I'm glad you built this particular jet. Such a brilliant combination of so many crazy ideas "Hey guys, let's make a jet bomber that drives like a motorcycle and runs on fireworks! Also, let's have it carry nukes!" "Go home, Bob, you're wasted."
To make anything (ships, cars, planes, people, anything) more agile, reduce weight.
Turning is the result of "leverage", which you can look up on wikipedia. Basically, in SP if the control surface (the flappy bits) is bigger and far away from the center of lift and center of mass, it will have better leverage. Modern jet fighters have such big control surfaces that the entire tail pieces move like this
The funny thing is you really did a beautiful job recreating this hideous jalopy. The from the commie-blue cockpit to the skin panels, this is a gorgeous tribute to a truly ugly machine.
@CRJ900Pilot Some planes were that glossy, but not that smooth. Rivets, panels, welds etc would break up and texture the surface of even the shinier planes, and I doubt they'd stay quite so beautiful during heavy use in-theatre. But if you google "shiny usaaf" you'll see quite a few B-17's, P-47's and P-51's that are almost mirror-shiny.
@BogdanX Oh, I'm not worried about points, I just wanted you to know about it because you have a passion for detail and because you make a lot of WW2 planes. Also, a glossy finish has less wind resistance.
There is no "winning." If someone doesn't want to talk to you, then they don't want to talk to you. It's not an issue of right or wrong. People will choose to communicate when they find it appealing and that's it. These forums are filled with immature demands for attention and they are usually met with the indifference they deserve.
@MrVaultech StuG V was called the Jagdpanther. Ok, I'm stretching the truth a little because it was a purpose built anti-tank vehicle and not a multi-purpose Sturmgeschutz but it's pretty close. Wiki
@Elicushman Try digging around on google for how-to's , lists and info on funkytrees. If that fails you can always ask around on the Simpleplanes discord for help.
@MobileFriendly The Helldiver was a piece of junk, Curtiss made some iconic planes but they were never as good as their competitors. Where some companies could improve a design with later revisions, Curtiss just made a big mess.
Midway was a late-war carrier, and the Dauntless was an early-war plane, the Helldiver eventually replaced it but crews usually preferred the old SBD. I have a pretty good Dauntless posted at the top of my profile if anyone is interested. It's pretty old, but it comes with instructions that'll help you become an expert at divebombing.
@WarHawk95 There's a brief rundown of the specific models in the article, but you're right. The P-51's involved were specialized for ground attack, and their pilots were not very experienced, unfortunately.
@asteroidbook345 I've intentionally stayed uninformed about that event. In this case, I just happened to be reading about something that seemed so unbelievably interesting that I had to share it with someone. DC-3 Gooneybirds being used as make-shift bombers, Corsairs fighting Mustangs, Corsairs fighting Corsairs! It sounds like a novel or something.
Looks like personal problem to me, the front page is full of high quality builds. As for classic masters leaving or taking a break, that's what happens. Ideally, new people step up and take their place. So why not improve your style instead of complaining?
@BogdanX Given much more time and resources, the jet program would have more than paid for itself. The engines themselves were cheap and simple to produce compared the ultra-engineered big V-12 engines of the era. But the attrition rate was never solved during the war. Perhaps if the Germans applied some American-style mass production methods to the program, they could have made the attrition rate cost-effective. After all, you aren't losing the materials if the engine can be recycled.
This is all what-ifs, because the way the program was run and eventually implemented was a colassal waste of resources, manpower and expertise. That's what happens when the talent and strength of a nation is lead by deluded half-wits.
@WarshipDude They were 41,000 each x2 ships. As for the 'pocket' battleships, you are right on the money, German heavy cruisers were derisively called pocket battleships. My mistake.
@PrinceZuko Yup, that's my point. Raw performance isn't everything. The USN had to train and deploy thousands and thousands of brand new pilots and the F4U was not the plane for that task.
This boat is mad cute, you get an upvote and a spotlight.
Polikarpov PO-2
@EternalDarkness
@TheSavageManZ
@AsteroidBook345
Interested in your thoughts here
I did link it. Click the word " cameras!" In my other comment. That's the blue paint job, they also used a pink one, lol
I'm glad you built this particular jet. Such a brilliant combination of so many crazy ideas "Hey guys, let's make a jet bomber that drives like a motorcycle and runs on fireworks! Also, let's have it carry nukes!" "Go home, Bob, you're wasted."
The Phantom's older brother, you can see a family resemblance.
You've got talent
How on earth did you keep the part count below 700 like that? Did you sell your soul to the devil in exchange for these skills or what?
CAMERAS!
The spy plane models of the Spit were extra fast and had cool paintjobs.
To make anything (ships, cars, planes, people, anything) more agile, reduce weight.
Turning is the result of "leverage", which you can look up on wikipedia. Basically, in SP if the control surface (the flappy bits) is bigger and far away from the center of lift and center of mass, it will have better leverage. Modern jet fighters have such big control surfaces that the entire tail pieces move like this
I was ready to upvote this, both because it is a pretty decent chassis and also not a rickroll
@asteroidbook345 Yeah, somebody built something similar so I reposted this one.
