The body of the jet looks really good! However, I would definitely change the cockpit. It doesn’t ruin the plane but having a normal cockpit would make it look far better. Nice job nonetheless!
I absolutely love this plane. It just looks fantastic. Has that beautiful 30s-40s look. I also love the rudimental defensive gun. Just letting you know though, the RPK was designed and built in the very early 60s
Change the water to be like that of Juno new origins (SimpleRockets2), make the engines customisable like in SimpleRockets2, make a dogfight mode where neither aircraft engages until after the merge, have a separation part clicker like in SR2, have a duplication part clicker like in SR2, a tinker panel like in SR2……. Basically take all the cool build features from SimpleRockets2 and add them here. That would be the perfect game.
It looks really good but doesn’t fly too great. The CoM should be a little more forward than the CoL. Cool plane overall though and could be easily made much better :)
@jelybaca why are they useless? They are pieces of history that deserve to be remembered. Not many of them fly but they are wonderful for people to look at and be inspired by
This is incredibly cool! When I was a kid I always wanted to see something like this made and now I can see one (in SimplePlanes but still)! Very nicely done!
This is very well made! It looks great and performance is quite good. I won’t even mention the acceleration since others have already but here are two other things that could be helpful. One is that the plane is not manoeuvrable enough. The F-104 may not have the agility of other fighters but it was still designed for air to air combat and had a tighter turn radius at 400mph than this build. Second thing is that you might want to enable aircraft collisions on the cannon. To stop it from blowing up the plane when firing, put it right at the end of a fuselage part shaped as a gun. You also might want to double the gun velocity as muzzle exit velocity on an M61 is closer to 1000m/s. Other than this I really love the build and the cockpit is excellent too! Superb job and I’m looking forward to more of your builds :)
@typeZERO Surprisingly, SimplePlanes is as realistic as you want it to be. If you play around with wing shape, wing area, drag points, engine power, having air breaks activate when you pitch to simulate realistic deceleration, and much more. On the other hand, you can have your plane pull 20g turns at 1000mpg with a radius of 50m hahahaha
@Maurmoz no problem! I’m excited to see the end result. Also, if you reduce the drag points, it will work much better for people who have devices that can’t handle high part-count builds
I know this is really old but I feel like I have to leave an answer. The answer is it depends. It depends on which model of spitfire and mustang you are comparing, which role you are comparing them in, who is flying them, etc. If you are comparing them in a 1:1 dogfight that’s also a different case. Early war spots were far superior to early was mustangs but soon mustangs caught up with the engine change. Towards the end of the war however, spitfires had a further engine change giving them more power, higher manifold pressure at lower altitudes, better climb rate, higher speed, and better turn radius. So again the answer is it depends but if you take the most modern spitfire and Mustang from May 1945 and put them head to head in a duel (with pilots of equal capability), my money would be on the Spit. Then again, the altitude they are fighting at would also potentially change the outcome but I don’t reckon by much. Spitfires were developed further than the P-51 as new models were coming out for longer than newer P-51 models. I hope this makes it a bit clear on why this question is a hard one to answer hahaha (and this is coming from a guy whose favourite plane is the P-51).
Just to let you know, you might want to wait a little before you make your own challenge. Once you have more points and post some cool aircraft you made yourself, it’s more likely someone will take part. Also, it would be even better if you put a little more effort into building something for the thumbnail of this design. Giving more specific requirements, rules, and prizes (people need a driving factor to enter a challenge and this is usually an upvote prize of some sort) would be useful as well. I hope this helped and good luck in your SimplePlanes career!
