• Overall good but some details are not enough worked.
• Movement Performance (6 points)
• Average Russian engineering. Built unstable, it has to provide multimanueverability if stabilized well but your plane - pardon submarine (or over-marine?) is using a gyro which limits most of manuevers.
• Weapons (7 points)
• Overarmed and generally performing well but there is a problem with esthetic details like weapon bays. But i like what you did with the gun.
• Post Content (4 points)
• Good thumbnail but text and photos are not enough.
No worries at all, @ComradeComissar Life always comes first, and I totally understand how school and holidays can get in the way. You definitely didn’t waste the extension. It provided me extra time for judging, and it’s always a pleasure seeing you take part in my challenges. You’ve already made an awesome mark in the previous one, and I’ll be looking forward to seeing your work in the next!
Wishing you all the best with your studies—hang in there and take care!
@SilverStar Why are trim and flaps reversed on this build?
Great question! This was a necessary adjustment to ensure that the visual control surfaces match the actual aerodynamic behavior of the aircraft in SimplePlanes. Here's how it works:
Technical Explanation:
Hidden Wings & Structural Covering:
Like many builders, I covered the wings with structural parts for a more realistic appearance. The actual lift-generating wings are hidden beneath.
Control Inputs for Pitch Adjustment:
The horizontal stabilizers (at the rear) control pitch and can be adjusted by both the trim slider and the main pitch input.
The flaps (on the mid-wings) are normally controlled by the VTOL slider but also affect pitch slightly, much like stabilizers do.
Flap Lift vs. Trim Lift:
On most aircraft, flaps generate more lift than the Trim of horizontal stabilizers, but in my build, the horizontal stabilizers actually produce more lift than the flaps.
To match the expected movement, I assigned the trim function to the visual flap covers (fuselage which looks like a flap), so they move when the trim slider is adjusted, giving the illusion that the flaps are responding to trim.
Reversing the Controls for Realism:
Since my aircraft's trim (horizontal stabilizers) has a greater aerodynamic effect than the flaps, I assigned the trim adjuster to control the flaps visually while the VTOL slider adjusts the stabilizers.
This way, what you see on the aircraft matches how it actually behaves aerodynamically, creating a more immersive and realistic flight experience.
Final Note:
I originally tried switching the technical control inputs (instead of the visuals), but it didn't work correctly. So, I adjusted the visual control assignments instead. The end result? The aircraft behaves correctly while also looking accurate!
@SemedianIndustries Thanks, I see. It's awsome and it looks like it will provide lots of information while judging. Still, if you can find more feedbacks i want to consider all.
Unfortunately it does not work on my device, I get less than 1 fps. If there are at least 3 people who can rate the movement performance, weapons, playability from 1 to 10, can they tag me and give me their scores? In the final case, the score will be close to the average of the 3 points. I would be better if you could help (at least gold rank for reliability)
@SemedianIndustries If i can test it properly i will accept. My device starts lagging at aprx. 1500 pieces but i think i can test it with some huge fps loss.
• Design (5 points)
• Overall good but some details are not enough worked.
• Movement Performance (6 points)
• Average Russian engineering. Built unstable, it has to provide multimanueverability if stabilized well but your plane - pardon submarine (or over-marine?) is using a gyro which limits most of manuevers.
• Weapons (7 points)
• Overarmed and generally performing well but there is a problem with esthetic details like weapon bays. But i like what you did with the gun.
• Post Content (4 points)
• Good thumbnail but text and photos are not enough.
• Playability (7 points)
• Yes, it is fun.
Total 29/50
+1@AeroTactical Will you build something in 4 days?
+2• Design (4 points)
• Very Huge. Can be more detailed
• Movement Performance (2 points)
• No movement. Only drop physics
• Weapons (3 points)
• Isn't exsplosion small?
• Post Content (6 points)
• Short but includes main features.
• Playability (2 points)
• Very big size makes it hard to play.
Total: 17/50
No worries at all, @ComradeComissar Life always comes first, and I totally understand how school and holidays can get in the way. You definitely didn’t waste the extension. It provided me extra time for judging, and it’s always a pleasure seeing you take part in my challenges. You’ve already made an awesome mark in the previous one, and I’ll be looking forward to seeing your work in the next!
Wishing you all the best with your studies—hang in there and take care!
+3@Icey21
Here is the link
@Icey21 Its already uploaded
+1@DeeganishCountryball
@ShinyGemsBro
@SuperSuperTheSylph
@MobileBuilder21 Wait for it!
@MobileBuilder21 Sorry I can't do that. But I'm planning a new challenge after current one ends. You can join that.
@SilverStar
Why are trim and flaps reversed on this build?
Great question! This was a necessary adjustment to ensure that the visual control surfaces match the actual aerodynamic behavior of the aircraft in SimplePlanes. Here's how it works:
Technical Explanation:
Hidden Wings & Structural Covering:
Control Inputs for Pitch Adjustment:
Flap Lift vs. Trim Lift:
Reversing the Controls for Realism:
Final Note:
I originally tried switching the technical control inputs (instead of the visuals), but it didn't work correctly. So, I adjusted the visual control assignments instead. The end result? The aircraft behaves correctly while also looking accurate!
