Cool project. I really dig the form factor and the general design. Internal weapons bays are also super cool!
Some tips that might help improve flight characteristics:
Have the v-tail stabs face down a little more and give them combined pitch/roll/yaw control by using rotators instead of default control surfaces. You may also want to increase their overall size a little bit.
Focus less on speed and more on agility (see above)
Whatever landing gear you end up using: move the main gear a good bit forward for a more realistic look. Also, the plane will rotate better on take-off. I know, they‘d be in the way of the bay door opening. But you‘ll find a way ;-) The plane‘s tiny anyway, you might as well end up extending its overall length…
This is gonna be an excellent fighter when it’s done, I’m sure.
That camo is simply amazing! Don’t dig the fact that there’s no cockpit, and the afterburner effect is pretty lackluster but HOLY CRAP THAT CAMO IS GORGEOUS!
@Stephen22 Too little time. I’ve been working on builds on and off but couldn’t bring myself to finish either of them so far. They’ll come… eventually. 😉
Hey, cool little build. Just noticed the issue with the flaps. The problem is that SP physics doesn’t recognize extra control surfaces made from wing parts in the position where flaps would typically be located. There are two ways of fixing this:
make extra flaps, scale them down and hide them in the fuselage, but FORWARD of the actual main wing. Or:
Make hidden wings with integrated flaps. Again, those wings are ideally scaled down (to 0.2 or so) and hidden in the fuselage or inside the cosmetic wings. Check out my old „ACAS“ build to se how this works. It’s far from perfect, but illustrates my point well. Cheers!
@Numbers2 just checked, they work fine. But since they’re LGBs… well, you do actually need to „lase“ the target, using the LITENING pod which has its own camera view. It locks onto the target automatically but you need to be at an appropriate angle for the pod to acquire lock and to release the bombs.
Hi there, cool build! There’s one detail you missed about the Danish F-35A variant: the ‚hump’ on its back (between the v-stabs) is not a luneburg lens. That’s actually the housing for the brake chute. A number of countries have set this as a requirement, among them Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and, prospectively, Germany. You can find more info here: https://www.f35.com/f35/news-and-features/the-f35a-drag-chute-system.html
And luneburg lenses are detachable (though not in-flight), so they’re not used permanently or on every sortie/mission. Same goes for the aforementioned drag chute system, by the way.
@AshdenpawTG22 that’s rather simple… the difference is: the MiG-29 exists, a Su-29 does not. 😉 I mean, technically, there is an Su-29, but that one’s a straight-wing, piston-driven aerobatic/trainer plane.
@CommanderIKEA Oh no worries at all. Again, this one is more detailed and accurate in terms of resembling the S-3 than most other attempts here - all of which need to be honored, though, as this a criminally underappreciated and really quite awesone plane!
Very nice work overall. Especially the landing gear is top-notch! Couple things that I thought were „missing“: in your model, the leading-edge slats move with the trailing-edge while in reality, they are operated only by gravity and air pressure, meaning they drop automatically when the airspeed is low enough (independently from the flaps). Also, the Skyhawks has wing spoilers extending upward from the wings that help with further reducing airspeed in addition to the air brakes in the fuselage.
Hm ... while it's true that the actual 'Doc' has most of its turrets removed, it also doesn't have any bombs in the bay as this specimen never saw any combat and was first converted to a radar calibration plane in 1951 and later used as a ballistic missile target by the Navy after its retirement from the Air Force in 1956. So if you wanted this to be 'realistic' ... just sayin. ;-)
I gotta be honest, as much as I enjoy your challenges, your original fixed wing builds are kind of „hit-or-miss“ for me, but your helos are consistently cool and well made, all while keeping it simple. Really enjoying these!!
Goodness gracious! Great balls of fire! This has to be the best A-model Tomcat yet, right alongside ReinMcDeer‘s builds for the B and D models. Much respect for getting it right!
One tiny little detail: The markings on the AIM-54s are a little off. For „hot“ missiles on U.S. jets it’s always yellow stripe(s) in the front for the warhead and reddish brown in the back for the rocket motor. Same for every missile, basically. Inert missiles for training are either painted blue or have blue markings.