This is a pretty nice build. It flies well and looks good but it feels like it’s missing some things. Landing gear is one and maybe a bit of detail or something else too. Also I’m personally not a fan of the ortho view for screenshots. Those engines exhaust nozzles though are a work of art! Overall I really enjoy this plane but it could easily be even better
There doesn’t seem to be a fireGuns button for me
Edit: the problem was that there was no actual gun on the build. The fireGuns button doesn’t come up (at least for me) without an actual gun being there
It looks alright but it all feels a bit cramped. Too many guns and other weapons on such a small ship. It also floats kind of funny and often lists quite a lot, especially when you spawn in. Overall though I love all of the details and parts individually but they would be better on separate builds or on a larger ship. Still nice work! You can really see the effort you put in
Might want to rethink that prize hahaha. Some people have posted hundreds of planes and that will take ages to upvote hahaha. Also you might want to add a description of some sort explaining what gives you points and whatnot
Astalavista baby
+4I love this thing! I do wish you gave it a little rectangle moustache below the cannon though and a certain hairstyle everyone is familiar with hahaha
+4Incredible! You really made the shape perfect and the details are fantastic. The cockpit could be a little thinner but apart from that it’s perfect
+4Whenever I restart on the Wright Final Approach
USS Beast: “Aww sh*t, here we go again”
+4The body of the jet looks really good! However, I would definitely change the cockpit. It doesn’t ruin the plane but having a normal cockpit would make it look far better. Nice job nonetheless!
+4I love this picture of the horse eating broccoli
+4Okay I know the media likes to downplay the capabilities of the F-35 but this just hyped up its performance immensely hahaha. Cool build though :)
+3I absolutely love this plane. It just looks fantastic. Has that beautiful 30s-40s look. I also love the rudimental defensive gun. Just letting you know though, the RPK was designed and built in the very early 60s
+3Beautifully made! Looks fantastic
+3Wow this is phenomenal! Beautifully made
+3Lmao target practice on an EMS vehicle. war crimes intensify
+3That pitch up auto rolling is what everyone should strive for. Realistic high AoA drawbacks
+3@IceCraftGaming I have a feeling they’ve been playing for a while and just now decided to make an account. Amazing build!
+3Oh and add rocket engines and the ability to choose which fuel tanks to use first so we can have actually useful drop tanks
+3@Magnavox20MS233S or we can just turn collision off on all the parts 😁
+3Change the water to be like that of Juno new origins (SimpleRockets2), make the engines customisable like in SimpleRockets2, make a dogfight mode where neither aircraft engages until after the merge, have a separation part clicker like in SR2, have a duplication part clicker like in SR2, a tinker panel like in SR2……. Basically take all the cool build features from SimpleRockets2 and add them here. That would be the perfect game.
+3It looks really good but doesn’t fly too great. The CoM should be a little more forward than the CoL. Cool plane overall though and could be easily made much better :)
+3Ah yes, now my builds can be in the thousands of parts
+3Really nice and rare build!
+3@jelybaca why are they useless? They are pieces of history that deserve to be remembered. Not many of them fly but they are wonderful for people to look at and be inspired by
+3This feels more like I’m flying in DCS rather than SimplePlanes! Excellent work and beautiful flight model!
+3This is incredibly cool! When I was a kid I always wanted to see something like this made and now I can see one (in SimplePlanes but still)! Very nicely done!
