@DEATHWALKER Just so you know, he didn't create the whole plane. He didn't create the Opening Rear ramp nor did he do the detail. You do realize that this is taken from another user that is far more experienced in building than @ravi007. Don't praise @ravi007 for all this because most of this helicopter is @QingyuZhou 's work. Go praise him since he is the original creator. lol Don't be an idiot.
@GorillaGuerrilla I currently have a few Flankers that are in the final stages of testing & tweaking. All (3) are capable of doing cobras at high and low speeds, where two are PSM-capable and one 'somewhat' capable. Their design is based on @KCferrari 's "Su-37 Terminator Thrust Vectoring" from 6.6 years ago. They've been upscaled, detailed, and armed up to fit the rough proportions of the general flanker body & having somewhat realistic flight characteristics (?). All are below 320 parts so they should be good for AI to use. Oh and they have fairly simple FT coding in comparison to more intricate builds with very smooth PSM control and stability like GuyFolk.
You are most likely going to get reported for just republishing a User's design. There is little to nothing you have done to consider this a new design. All you did was just add one part from the original that contained 734 parts and changed the color scheme. If you want to rank up then make your own designs. Just adding a gyroscope is something that anyone could have done. Go ahead and make something with your own imagination. It will be worth the while...
Heck, even I have took other users' designs and changed them up a bit. But it wasn't just adding a couple of parts and then publishing it, what I did was change the weapon set and tweaked the controls and handling of the designs.
There is a definite line to see whether you could call something as a bare copy or an improved version of a design...
@IonMechanics But of course he doesn't have time to read this nor his special intelligence agents because I am just one of thousands people around the world who had insulted the dictator. I understand that they are dangerous but only to a short extent (range) and power. And on top of that, should there be launches conducted by N. Korea onto S. Korea, there wouldn't be as much casualties as it would be knocked out of the sky by S. Korean and U.S missile defenses stationed in South Korea or Japan. Furthmore, there are even naval defenses stationed in or near the Sea of Japan and S. Korea to closely monitor N. Korean activity or... in a worst case scenario, North Korean Aggression. I myself lived in Japan inside a U.S Military Navy Base. Even as a kid, I understood what the purpose of the base was for in the present day and in the past.
@Simpleplaner656 The ICBM wouldn't look like an ICBM in-game without the Rocket Engines mod so sorry. Besides, it doesnt really do anything except climb in altitude. It's held in its exact position because of a gyro I placed. I designed it to be used specifically as an AI Improvised Missile Launch for people to shoot down with their own planes. I'm sure there are a few other rockets built by other more well known users. Luck has run out for you here, pal.
I rode on one of these when traveling from my my hometown near Yokohama to Narita Internation Airport. If I remember correctly, the NEX line leads directly into the Terminals at the Airport. Thx for the nostalgia; these things looked very futuristic when I first saw them....
@xNotDumb They're linked together starting from the 37, plus, the full description is only on this build. So go for the 37. But if you want, spotlight both.
@SirLoafsAlot I'm in the final stages of making three Flankers from this design. Redesigned, detailed and upscaled to fit the rough proportions of the real flanker. Essentially a more realistic version of this build in terms of size, shape, and flight characteristics. Two of them feature an improved version of this plane's TVC providing enough control to perform a PSM without being too fast, sticking to the realistic nature. The three projects being: a Su-27, a Su-35, and a Su-37. All three are capable of performing a cobra (at high or low speeds) and at least one PSM including the Falling Leaf and Kulbit... all thanks to some XML and FT coding that I took from other super maneuverable projects.
@Mahesa25 No, the BO-F18 had no problem of flipping whatsoever. I also lowered the horsepower of the engines to 300 each. Other than that custom change, it performs nicely and is able to handle tight turns. Same thing goes for this BO-F19.
@Culydeath I believe you don't know how a helicopter with two main rotors work... The thing about those two main rotors is that they cancel out each other's torque which makes the helicopter hover and fly straight without spinning out of control.
You see, if there's only one main rotor, then thats the time when you need a tail rotor. the tail rotor is basically a counteracting method of stopping the helicopter from spinning left or right.
And since the Kamov Ka-52 has two main rotors, there would be no need for a tail rotor. Realistically, if u did add a tail rotor, you would just ruin the whole balance between the Main Rotors.
You guys really don't know how certain helicopters work do ya... make sure you do your research and don't go making assumptions. You probably think its wierd that a lot of people are posting helicopters with two main rotors and no tail rotor. Now u you know why (because they know how different types of helicopters work).