@P0TET0Z
Push it to the limit
@BogdanX Yeah, no arguing with that. Now that I've got your attention I should probably tell you about the pink spyplanes of the RAF. :)
@P0TET0Z You da man!
@jrodriguezwang That's really funny
THIS AINT 2-D
This is.
The funny thing is you really did a beautiful job recreating this hideous jalopy. The from the commie-blue cockpit to the skin panels, this is a gorgeous tribute to a truly ugly machine.
@metaphysicalgnome And I respect you
@CRJ900Pilot Some planes were that glossy, but not that smooth. Rivets, panels, welds etc would break up and texture the surface of even the shinier planes, and I doubt they'd stay quite so beautiful during heavy use in-theatre. But if you google "shiny usaaf" you'll see quite a few B-17's, P-47's and P-51's that are almost mirror-shiny.
@rexzion Ouch!
@BogdanX Oh, I'm not worried about points, I just wanted you to know about it because you have a passion for detail and because you make a lot of WW2 planes. Also, a glossy finish has less wind resistance.
There is no "winning." If someone doesn't want to talk to you, then they don't want to talk to you. It's not an issue of right or wrong. People will choose to communicate when they find it appealing and that's it. These forums are filled with immature demands for attention and they are usually met with the indifference they deserve.
If you want to make it historically accurate, be sure to make the torpedo a dud. Also, "T"
@MrVaultech StuG V was called the Jagdpanther. Ok, I'm stretching the truth a little because it was a purpose built anti-tank vehicle and not a multi-purpose Sturmgeschutz but it's pretty close. Wiki
@CobraHueyIndustries Thanks dude
@Elicushman Try digging around on google for how-to's , lists and info on funkytrees. If that fails you can always ask around on the Simpleplanes discord for help.
You can use funky trees to make normal control inputs result in tank-like steering.
@MobileFriendly The Helldiver was a piece of junk, Curtiss made some iconic planes but they were never as good as their competitors. Where some companies could improve a design with later revisions, Curtiss just made a big mess.
Midway was a late-war carrier, and the Dauntless was an early-war plane, the Helldiver eventually replaced it but crews usually preferred the old SBD. I have a pretty good Dauntless posted at the top of my profile if anyone is interested. It's pretty old, but it comes with instructions that'll help you become an expert at divebombing.
@WarshipDude The Dragon was a set of modified DC-3's, but yeah, same airframe.
@CobraHueyIndustries Yeah, what @WarHawk95 said.
@Alta2809 That's very cool!
I dont think people should be allowed to change their names.
@WarHawk95 There's a brief rundown of the specific models in the article, but you're right. The P-51's involved were specialized for ground attack, and their pilots were not very experienced, unfortunately.
666
@asteroidbook345 I've intentionally stayed uninformed about that event. In this case, I just happened to be reading about something that seemed so unbelievably interesting that I had to share it with someone. DC-3 Gooneybirds being used as make-shift bombers, Corsairs fighting Mustangs, Corsairs fighting Corsairs! It sounds like a novel or something.
Very smooth design
@metaphysicalgnome It kind of highlights the pointlessness of warfare in general, doesn't it?
@marcox43 Hell yeah dude, you squeezed a ton of detail out of only 150 parts. I wish I could do that.
@metaphysicalgnome He'll drop it when he's ready, there are probably some good Bears to play around with while we wait.
@metaphysicalgnome Right on
@metaphysicalgnome Hey, I just hope you feel better, you know? I hate that feeling like there's nothing to do and no one to talk to. Good luck man
Looks like personal problem to me, the front page is full of high quality builds. As for classic masters leaving or taking a break, that's what happens. Ideally, new people step up and take their place. So why not improve your style instead of complaining?
Is that a Panzer IV?
I like the teeth
@Nightgems Let me know when you do
@BogdanX Given much more time and resources, the jet program would have more than paid for itself. The engines themselves were cheap and simple to produce compared the ultra-engineered big V-12 engines of the era. But the attrition rate was never solved during the war. Perhaps if the Germans applied some American-style mass production methods to the program, they could have made the attrition rate cost-effective. After all, you aren't losing the materials if the engine can be recycled.
This is all what-ifs, because the way the program was run and eventually implemented was a colassal waste of resources, manpower and expertise. That's what happens when the talent and strength of a nation is lead by deluded half-wits.
@WarshipDude They were 41,000 each x2 ships. As for the 'pocket' battleships, you are right on the money, German heavy cruisers were derisively called pocket battleships. My mistake.
@FishMiner Sorry, got the terminology confused with their heavy cruisers. I will edit.
@PrinceZuko Yup, that's my point. Raw performance isn't everything. The USN had to train and deploy thousands and thousands of brand new pilots and the F4U was not the plane for that task.
@MAHADI Check out the download count! What the hell?