+3@jselbach mobile isn’t bad at all! I always build on mobile
+3This is so much fun! It’s pretty freaky when the half destroyed ones sneak up on you while looking all mangled
+3This is very well made! It looks great and performance is quite good. I won’t even mention the acceleration since others have already but here are two other things that could be helpful. One is that the plane is not manoeuvrable enough. The F-104 may not have the agility of other fighters but it was still designed for air to air combat and had a tighter turn radius at 400mph than this build. Second thing is that you might want to enable aircraft collisions on the cannon. To stop it from blowing up the plane when firing, put it right at the end of a fuselage part shaped as a gun. You also might want to double the gun velocity as muzzle exit velocity on an M61 is closer to 1000m/s. Other than this I really love the build and the cockpit is excellent too! Superb job and I’m looking forward to more of your builds :)
+3@typeZERO Surprisingly, SimplePlanes is as realistic as you want it to be. If you play around with wing shape, wing area, drag points, engine power, having air breaks activate when you pitch to simulate realistic deceleration, and much more. On the other hand, you can have your plane pull 20g turns at 1000mpg with a radius of 50m hahahaha
+3@Maurmoz no problem! I’m excited to see the end result. Also, if you reduce the drag points, it will work much better for people who have devices that can’t handle high part-count builds
+3Gotta say this is one of the best flags on SP. Very well made
+3I know this is really old but I feel like I have to leave an answer. The answer is it depends. It depends on which model of spitfire and mustang you are comparing, which role you are comparing them in, who is flying them, etc. If you are comparing them in a 1:1 dogfight that’s also a different case. Early war spots were far superior to early was mustangs but soon mustangs caught up with the engine change. Towards the end of the war however, spitfires had a further engine change giving them more power, higher manifold pressure at lower altitudes, better climb rate, higher speed, and better turn radius. So again the answer is it depends but if you take the most modern spitfire and Mustang from May 1945 and put them head to head in a duel (with pilots of equal capability), my money would be on the Spit. Then again, the altitude they are fighting at would also potentially change the outcome but I don’t reckon by much. Spitfires were developed further than the P-51 as new models were coming out for longer than newer P-51 models. I hope this makes it a bit clear on why this question is a hard one to answer hahaha (and this is coming from a guy whose favourite plane is the P-51).
+3I can’t tell the difference between a coffee cup and a donut anymore
+3I love that intake but the two engines and single exhaust nozzle is a little odd. Overall though it’s pretty great
+3Congratulations my friend! You started out really good and managed to still dramatically improve to create top tier builds. Great job buddy!
+3Just to let you know, you might want to wait a little before you make your own challenge. Once you have more points and post some cool aircraft you made yourself, it’s more likely someone will take part. Also, it would be even better if you put a little more effort into building something for the thumbnail of this design. Giving more specific requirements, rules, and prizes (people need a driving factor to enter a challenge and this is usually an upvote prize of some sort) would be useful as well. I hope this helped and good luck in your SimplePlanes career!
+3This is a pretty nice build. It flies well and looks good but it feels like it’s missing some things. Landing gear is one and maybe a bit of detail or something else too. Also I’m personally not a fan of the ortho view for screenshots. Those engines exhaust nozzles though are a work of art! Overall I really enjoy this plane but it could easily be even better
+3Do they speak Vietnamese?
+3Nice design! It feels somewhat like a combination between F-22 and F-35 with a larger wing. Nice job!
+3I’m enjoying riding along with the convoy in the same vehicles they’re using
+3There doesn’t seem to be a fireGuns button for me
+3Edit: the problem was that there was no actual gun on the build. The fireGuns button doesn’t come up (at least for me) without an actual gun being there
@asteroidbook345 @emanuelga @BnanaX thank you all so much hahaha
+3@Wi1dSk7 @tommie @Tums thank you all so much hahaha. I didn’t realise I had an impact on the community the way you guys make it seem
+3This plane looks really good! It’s a bit crazy to fly but for looks and the methods you’re using to build, it’s fantastic
+3Congratulations! This entry won the challenge! here is what you scored:
Design: 19/20
Functionality: 9/10
Performance: 13/15
Build quality: 13/15
Paint scheme: 5/5
Personal opinion 5/5
Overall: 64/70 (6 upvotes!)
Overall you won 26 upvotes!
+3It looks alright but it all feels a bit cramped. Too many guns and other weapons on such a small ship. It also floats kind of funny and often lists quite a lot, especially when you spawn in. Overall though I love all of the details and parts individually but they would be better on separate builds or on a larger ship. Still nice work! You can really see the effort you put in
+3This is a really awesome concept. What era did you see this being used? Would be cool to see a gunship version of this too
+3Cool tank + no mods = upvote.
+3It’s simple maths
Incredible! Those tracks look great and I love the gyroscopic turret/gun. Very cool tank
+3I think he wants lasagne
+3This is also probably the only Tesla I would ever buy
+3The Cybertruck was really made to be a meme on this platform
+3Might want to rethink that prize hahaha. Some people have posted hundreds of planes and that will take ages to upvote hahaha. Also you might want to add a description of some sort explaining what gives you points and whatnot
+3