I have found out something... I know you used @Authros's old Kamov KA-52 design to make this. However, I don't see any Auto Credit at all. So, you used his kamov body as a sub assembly and gave no credit to him? That's disrespectful dude. I have seen the original design and I have seen yours. You definitely changed up the design but you don't even give a damn about the original creator. I've already reported this post so that the officials could look into this.
Its already common knowledge to know that the wasp is based on an F/A-18 Super Hornet which is already mainly used as the standard naval aircraft you'd see on an aircraft carrier... Now that you published it as 'Sea Wasp' ("naval version") kind of makes it sound wierd (at least to me). Its good that you added the tail hook and foldable wings, and I do quite like those features... but try to give it a better name. Sea Wasp just sounds like adding more obviousness to an already obvious design that almost any aircraft enthusiast is supposed to know. Maybe something like Wasp Type 2 or Super Wasp (like Super Hornet), or something along those lines. Afterall you don't want to look dumb.
@A1Ravage "Add that underwater camera" ...Look, I'm pretty sure thats a mod in of in itself and that it cannot just be fitted onto a design by default standards. You'd have to download the mod yourself. You do realize that its a mod right? Also what is it about the name? There's nothing wrong with it. In my opinion, it seems like the perfect name for a simple design of a sub like this...
You got the colors and the over upper modules correct though missing a few parts at the rear. Overall good build. What I could say is that the legs seem a bit too large in stature. But oh well.
p.s: love the railgun design btw
"Already on the (birth), and i know you guys had one aircraft carrier already but it was an old soviet model that they gave to you, an dso youre making your own. Also it seems that only one is in production right now, a prototype. So its not supercarrier-s (plural)right now.
Tbh the real Tsar Bomba, in the photos, is much more bulbous is shape so it looks a lot similar to the Fat Man bomb. Here, it looks like you elongated and stretched the main body of the bomb, which kind of looks a little wierd and unusual. I believe it was because of the armament that was jam-packed into a small space. Do note there are modded parts you can take that are smaller in size yet still containing normal damage potential. You could find works from peoples' planes which have these modified xml parts and use them in your works to make them look more authentic and professional. Just a suggestion...
Its so easy to use fuselage blocks. Either you truly dont know the full mechanics or youre just lazy to do all the delicate things in placing a fuselage
My friend... have you ever seen or used a Fuselage Block? Because what you have built right here, looks like something that was built 2 years ago, when all these new parts weren't even in the game yet.
Its not considered a tank if it does not have a fully rotatable turret, traversable tracks (emphasis on tracks), and one main gun. Here all i see is a fighting vehicle or FV, instead of one primary gun, it has 15 of them. It has no turret and it does not have tracks... this is a fighting vehicle, not a tank. Im not ranting or anything but, please get the terminologies right, just for respect.
The engines seem a bit too low off the ground. Very hard to land without crashing into window pieces (thats what I keep seeing everytime it blows). But the overall design is pretty good. Very realistic yet only much because theres no flaps or brakes. Seems legit, flies well. So the only problem is with landing this sucker.
Saw the Reagan daily when I lived in Yokosuka, Japan. Never got to board her but I did so on GW. Certified Based Build
+2@DEATHWALKER Just so you know, he didn't create the whole plane. He didn't create the Opening Rear ramp nor did he do the detail. You do realize that this is taken from another user that is far more experienced in building than @ravi007. Don't praise @ravi007 for all this because most of this helicopter is @QingyuZhou 's work. Go praise him since he is the original creator. lol Don't be an idiot.
+2@SirLoafsAlot
+1@GorillaGuerrilla I currently have a few Flankers that are in the final stages of testing & tweaking. All (3) are capable of doing cobras at high and low speeds, where two are PSM-capable and one 'somewhat' capable. Their design is based on @KCferrari 's "Su-37 Terminator Thrust Vectoring" from 6.6 years ago. They've been upscaled, detailed, and armed up to fit the rough proportions of the general flanker body & having somewhat realistic flight characteristics (?). All are below 320 parts so they should be good for AI to use. Oh and they have fairly simple FT coding in comparison to more intricate builds with very smooth PSM control and stability like GuyFolk.
