Apart from that 30mm turret blocking a 360 degree rotation of the main gun, this is actually a fairly viable tank design. Low profile, crew protected in the back, nice slopes (maybe the turret could use a little more). If you added a coaxial gun on the main turret, I would think some militaries would actually be interested lol
@LeonardoEngineering I agree with that. It also feels a little Italian. I get a Macchi or Regia vibe from it. It looks good enough to be made by one of them
Wonderful plane! It looks very cool and I like those radar antennas. Is it supposed to be a night fighter? Also the way you added in the green German tracers to the guns is great!
@Lorileni no worries! It will still meet some points so you might be awarded a couple upvotes for it from getting enough requirement points. Looking forward to seeing your next one!
Very cool! I like how you changed the fuselage shape so that your visibility is better when you’re taxiing on a carrier. Lovely work and thank you for your entry!
This is incredible! What a wonderfully made F-16! It flies incredibly well and the shape is completely perfect. I also love that the nose moves to reveal the radar! What a lovely little touch. This is worthy of a feature I think!
Damn this is too good for words. The fact that I can fly it on my iPhone in high quality is very strange considering the part count but I’m very happy that I can! This is truly incredible!
Pretty cool build of the Viggen and it’s flies great but the proportions seem to be quite off. The build itself looks cool but it helps to have the dimensions and diagrams of the aircraft you’re building on hand to make sure it’s correct.
Imagine how great it would be if you could edit the colour of the explosions and fire to make them red. It would be just like the real happy wheels then
@Whills ohhh I get what you mean. And yeah I use a calculator which just automatically tells me the mach number at a certain altitude I put in. I also have a mach calculator display that takes altitude into account. That’s why I find it annoying when people say that a planes top speed is a certain mach number but they don’t say the altitude it reaches that number at hahaha. My issue with high and low altitude though is more that if I build a transonic aircraft that can reach 0.9 mach at 5000ft, but in real life can’t break the sound barrier in level flight, in SP the plane will exceed mach 1 when at high altitude since I don’t think SP’s air model can model the issues that occur at transonic speeds. Would be nice if fuselage tapering for the area affect would be modelled on SimplePlanes but sadly such a thing isn’t possible
I’ve been experimenting for a long time on how to make a plane have both realistic acceleration while also having realistic energy bleeding characteristics. It’s pretty tough since in order to have realistic acceleration, you have to have an engine that’s not so powerful and remove lots of drag points. That becomes an issue, that can be seen with this build, as the plane will lose hardly any energy while pulling high AoA/G turns and even increase speed while at very low throttle. I had this issue on my planes too and tried to fix it first with air breaks that just work on pitch but that was quite annoying. I tried setting them to activate when above a certain G or to gradually increase as G increased but again didn’t work well. Then I set them to increase with AoA or activate after a certain AoA and this was much better but would often prevent the plane from reaching a realistically fast speed, especially when not in full burner. I tried to make an FT command that worked and with the help of a few peoples recommendations and help, I now have this command: clamp01((2.5+AngleOfAttack)/-25)
When put as the input for an air break, it will only engage when at 2.5 degrees angle of attack (edit it to what you want of course) and will become its max at 25 degrees (again edit it for the plane you’re using of course). I tried this air break with this plane and changed it to: clamp01((1.75+AngleOfAttack)/-13.5)
In my opinion, this makes the plane lose energy realistically enough to work with the number of drag points you have for this build. I put two air breaks on it which open sideways at the CoL and it seems to handle much more realistically. What do you think?
@Darkmoon well nowadays I feel like you have to make a forum post about it beforehand to build up some hype and get people to ask to be tagged. Then once you post it, you tag those people and hopefully they upvote relatively quickly so that it stays at the top of the hot page for a while. I’d also post it at a time when people are leaving work/at home from school so that it gets seen by more people quickly. I’ve also heard it’s best to post in the middle of the week and not Friday Saturday or Sunday since people will often likely be more busy with other things. I used to do some Instagram account managing on the side while I was in uni and that last point is something I learnt there so I don’t know if that will work on SP. Also, I think the first thumbnail should be a good zoomed in shot of the aircraft that shows the whole thing from a nice angle and definitely use all 3 of the thumbnail images you’re allowed to use. One other thing, after you posted your build, comment and upvote on a lot of other peoples builds that were posted on the same day (as long as you would normally upvote it of course) because some of the people will then check out your page and see your most recent build. I didn’t do that last one on purpose but when I’m on the app I like to interact with other users and I found that the people whose build I would like and comment on would then often go and look at my own. Just some tips I’ve learnt over the years
I love this build! Very well done and it’s quite nice to fly. I love these old crappy early Cold War designs where they were still figuring things out. How could they make a twin engine delta wing that has afterburners a subsonic aircraft?!?!
