or adding a few guns is not enough to consider it your own. In the future please credit the original maker, and try to post your own work.
You should have simply reported it. In a drop-down menu where you'd have "Edit" and similar stuff on your build select "Report", select "Copy", and put the URL of the original build in the description of the report. Then it's up to moderators to remove it.
@SpencerTreePuncher I think I have a few better ones, in terms of design, details, realism... This is more of a quick fun build. Still, I'm glad you like it.
@SledDriver if target reticle stays blue, then you are spawning a friendly plane. You can't lock onto those. Just set air traffic to dense and wait for them to come to you.
@Roswell missiles are 24 parts x 12 = 288 + 6 x 18 parts per pair of rails = 396 + 48 parts for supports = 444 parts. Radar has 45 parts, which is a total of 489 parts. That leaves 42 parts for the base and housing, four countermeasures, and a cockpit.
If you mean musical instruments, it's too far off-topic for a tag in my opinion. But if you manage to persuade another moderator to add it, I won't object. Flight instruments/indicators belong in parts category.
If we eliminate all VTOLs, lighter-than-air craft, and other "cheaters", my bet is on Dornier Do-29. It was a partial tiltrotor STOL aircraft with minimal controllable speed of just 24km/h.
@Tully2001 @ChiChiWerx @Mod @Aeroman77 thanks guys.
+1@GritAerospaceSolutionsLTD builds deleted by user are completely removed from the site. There's no way to bring it back.
+1@randomusername he's blind to the wae. We've been showing it to him for a while now, but he keeps going the wrong wae.
+1Delph, are you ok? You made something not abstract :)
+1@Phantom051 you can contact developers through the contact button at the bottom of the page.
+1selfDestructTimer = "x" is what you are looking for. Just replace x with a number of seconds to self destruction.
+1You should add a few pictures to description. Many of us are not able to enjoy this great ship in game, as it is too big, so we'd like to at least see its features on pictures.
+1Nice design, good choice of armament and low part count. ood job.
+1Upvote for the description.
+1Your post has been removed. Please read these rules about posting planes.
+1Please try to make major changes to a plane before posting it. Simply painting an object a different color, or adding a few guns is not enough to consider it your own. In the future please credit the original maker, and try to post your own work.
Wait till you rejoin Builders chat. Tanks aren't really a topic these days, being overshadowed by something much bigger.
+1You should have simply reported it. In a drop-down menu where you'd have "Edit" and similar stuff on your build select "Report", select "Copy", and put the URL of the original build in the description of the report. Then it's up to moderators to remove it.
+1It looks good. Except for control surfaces. Why separate them so much?
+1Nice ship. Just give it a name and some description.
+1Your post has been removed as spam. This is your third identical post.
+1Killing people is overrated. Have you tried economic sanctions?
+1@Hyattorama no problem :)
+1It's chubby, but well-made. You should practice proportion a little.
+1@Zyvx thanks.
+1Not bad. It's still a bit heavy, but flies much better than before.
+1@Chancey21 then it's justified. I totally forgot about that.
+1@Johawks1976 in naval terminology, there's blue water (open sea), green water (litoral/coastal waters), and brown water (lakes, rivers, channels).
+1@SpencerTreePuncher I think I have a few better ones, in terms of design, details, realism... This is more of a quick fun build. Still, I'm glad you like it.
+1@Z3RO thanks. I'm glad you like 'em.
+1@ethanplanes your comment has been removed for foul language.
+1@SledDriver enjoy shooting 'em.
+1@SledDriver if target reticle stays blue, then you are spawning a friendly plane. You can't lock onto those. Just set air traffic to dense and wait for them to come to you.
+1@grizzlitn thanks.
+1@SledDriver like normal missiles. Just activate 1 to start the system.
+1@ThomasRoderick thanks.
+1Very nice, except for the nose. It is shorter and pointier on the real one. And pointed down a bit.
+1@Roswell missiles are 24 parts x 12 = 288 + 6 x 18 parts per pair of rails = 396 + 48 parts for supports = 444 parts. Radar has 45 parts, which is a total of 489 parts. That leaves 42 parts for the base and housing, four countermeasures, and a cockpit.
+1If you mean musical instruments, it's too far off-topic for a tag in my opinion. But if you manage to persuade another moderator to add it, I won't object. Flight instruments/indicators belong in parts category.
+1@Mainblocks just leave a hole and fill it with thin fuselage blocks. I'm glad you like it.
+1Use tags...
+1Also, add pics of what it looks like deployed to description.
I must have accidentally unfollowed you. Fixed now :)
+1I think you should add windshield and mirrors. Maybe some detail on the middle bulge on the very front.
+1If we eliminate all VTOLs, lighter-than-air craft, and other "cheaters", my bet is on Dornier Do-29. It was a partial tiltrotor STOL aircraft with minimal controllable speed of just 24km/h.
+1@Hyattorama no problem.
+1@tsampoy I've created Futuristic tag. I don't think I've changed now that I'm a mod. Except for the fact that I can ban people now :)
+1@Watlel you don't wanna offer a winning prize that big. What if I win? I have a lot of planes. And there are users who have even more.
+1@LiamW added.
+1Please use tags. It's easy, and makes your build easy to find in the future.
+1You should use tags to make your build more easily accessible.
+1@LeonardoEngineering this build is quite successful as it is. I don't think it needs a feature.
+1@Dllama4 @ThePrototype @Tankace1 @BaconAircraft @Planefun @AWESOMENESS360 @ThePilotDude @danman12 @Supercraft888 @Tully2001 thanks guys.
+1@BurkeEnterprise @Deiaa @FastDan thanks.
+1@DerekSP I was at the bar, quick checking the site. I've read the post now. Can't wait for the next one.
+1Suspension is a bit stiff. The rest of the truck is good.
+1@RedSample I'm glad you like it. An-72 was the main inspiration.
+1