+1You are most likely going to get reported for just republishing a User's design. There is little to nothing you have done to consider this a new design. All you did was just add one part from the original that contained 734 parts and changed the color scheme. If you want to rank up then make your own designs. Just adding a gyroscope is something that anyone could have done. Go ahead and make something with your own imagination. It will be worth the while...
+1Heck, even I have took other users' designs and changed them up a bit. But it wasn't just adding a couple of parts and then publishing it, what I did was change the weapon set and tweaked the controls and handling of the designs.
There is a definite line to see whether you could call something as a bare copy or an improved version of a design...
@IonMechanics But of course he doesn't have time to read this nor his special intelligence agents because I am just one of thousands people around the world who had insulted the dictator. I understand that they are dangerous but only to a short extent (range) and power. And on top of that, should there be launches conducted by N. Korea onto S. Korea, there wouldn't be as much casualties as it would be knocked out of the sky by S. Korean and U.S missile defenses stationed in South Korea or Japan. Furthmore, there are even naval defenses stationed in or near the Sea of Japan and S. Korea to closely monitor N. Korean activity or... in a worst case scenario, North Korean Aggression. I myself lived in Japan inside a U.S Military Navy Base. Even as a kid, I understood what the purpose of the base was for in the present day and in the past.
+1@Simpleplaner656 The ICBM wouldn't look like an ICBM in-game without the Rocket Engines mod so sorry. Besides, it doesnt really do anything except climb in altitude. It's held in its exact position because of a gyro I placed. I designed it to be used specifically as an AI Improvised Missile Launch for people to shoot down with their own planes. I'm sure there are a few other rockets built by other more well known users. Luck has run out for you here, pal.
+1I rode on one of these when traveling from my my hometown near Yokohama to Narita Internation Airport. If I remember correctly, the NEX line leads directly into the Terminals at the Airport. Thx for the nostalgia; these things looked very futuristic when I first saw them....
+1I just watched Mustard's B747 Carrier this morning...
+1Hmm, looks like you were listening to the dialogue when Huey said that PW weighed about 500 tons... Looks like someone's been paying attention :)
+1I will be blunt here, this just looks like a silo fitted on top of a plane body. Very uncreative
+1You couldve just said those things in the description
+1Unless you don't know how to...
@SasuValentin2 good question... I'm trying to get into a college
@SasuValentin2 Work and School. Safe to say KCferrari won't post anytime soon. Plus, I haven't touched SP since January. Life events ya know.
Looking spicy.
@xNotDumb They're linked together starting from the 37, plus, the full description is only on this build. So go for the 37. But if you want, spotlight both.
Like... An F-111? Because I have a few F-111s that I pimped out using @Homemade1's F-111 build.
@SirLoafsAlot I'm in the final stages of making three Flankers from this design. Redesigned, detailed and upscaled to fit the rough proportions of the real flanker. Essentially a more realistic version of this build in terms of size, shape, and flight characteristics. Two of them feature an improved version of this plane's TVC providing enough control to perform a PSM without being too fast, sticking to the realistic nature. The three projects being: a Su-27, a Su-35, and a Su-37. All three are capable of performing a cobra (at high or low speeds) and at least one PSM including the Falling Leaf and Kulbit... all thanks to some XML and FT coding that I took from other super maneuverable projects.
For the CH-53 build:
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/n8ZQYY/CH-53E-Super-Stallion
For the MH-53 build:
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/K0b946/MH-53-Pavelow
...Im pretty sure the vast majority of known motorsports only designate one racer per racecar... Kind of obvious
@Mahesa25 No, the BO-F18 had no problem of flipping whatsoever. I also lowered the horsepower of the engines to 300 each. Other than that custom change, it performs nicely and is able to handle tight turns. Same thing goes for this BO-F19.
@AdlerSteiner How about no
@Culydeath I believe you don't know how a helicopter with two main rotors work... The thing about those two main rotors is that they cancel out each other's torque which makes the helicopter hover and fly straight without spinning out of control.
You see, if there's only one main rotor, then thats the time when you need a tail rotor. the tail rotor is basically a counteracting method of stopping the helicopter from spinning left or right.
And since the Kamov Ka-52 has two main rotors, there would be no need for a tail rotor. Realistically, if u did add a tail rotor, you would just ruin the whole balance between the Main Rotors.
You guys really don't know how certain helicopters work do ya... make sure you do your research and don't go making assumptions. You probably think its wierd that a lot of people are posting helicopters with two main rotors and no tail rotor. Now u you know why (because they know how different types of helicopters work).
