Hey there! This is definitely the most beautiful A-4 build on the site yet. I’m with @TheVexedVortex on this one: please flesh it out at some point and make it THE definitive SimplePlanes A-4!
There is only one gripe I have with this: the flight model. While the roll rate is spot on, pitching and turning is a drag. It feels like flying a school bus loaded with cement! ;-) Am I doing it wrong? For take-off, I followed your instructions (“Use 100% trim nose up + half flaps”), once I’m in the air at a decent airspeed, I neutralize trim and try to maneuver, which I find to be really hard, even when I use trim nose down for level flight. Any suggestions? Thanks!!
@Heganix So…what is the question? You stated that you „perfect the designs“ of other people’s creations … well, I don’t really see any significant changes to the original. In fact, it is pretty much exactly the same. So it’s even more important then to tag the original creator and/or ask for their permission. It’s a simple rule.
Hey, try to make the flaps work by removing the actual wing parts from them and using hidden flaps in front of the CoL instead. The way the flaps are now, they work „backwards“, meaning: they reduce lift when they‘re down, when in reality, they increase lift. It’s an unfortunate flaw in the SP flight model.
This is the best revamp of anything I’ve seen on here so far. Clean, simple (well, simple-looking) and with attention to detail, but not overblown. You even put in actual cannons and modeled them accurately. Nice job!
@CaptFoxworth19 thanks for the heads-up! However, there are countless examples of custom flaps working just fine. Most of them seem to be constructed without any actual wing parts as the flaps, but with fuselage parts only. I can‘t figure out a „formula“ for this to work correctly. Does ist come down to XMLing the drag values? Is there a secret recipe?
Hey guys, is there any clarity on this issue yet? I have the same problem. I am relatively new to building custom wings and all the other control surfaces work fine. But the flaps make my plane pitch down, when I lower them. Any further suggestions would be much appreciated! Check out my build on my profile if you like (it's the only one there). THX!
@SimpleCollector Wow, you get butt-hurt quickly. I suggest you quit going around, trying to order creators to lower part counts and also: „this place is American“ - really? You mean the internet? This site? The SP community? What’s American, mate?
Great stuff! Only criticism I'd be able to put forward is for the description: the livery is of the Bundesmarine, not Kriegsmarine. It used to be called Kriegsmarine when the Nazis were in Power. Today, the "Marine" (official name since 1995) is simply the naval branch of the Germany army, "Bundeswehr". Hence the correct name "Bundesmarine" which was the colloquial name up until 1995.
Never knew the F-20 was supercruise-capable. This is some seriously brilliant work. Great flight model und sleek looks. I just love everything F-5(ish)!
It is, no doubt, one of the two prettiest Me-262s on the entire site. However, there are some quirks in its flight behavior: it has quite severe auto-rotation and it takes forever to actually lift off and the pitch is hard to control. I know that the real-world Me-262 wasn't exactly a STOL fighter but for the sake of flyability maybe give it a little more power and controllability. Other than that: GREAT!
I also find the F-14 very daunting in terms of building one in SP. I think you did a very nice job in getting the proportions and silhouette right. Also the flight characteristics come close to the real thing, from what I can tell. One thing I wondered about: why didn’t you include a gun? Maybe because it wasn’t really featured in Top Gun? Anyway, nice job!!
Hey guys! Thanks for the downloads and upvotes so far. I'd really like to encourage you to help me improve upon the flight characteristics. While I'm still fairly new to this whole "building-nice-looking-and-flying-machines"-thing and thus like to keep my planes simple (zing), I don't shy away from a little more internal complexity when it comes to moving parts, modifications to stock parts, etc. So just hit me with your thoughts, suggestions and advice!
@Mustang51 Good Point. Just after I replied to your comment I started looking at pictures and drawings of the Me-262 again and those were my thoughts exactly! The Meteor, now that might be a good idea!
@Mustang51 Hey thanks, that’s very kind of you! And you’re definitely right about the engine placement. I noticed that only much later. In fact I didn’t even look at reference for this one and built it from memory ... which mostly relies on an old Revell model kit that I built as a child. I guess halfway through I kinda abandoned wanting to make a replica and focused more on „flyability“. ;-) But who knows ... a more proper replica might come some time soon.
@2Papi2Chulo Thanks for replying! I’ll try my hand at faster airspeeds. 😉
Hey there! This is definitely the most beautiful A-4 build on the site yet. I’m with @TheVexedVortex on this one: please flesh it out at some point and make it THE definitive SimplePlanes A-4!
There is only one gripe I have with this: the flight model. While the roll rate is spot on, pitching and turning is a drag. It feels like flying a school bus loaded with cement! ;-) Am I doing it wrong? For take-off, I followed your instructions (“Use 100% trim nose up + half flaps”), once I’m in the air at a decent airspeed, I neutralize trim and try to maneuver, which I find to be really hard, even when I use trim nose down for level flight. Any suggestions? Thanks!!