I think something is wrong with the turrets because they constantly swing around and never stop. Other than that, and imagining it with the weapons control of the other ships you built. Pretty cool! If you really want more upvotes for your builds though, I would follow some of the advise here. Don’t post so frequently, people like to see variations in build style and build types on their page. I can always instantly tell when a build is yours or when another player is posting several builds in one week just from the design. I personally don’t mind this but for some reason, i think it makes people think it’s a low effort build and they will be less likely to upvote. However, the main thing that I find gets lots of upvotes is build quality. Having a build function either extremely realistically tends to get great results. Also, having extreme detail, even without realistic flight characteristics, is also a great way to get points. Something that is especially aesthetically pleasing also seems to do well but that usually has to be paired with realistic flight characteristics. Having a mix of all of these is of course the best but that takes a lot of time (which is why I pretty much stopped uploading builds). However, if you have a high part count plane with extreme realism in its handling, you will find that you’ll get a lot of upvotes, but not many downloads because not everyone can handle such a build on their device or they find it too complex and annoying to fly/use. Lots of trade-offs but it’s what I have noticed in my years of SimplePlanes
This is fantastic! Cool that you got those ideas from chat gpt. I tried with Snapchat AI to see if that gave anything good and it had some surprisingly detailed and interesting suggestions. You built it very well though. Nice job!
Pretty neat plane! Looks nice and flies pretty decent. Only thing I’ll say is it seems like it has a pretty high takeoff speed. A Mooney M20J for example (a plane similar to this one), has a takeoff speed of 80kts. This is around twice that. Apart from that though, I love it
@Mihairus34 if someone answers, please let me know. Would be cool to make that there is a random chance a missile just doesn’t work or that even 50 flares just won’t shake a fox-2
This plane on the surface looks good but some things could definitely be improved. The dimensions of the plane are quite a bit off but proportionally it’s still good. However, the flight characteristics need some work. The engines are waaaay too powerful for a plane which can’t hit mach 2 in real life and the take off length is virtually nothing. If you reduce the drag (I’m not sure where you have over 3000 points of drag from actually), and give it a realistic thrust with an increase around 95% for the afterburner, it will fly way more realistically. I also love the detailing you did on this aircraft. Makes it look fantastic, especially with this engines!
I absolutely love this build! The control stiffening speed was a fantastic addition. The one thing that could be better is a more realistic acceleration rate. Reducing engine power and drag (on parts other than the wheels) would definitely help with that. To maintain a realistic loss of airspeed during certain aircraft manoeuvres, you can make air breaks which open when pitch is input. Nevertheless I love this build!
My goodness, this is absolutely fantastic! One of the best Drakens I have seen on SP and that wing art is superb! Incredible
+3Apart from that 30mm turret blocking a 360 degree rotation of the main gun, this is actually a fairly viable tank design. Low profile, crew protected in the back, nice slopes (maybe the turret could use a little more). If you added a coaxial gun on the main turret, I would think some militaries would actually be interested lol
+3Incredible! Is this supposed to be the two seater F version?
+3Isn’t this a copy of someone else’s?
+3@LeonardoEngineering I agree with that. It also feels a little Italian. I get a Macchi or Regia vibe from it. It looks good enough to be made by one of them
+3Wonderful plane! It looks very cool and I like those radar antennas. Is it supposed to be a night fighter? Also the way you added in the green German tracers to the guns is great!
+3Lovely! Very nice choice in plane
+3@Lorileni no worries! It will still meet some points so you might be awarded a couple upvotes for it from getting enough requirement points. Looking forward to seeing your next one!
+3Very cool! I like how you changed the fuselage shape so that your visibility is better when you’re taxiing on a carrier. Lovely work and thank you for your entry!