I have found out something... I know you used @Authros's old Kamov KA-52 design to make this. However, I don't see any Auto Credit at all. So, you used his kamov body as a sub assembly and gave no credit to him? That's disrespectful dude. I have seen the original design and I have seen yours. You definitely changed up the design but you don't even give a damn about the original creator. I've already reported this post so that the officials could look into this.
Are you intentionally trying to name it "Naboob" or is that just your lack of knowledge of Star Wars? If not then get the name right...
Its already common knowledge to know that the wasp is based on an F/A-18 Super Hornet which is already mainly used as the standard naval aircraft you'd see on an aircraft carrier... Now that you published it as 'Sea Wasp' ("naval version") kind of makes it sound wierd (at least to me). Its good that you added the tail hook and foldable wings, and I do quite like those features... but try to give it a better name. Sea Wasp just sounds like adding more obviousness to an already obvious design that almost any aircraft enthusiast is supposed to know. Maybe something like Wasp Type 2 or Super Wasp (like Super Hornet), or something along those lines. Afterall you don't want to look dumb.
Not a C-130... not even close. This would be a fighter bomber, not a strategic cargo hauler.
@A1Ravage "Add that underwater camera" ...Look, I'm pretty sure thats a mod in of in itself and that it cannot just be fitted onto a design by default standards. You'd have to download the mod yourself. You do realize that its a mod right? Also what is it about the name? There's nothing wrong with it. In my opinion, it seems like the perfect name for a simple design of a sub like this...
@Footballdare well im sure other countries dont use that color scheme. Black isn't a fitting color for a Helicopter thats supposed to be friendly.
The U.s coast guard doesn't use that color scheme, smh. I thought you would've checked online to see how they look...
I'm pretty sure the B-29 was designed by Boeing and not Lockheed...
@Windwaker5000 Sad truths are everywhere, my dude
The missile pylon and rocket pod designs were taken from the planes of @BogdanX...
~ 80 Parts... Very very low. Could use it as an AI opponent if you want. °~°
I would love if you made the Power Unit right behind REX's head to be a bit more elongated but I understand its for stability purposes.
Hmm...You're pretty good...
You got the colors and the over upper modules correct though missing a few parts at the rear. Overall good build. What I could say is that the legs seem a bit too large in stature. But oh well.
p.s: love the railgun design btw
@agnanSatrio and you can tell I'm a fan too by looking at my Gravatar...
Hmm seen this exact design (4 of them) hoisting Sahelanthropus in MGSV. Nice going there, Boss :)
"Already on the (birth), and i know you guys had one aircraft carrier already but it was an old soviet model that they gave to you, an dso youre making your own. Also it seems that only one is in production right now, a prototype. So its not supercarrier-s (plural)right now.
Chinese branded, American designed aircraft carrier lol
This looks a lot like the Batpod from The Dark Knight.
Tbh the real Tsar Bomba, in the photos, is much more bulbous is shape so it looks a lot similar to the Fat Man bomb. Here, it looks like you elongated and stretched the main body of the bomb, which kind of looks a little wierd and unusual. I believe it was because of the armament that was jam-packed into a small space. Do note there are modded parts you can take that are smaller in size yet still containing normal damage potential. You could find works from peoples' planes which have these modified xml parts and use them in your works to make them look more authentic and professional. Just a suggestion...
Pls try to make it less steep, otherwise it will be looking like a Type 64 light tank...
Tbh, the frontal armor slope is just ugly.
Its so easy to use fuselage blocks. Either you truly dont know the full mechanics or youre just lazy to do all the delicate things in placing a fuselage
My friend... have you ever seen or used a Fuselage Block? Because what you have built right here, looks like something that was built 2 years ago, when all these new parts weren't even in the game yet.
Hmm the nose, although being a little too pointy, it does give the feeling of a concorde... looks interesting to me. Nice one.
Its not considered a tank if it does not have a fully rotatable turret, traversable tracks (emphasis on tracks), and one main gun. Here all i see is a fighting vehicle or FV, instead of one primary gun, it has 15 of them. It has no turret and it does not have tracks... this is a fighting vehicle, not a tank. Im not ranting or anything but, please get the terminologies right, just for respect.
The engines seem a bit too low off the ground. Very hard to land without crashing into window pieces (thats what I keep seeing everytime it blows). But the overall design is pretty good. Very realistic yet only much because theres no flaps or brakes. Seems legit, flies well. So the only problem is with landing this sucker.