What the heck!? I literally just checked the Fictional GA Challenge the minute this was uploaded and it instantly blew me away. What a beauty!! Gonna have some fun taking her for a spin now …
@1031367473 Well, there is the option of employing either a 23mm (GSh copy) or a 25mm cannon (Bushmaster copy), none of which I’d necessarily call „small“. Sure, it’s no Apache … but everything upward of 20mm is considered a cannon and can pack quite an explosive punch. ;-)
This is incredibly well-built and even handles nicely! Impressive work - and not just for a newcomer. Great parts economy, too. This is close to pro-level. It is only slightly larger than 1:1 scale but that doesn't take away from the quality. May I suggest you add an actual cannon to the turret instead of a wing gun?
Excited to see if this receives more upgrades. You are definitely ready for your own builds!
@TheCommentaryGuy I'm neither a F-14 (sexy plane, but not the only one) or Top Gun fanboy (I think both films mostly live off nostalgia, although TGM does have some cool flying scenes) so I feel relatively impartial here ... still, this design proposal shows exactly, why it wasn't selected for development and testing: it's rough, bulky and the low-wing VG configuration seems like it would cause more harm than good in terms of stability. There are many good reasons why the F-14 was selected.
And let's be real, everything forward of the intakes looks very much like a Tomcat anyway. ;-) Still very cool to see this made in SP!
Cool project. I really dig the form factor and the general design. Internal weapons bays are also super cool!
Some tips that might help improve flight characteristics:
This is gonna be an excellent fighter when it’s done, I’m sure.
+1@Eggplant Yeah, SP has some strange ways of screwin with us. I get it.
That camo is simply amazing! Don’t dig the fact that there’s no cockpit, and the afterburner effect is pretty lackluster but HOLY CRAP THAT CAMO IS GORGEOUS!
@Stephen22 Too little time. I’ve been working on builds on and off but couldn’t bring myself to finish either of them so far. They’ll come… eventually. 😉
+1Hey, cool little build. Just noticed the issue with the flaps. The problem is that SP physics doesn’t recognize extra control surfaces made from wing parts in the position where flaps would typically be located. There are two ways of fixing this:
@Tridentgamer calm down already. Some of us have lives beyond SP. I just fixed the airbrake issues and re-uploaded the build. Enjoy.
@Numbers2 True that. It can be a little annoying to get just the right angle. Glad it’s working for you, though.
@Numbers2 just checked, they work fine. But since they’re LGBs… well, you do actually need to „lase“ the target, using the LITENING pod which has its own camera view. It locks onto the target automatically but you need to be at an appropriate angle for the pod to acquire lock and to release the bombs.
You’re really good at this, aren’t you! :-)
+1Hi there, cool build! There’s one detail you missed about the Danish F-35A variant: the ‚hump’ on its back (between the v-stabs) is not a luneburg lens. That’s actually the housing for the brake chute. A number of countries have set this as a requirement, among them Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and, prospectively, Germany. You can find more info here: https://www.f35.com/f35/news-and-features/the-f35a-drag-chute-system.html
And luneburg lenses are detachable (though not in-flight), so they’re not used permanently or on every sortie/mission. Same goes for the aforementioned drag chute system, by the way.
Cheers
+1@AshdenpawTG22 No worries, I was just nitpicking ;-)
@SilverStar I had my suspicions… when I loaded the helo in game, it didn’t seem that oversized at all. Thanks for clarifying!
Very nice model! Why make it so over-dimensional, though? Easier to work on details?
@AshdenpawTG22 that’s rather simple… the difference is: the MiG-29 exists, a Su-29 does not. 😉 I mean, technically, there is an Su-29, but that one’s a straight-wing, piston-driven aerobatic/trainer plane.
@CommanderIKEA Oh no worries at all. Again, this one is more detailed and accurate in terms of resembling the S-3 than most other attempts here - all of which need to be honored, though, as this a criminally underappreciated and really quite awesone plane!
This would have every right to call itself an S-3 replica since it is, in fact, better than most S-3 replicas on here. Nice job!
+1@spectre118 Same here! I’m on iOS.
+1Wait, there are ‚possibilities‘ with the control base? I am checking this out!
@ACGspOfficial No, I'll just block you instead. What a stupid thing to say.
@AgDynamics You said it best.