@Heganix So…what is the question? You stated that you „perfect the designs“ of other people’s creations … well, I don’t really see any significant changes to the original. In fact, it is pretty much exactly the same. So it’s even more important then to tag the original creator and/or ask for their permission. It’s a simple rule.
Hey, try to make the flaps work by removing the actual wing parts from them and using hidden flaps in front of the CoL instead. The way the flaps are now, they work „backwards“, meaning: they reduce lift when they‘re down, when in reality, they increase lift. It’s an unfortunate flaw in the SP flight model.
This is the best revamp of anything I’ve seen on here so far. Clean, simple (well, simple-looking) and with attention to detail, but not overblown. You even put in actual cannons and modeled them accurately. Nice job!
@ShootsPlanes That he did. ;-)
@ShootsPlanes How so? It clearly didn't despite having seen action.
@SimplyPlain Right you are! This is a little gem right there.
@EternalDarkness You made my day! Thank you so much, this has been driving me mad! :-)
@CaptFoxworth19 thanks for the heads-up! However, there are countless examples of custom flaps working just fine. Most of them seem to be constructed without any actual wing parts as the flaps, but with fuselage parts only. I can‘t figure out a „formula“ for this to work correctly. Does ist come down to XMLing the drag values? Is there a secret recipe?
Snuck in an extra barrel there, didn‘t ya?! Who wants a measly GAU-7 after all?
JK. ;-)
Hey guys, is there any clarity on this issue yet? I have the same problem. I am relatively new to building custom wings and all the other control surfaces work fine. But the flaps make my plane pitch down, when I lower them. Any further suggestions would be much appreciated! Check out my build on my profile if you like (it's the only one there). THX!
@SimpleCollector Wow, you get butt-hurt quickly. I suggest you quit going around, trying to order creators to lower part counts and also: „this place is American“ - really? You mean the internet? This site? The SP community? What’s American, mate?
Great stuff! Only criticism I'd be able to put forward is for the description: the livery is of the Bundesmarine, not Kriegsmarine. It used to be called Kriegsmarine when the Nazis were in Power. Today, the "Marine" (official name since 1995) is simply the naval branch of the Germany army, "Bundeswehr". Hence the correct name "Bundesmarine" which was the colloquial name up until 1995.
Also, with that experience of yours, I just have to ask: Will you do a proper T-38 at some point? That is sorely missed here so far!
Never knew the F-20 was supercruise-capable. This is some seriously brilliant work. Great flight model und sleek looks. I just love everything F-5(ish)!
It is, no doubt, one of the two prettiest Me-262s on the entire site. However, there are some quirks in its flight behavior: it has quite severe auto-rotation and it takes forever to actually lift off and the pitch is hard to control. I know that the real-world Me-262 wasn't exactly a STOL fighter but for the sake of flyability maybe give it a little more power and controllability. Other than that: GREAT!
I also find the F-14 very daunting in terms of building one in SP. I think you did a very nice job in getting the proportions and silhouette right. Also the flight characteristics come close to the real thing, from what I can tell. One thing I wondered about: why didn’t you include a gun? Maybe because it wasn’t really featured in Top Gun? Anyway, nice job!!
Hey guys! Thanks for the downloads and upvotes so far. I'd really like to encourage you to help me improve upon the flight characteristics. While I'm still fairly new to this whole "building-nice-looking-and-flying-machines"-thing and thus like to keep my planes simple (zing), I don't shy away from a little more internal complexity when it comes to moving parts, modifications to stock parts, etc. So just hit me with your thoughts, suggestions and advice!
Cheers
@Mustang51 I agree. And thanks again, I will definitely take you up on that, eventually. :)
@Mustang51 Good Point. Just after I replied to your comment I started looking at pictures and drawings of the Me-262 again and those were my thoughts exactly! The Meteor, now that might be a good idea!
@Mustang51 Hey thanks, that’s very kind of you! And you’re definitely right about the engine placement. I noticed that only much later. In fact I didn’t even look at reference for this one and built it from memory ... which mostly relies on an old Revell model kit that I built as a child. I guess halfway through I kinda abandoned wanting to make a replica and focused more on „flyability“. ;-) But who knows ... a more proper replica might come some time soon.
@nadvgia thanks buddy!
This is, without any exaggeration, the best Tornado I have seen here. Can't believe how truly simple it is too. A work of art!
@TheDarkem Don't worry, even the 586-parts version is awesome...more detail and better flight characteristics than most builds here.
@RamboJutter Thanks, I've only tried mounting the missiles on mobile so far, so I'll try again and maybe on PC.
Forgot to mention: absolutely stunning work on the realism here!