+3This is incredible! What a wonderfully made F-16! It flies incredibly well and the shape is completely perfect. I also love that the nose moves to reveal the radar! What a lovely little touch. This is worthy of a feature I think!
+3Unrealistic, the glass doesn’t shatter
+3@RicardoAs1515
+3@emanuelga
@Zott
Not realistic, glass doesn’t shatter
+3Damn this is too good for words. The fact that I can fly it on my iPhone in high quality is very strange considering the part count but I’m very happy that I can! This is truly incredible!
+3This is what I see in my sleep paralysis
+3Very nice but can they go inverted with an F-5 Freedo- I mean MiG-28?
+3This thing sucks. It can’t even take off from the USS beast catapult. Very poor aerodynamics
+3Pretty cool build of the Viggen and it’s flies great but the proportions seem to be quite off. The build itself looks cool but it helps to have the dimensions and diagrams of the aircraft you’re building on hand to make sure it’s correct.
+3Well this is different for your builds. It’s really fantastic though! Great job on this one man!
+3Damn this is great! I love old Russian bombers like this
+3Imagine how great it would be if you could edit the colour of the explosions and fire to make them red. It would be just like the real happy wheels then
+3I can’t beleive I didn’t try this plane out before! It’s fantastic! You now have your 60th upvote
+3@Whills ohhh I get what you mean. And yeah I use a calculator which just automatically tells me the mach number at a certain altitude I put in. I also have a mach calculator display that takes altitude into account. That’s why I find it annoying when people say that a planes top speed is a certain mach number but they don’t say the altitude it reaches that number at hahaha. My issue with high and low altitude though is more that if I build a transonic aircraft that can reach 0.9 mach at 5000ft, but in real life can’t break the sound barrier in level flight, in SP the plane will exceed mach 1 when at high altitude since I don’t think SP’s air model can model the issues that occur at transonic speeds. Would be nice if fuselage tapering for the area affect would be modelled on SimplePlanes but sadly such a thing isn’t possible
+2Pretty cool looking! And don’t worry it’s not hard to land :)
+2Jeez what a monster! Nice build
+2It’s called the Morane-Saulnier MS.315 (sometimes I see it as MS.317)
+2I’ve been experimenting for a long time on how to make a plane have both realistic acceleration while also having realistic energy bleeding characteristics. It’s pretty tough since in order to have realistic acceleration, you have to have an engine that’s not so powerful and remove lots of drag points. That becomes an issue, that can be seen with this build, as the plane will lose hardly any energy while pulling high AoA/G turns and even increase speed while at very low throttle. I had this issue on my planes too and tried to fix it first with air breaks that just work on pitch but that was quite annoying. I tried setting them to activate when above a certain G or to gradually increase as G increased but again didn’t work well. Then I set them to increase with AoA or activate after a certain AoA and this was much better but would often prevent the plane from reaching a realistically fast speed, especially when not in full burner. I tried to make an FT command that worked and with the help of a few peoples recommendations and help, I now have this command: clamp01((2.5+AngleOfAttack)/-25)
When put as the input for an air break, it will only engage when at 2.5 degrees angle of attack (edit it to what you want of course) and will become its max at 25 degrees (again edit it for the plane you’re using of course). I tried this air break with this plane and changed it to: clamp01((1.75+AngleOfAttack)/-13.5)
In my opinion, this makes the plane lose energy realistically enough to work with the number of drag points you have for this build. I put two air breaks on it which open sideways at the CoL and it seems to handle much more realistically. What do you think?
+2“So how long do you want the vertical stab to be?”