Very nice work overall. Especially the landing gear is top-notch! Couple things that I thought were „missing“: in your model, the leading-edge slats move with the trailing-edge while in reality, they are operated only by gravity and air pressure, meaning they drop automatically when the airspeed is low enough (independently from the flaps). Also, the Skyhawks has wing spoilers extending upward from the wings that help with further reducing airspeed in addition to the air brakes in the fuselage.
Congrats on pursuing your dream job! Go get em!
+11Hm ... while it's true that the actual 'Doc' has most of its turrets removed, it also doesn't have any bombs in the bay as this specimen never saw any combat and was first converted to a radar calibration plane in 1951 and later used as a ballistic missile target by the Navy after its retirement from the Air Force in 1956. So if you wanted this to be 'realistic' ... just sayin. ;-)
T for sure! Finally someone does the Comanche justice ... again! ;-)
+1You, sir, should most definitely produce more ft content, and especially in video form! Great analytical approach and super professional narration.
+2Marvelous build! Now all I need to learn is how to actually slow that thing down for landing. Any advice? 😉
T
T!
Mhm, one for the finer palates… 😉 T, sir, T indeed!
Legacy Hornet with JSOW and SLAM-ER (which are AGM-84H, by the way, not AGM-88) ? I wonder which nation can pull that off … Finland maybe?
I read „Japanese burger“ and didn’t even think twice.
+1It’s completely safe as long as … hold on …
.
..
… ok, we’re fucked. Sorry bout that.
... as opposed to all the less detailed 3D elephants on this site ...
@SimpleVienne Calm down, some of us have actual jobs and a life outside of SP
Best contribution in months by anyone! :-)
+1Love the simplicity while getting the look & feel spot on! Check out my Tornados, if you like: 217 parts basic version and 533 parts ASSTA 3.1 version with LGBs
:-)
+1I gotta be honest, as much as I enjoy your challenges, your original fixed wing builds are kind of „hit-or-miss“ for me, but your helos are consistently cool and well made, all while keeping it simple. Really enjoying these!!
@LinusTouchTips No worries, I was just nitpicking since the build is so damn good! ;-)
Goodness gracious! Great balls of fire! This has to be the best A-model Tomcat yet, right alongside ReinMcDeer‘s builds for the B and D models. Much respect for getting it right!
One tiny little detail: The markings on the AIM-54s are a little off. For „hot“ missiles on U.S. jets it’s always yellow stripe(s) in the front for the warhead and reddish brown in the back for the rocket motor. Same for every missile, basically. Inert missiles for training are either painted blue or have blue markings.
@LinusTouchTips … and succeeded big time. First one in SP to get them 100% accurate, as far as I know!
What the heck!? I literally just checked the Fictional GA Challenge the minute this was uploaded and it instantly blew me away. What a beauty!! Gonna have some fun taking her for a spin now …
@1031367473 Well, there is the option of employing either a 23mm (GSh copy) or a 25mm cannon (Bushmaster copy), none of which I’d necessarily call „small“. Sure, it’s no Apache … but everything upward of 20mm is considered a cannon and can pack quite an explosive punch. ;-)
+1This is incredibly well-built and even handles nicely! Impressive work - and not just for a newcomer. Great parts economy, too. This is close to pro-level. It is only slightly larger than 1:1 scale but that doesn't take away from the quality. May I suggest you add an actual cannon to the turret instead of a wing gun?
Excited to see if this receives more upgrades. You are definitely ready for your own builds!
+1T! This looks fun!
+1@RicardoACE THIS
„ update simpleplans and add maps for mobile mobile devices, it's boring to see only sea, my cell phone is powerful and can support them.“
+4@TheCommentaryGuy I'm neither a F-14 (sexy plane, but not the only one) or Top Gun fanboy (I think both films mostly live off nostalgia, although TGM does have some cool flying scenes) so I feel relatively impartial here ... still, this design proposal shows exactly, why it wasn't selected for development and testing: it's rough, bulky and the low-wing VG configuration seems like it would cause more harm than good in terms of stability. There are many good reasons why the F-14 was selected.
And let's be real, everything forward of the intakes looks very much like a Tomcat anyway. ;-) Still very cool to see this made in SP!
T
@DarDragon Who are the other two?
Holy moly. This is all I could ever ask for!
+1@LlamaIndustries It's anything BUT an Apache. But if you're out for references, it's practically a Cobra with landing gear instead of skids.
+2