• Design (2 points)
• SimpleMissiles
• Movement Performance (7 points)
• Fast and agile.
• Weapons (4 points)
• Explosion is huge but lack of esthetics.
• Post Content (6 points)
• Text are short and there are not anybdescription photos.
• Playability (4 points)
• No launch mechanism, plain, can't see explosion.
Total: 23/50
+1• Design (3 points)
• Few parts but looks well.
• Movement Performance (7 points)
• Easy to control. Good aerodynamics.
• Weapons (6 points)
• It explodes. I cant expect anything more.
• Post Content (7 points)
• Description is well also good thumbnail but some more photos will be better.
• Playability (6 points)
• There is nothing so much to do expect but it does what its intended to do.
Total: 29/50
@ComradeComissar Is April 15 Okay? Because im planning another challenge after that.
@Grob0s0VBRa @ComradeComissar
As i promised before i'm delaying the deadline.
NEW DEADLINE IS APRIL 15
(Tell me if you want to join but need time)
@SemedianIndustries Thanks, I see. It's awsome and it looks like it will provide lots of information while judging. Still, if you can find more feedbacks i want to consider all.
+1@PlaneFlightX
Thank you for your rating. Your detailed feedback will help so much.
@MalaySmoker You are right. I checked other posts. You deserve 7 points for it.
@MalaySmoker So +2 Points for post content
@MalaySmoker
+1@MalaySmoker I made a change, now it works. I uploaded on a different platform. Click the link
You can use this link to add your gif.
link
Open the link and paste the text in the description.
@MalaySmoker
@jedreubeng From transform part menu. Press zero locations.
+4@MalaySmoker Yes
• Design (7 points)
• Detailed but nose shape is awkward.
• Movement Performance (9 points)
• Super-
• Weapons (9 points)
• Weapon
• Post Content (7 points)
• Pic is ok but no description
• Playability (8 points)
• Good
Total: 40/50
+1• Design (6 points)
• Good.
• Movement Performance (6 points)
• Easy solution and great job but height is unrealistic.
• Weapons (5 points)
• Perfect in look but has not exlosive power or speed. Add huge bombs or send it to space to have enough energy to destroy a city.
• Post Content (6 points)
• Awesome pic but description is plain
• Playability (5 points)
•Mid
Total: 28/50
• Design (5 points)
• Not so detailed but good.
• Movement Performance (9 points)
• Very easy to control
• Weapons (5 points)
• Try to add auto aim to turrets.
• Post Content (7 points)
• Maybe a longer text.
• Playability (7 points)
•I like it but nothimg to much to do.
Total: 33/50
Unfortunately this is not a superweapon but i like this so i will upvote.
+1• Design (2 points)
• A Cylinder with a cone as nose and some wings.
• Movement Performance (5 points)
• It's nearly impossible to save your plane from explosion
• Weapons (5 points)
• You have to make it when you press drop bomb button not AG1.
• Post Content (2 points)
• Needs pictures, a long description and controls list
• Playability (6 points)
• Problem is that your aircraft explodes too. Explosion range is too long for a bomb. It should be a missile warhead.
Total: 20/50
@PUMKINSIDD I can't play this. I don't know why but my device crashes when i press play button.
+1• Design (8 points)
• Very good
• Movement Performance (8 points)
• Interestingly fast. I like tracks
• Weapons (9 points)
• Super
• Post Content (6 points)
• Needs pictures and detailed informarion.
• Playability (9 points)
•I liked it
Total: 40/50
Unfortunately it does not work on my device, I get less than 1 fps. If there are at least 3 people who can rate the movement performance, weapons, playability from 1 to 10, can they tag me and give me their scores? In the final case, the score will be close to the average of the 3 points. I would be better if you could help (at least gold rank for reliability)
• Design (10 points)
• Perfect
• Movement Performance (8 points)
•
• Weapons (9 points)
•
• Post Content (10 points)
• Perfect, long and full of pictures!
• Playability (8 points)
•
Total: 45/50
This can be considered a superweapon.
@Grob0s0VBRa If you want to join i can make the challenge a little bit longer.
@Riyadqadri Ok. Here is an upvote as honorable mention reward.
+1I can not judge this as a superweapon because this is not.
@bumaxi I will announce winners after challenge ends.@Riyadqadri
+1@bumaxi Click on the blue text it's the link
+1@Rb2h Oh, thanks
+2@bumaxi CL-1201 is already done
+1@SemedianIndustries Actually its too huge but i think i can judge it.
@MalaySmoker Make it as powerful as you can.
+1@SemedianIndustries If i can test it properly i will accept. My device starts lagging at aprx. 1500 pieces but i think i can test it with some huge fps loss.
+3@IMCI Something like a superwepon base will be ok.
+2@IMCI Yep
+2@Rb2h
+1and why?
@L1nus Yeah, this will be a problem for them.
@blt I really appreciate your work but this gun is not a superweapon.
+1.
Dictionary meaning of superweapon
@L1nus Sorry but what did you mean by "FT flying"?