+2“Yes”
@Darkmoon well nowadays I feel like you have to make a forum post about it beforehand to build up some hype and get people to ask to be tagged. Then once you post it, you tag those people and hopefully they upvote relatively quickly so that it stays at the top of the hot page for a while. I’d also post it at a time when people are leaving work/at home from school so that it gets seen by more people quickly. I’ve also heard it’s best to post in the middle of the week and not Friday Saturday or Sunday since people will often likely be more busy with other things. I used to do some Instagram account managing on the side while I was in uni and that last point is something I learnt there so I don’t know if that will work on SP. Also, I think the first thumbnail should be a good zoomed in shot of the aircraft that shows the whole thing from a nice angle and definitely use all 3 of the thumbnail images you’re allowed to use. One other thing, after you posted your build, comment and upvote on a lot of other peoples builds that were posted on the same day (as long as you would normally upvote it of course) because some of the people will then check out your page and see your most recent build. I didn’t do that last one on purpose but when I’m on the app I like to interact with other users and I found that the people whose build I would like and comment on would then often go and look at my own. Just some tips I’ve learnt over the years
+2This is pretty cool! Nice build idea
+2@DNA turns out you’re actually just a terrible pilot since you can’t even start it ;)
+2I love this build! Very well done and it’s quite nice to fly. I love these old crappy early Cold War designs where they were still figuring things out. How could they make a twin engine delta wing that has afterburners a subsonic aircraft?!?!
+2I think something is wrong with the turrets because they constantly swing around and never stop. Other than that, and imagining it with the weapons control of the other ships you built. Pretty cool! If you really want more upvotes for your builds though, I would follow some of the advise here. Don’t post so frequently, people like to see variations in build style and build types on their page. I can always instantly tell when a build is yours or when another player is posting several builds in one week just from the design. I personally don’t mind this but for some reason, i think it makes people think it’s a low effort build and they will be less likely to upvote. However, the main thing that I find gets lots of upvotes is build quality. Having a build function either extremely realistically tends to get great results. Also, having extreme detail, even without realistic flight characteristics, is also a great way to get points. Something that is especially aesthetically pleasing also seems to do well but that usually has to be paired with realistic flight characteristics. Having a mix of all of these is of course the best but that takes a lot of time (which is why I pretty much stopped uploading builds). However, if you have a high part count plane with extreme realism in its handling, you will find that you’ll get a lot of upvotes, but not many downloads because not everyone can handle such a build on their device or they find it too complex and annoying to fly/use. Lots of trade-offs but it’s what I have noticed in my years of SimplePlanes
+2This is fantastic! Cool that you got those ideas from chat gpt. I tried with Snapchat AI to see if that gave anything good and it had some surprisingly detailed and interesting suggestions. You built it very well though. Nice job!
+2Pretty neat plane! Looks nice and flies pretty decent. Only thing I’ll say is it seems like it has a pretty high takeoff speed. A Mooney M20J for example (a plane similar to this one), has a takeoff speed of 80kts. This is around twice that. Apart from that though, I love it
+2Yup, name checks out
+2@JADE117 for one year you’re building some cool looking stuff! Can’t wait to see what you can build the more experienced you get
+2@C47skytrain ohhhh. Are all of his builds like this?
+2Boy is speedy. 1600km/h at 40,000ft. Nice!
+2@Mihairus34 if someone answers, please let me know. Would be cool to make that there is a random chance a missile just doesn’t work or that even 50 flares just won’t shake a fox-2
+2Low part count but this is still probably the best MiG-21 on the site. Beautiful
+2Yes, girth
+2This is fantastic. I love these low part count but realistic looking aircraft. Very fun to fly
+2It’s not a cluster bomb when each is fired directly from the plane… right? 🙃
+2Crazy coincidence but I have been working on a plane that is also a mix of an L-39 and F-5! It’s a really cool idea
+2Ah nice! Some target practice
+2This plane on the surface looks good but some things could definitely be improved. The dimensions of the plane are quite a bit off but proportionally it’s still good. However, the flight characteristics need some work. The engines are waaaay too powerful for a plane which can’t hit mach 2 in real life and the take off length is virtually nothing. If you reduce the drag (I’m not sure where you have over 3000 points of drag from actually), and give it a realistic thrust with an increase around 95% for the afterburner, it will fly way more realistically. I also love the detailing you did on this aircraft. Makes it look fantastic, especially with this engines!
+2I absolutely love this build! The control stiffening speed was a fantastic addition. The one thing that could be better is a more realistic acceleration rate. Reducing engine power and drag (on parts other than the wheels) would definitely help with that. To maintain a realistic loss of airspeed during certain aircraft manoeuvres, you can make air breaks which open when pitch is input. Nevertheless I love this build!
+2This is a perfect AI aircraft!
+2@Default4 @TatsuTheOtaku thanks guys!
+2