@asteroidbook345 fair enough, the dragon was a single engine ee lightning fuselage (reduced in height due to one engine) and a draken style wing, nothing too outrageous there :p.

The thing is, the game let's you make whatever you want and you can make things fly that wouldn't necessarily in real life, thats part of the fun to me. Look at the artwork small-brown-dog produces, non of it would be work in real life but his art looks good with the whole concept being around imaginary lift devices.

I get that some of my concepts are less feasible than others but in the end they are just bits of art. On top of that I have seen a load of concept drawings for aircraft of all eras where you take one look and think "thats not going to work" but someone obviously thought differently. I like the saying "if it looks right it will fly right" but just because it looks wrong doesn't automatically mean it will fly wrong, look at the f4, the fairey gannet or the airtruk for instance, they all have non conventional aspects that just make them look wrong but they where successful aircraft.

The wings r too thic

When I make fictional stuff these days I like to keep it conventional because "if it doesn't look right, it won't fly right"

@RamboJutter Yes that is true. I felt like the FGRII Dragon was too round for being a supersonic interceptor like a Mirage III or F-102, the RJ F4 irl would have a crazily high wing loading and be incredibly unstable because of how short the wings are and how large the engine is, and the Pelican just looks funky, not to mention the very low center of thrust and probably high center of mass. With the cannon layout it would also be difficult to keep it from ingesting the gases from the cannons like the MiG-9 did.

@asteroidbook345 fair enough, im not disputing your opinion and I like feedback like this that we can discuss. In regards to gaps around control surfaces, these exist on real aircraft (have a look at a spitfire fin for instance) older aircraft where not built to the same tolerances as todays aircraft plus leaving a small gap (intentionally on my part) it accentuates the control surface and also has the added genetic of reducing part clashing. I'm curious which of my more recent aircraft you thought was implausible :)

@RamboJutter The jet provost is also a popular one, probably because it's a replica. People seem to be partial to them. The only thing I would say you could improve on is wings because your WWI and WWII always have big-ish gaps between the control surfaces and the rest of the wing. Also, some of your concepts are cool but implausible, which I think is why some people don't love their appearance. I think they're cool though.

@asteroidbook345 nah, my hottest builds where just because I was new, the only thing that has been added to that list of late was the kit challenge (and that's an oddity in itself). I use different styles and design completely different things all the time but there's always something else to work on :) votes are harder to come by when mods can't spotlight your work.

@RamboJutter I think it's the contrast with the white page. Anyways, I think you should leave your comfort zone more often! I know you've made some forums about not getting a lot of upvotes and I think it's because your building style hasn't changed very much. If you go to your hottest aircraft, you'll notice that the most upvoted ones are the ones where you branched out and tried a new building style or built a replica.

@RamboJutter yes i know, i still like it a lot.

@tucan you still can, i havnt exactly built a replica, mine is much shallower in depth of fuselage, doesnt have the armament or the cockpit etc. I basically just used the photo for inspiration and then made my own thing. oh and if you want to do a proper link just put  without the exclamation mark

@Dimkal Thanks, glad you like it. Oh there is definately room for variants with this one, first im going to have to spend some time and rebuild the fuselage with panels and a working cargo door/bay so i can drop a jeep or 2 =) Then as you say there could be a special forces variant as well including all the biuts you mentioned as well as adding the refueling probe, possibly remake the cockpit area, obs blisters, etc. I was also thinking of a larger variant (more A400 size) with 4 wings / sets of rotors but that will take some work so will finish some more other builds first.

@asteroidbook345 I know its weird as on my computer screen it is bright and clear but on when its on a thumbnail it seems darker especially on my phone. I wont use sunrise in future =)

https://www.google.com/search?q=military+vtol+concepts&rlz=1C1CHBFenUS908US908&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqw7rGgKzuAhWRT98KHdgICwUQAUoAXoECAgQAw&biw=1536&bih=666#imgrc=HsG4yP24f3wlzM

ah yes, the V-130 Hercosprey

ow man i was gonna build this

Holy hot jesus I wasn't expecting this! It's awesome to see something a little different like this!

@Urocyon big prop = bigger pro

How do i put bigger image on my description cause my images are tiny?

Me: Mom, can i have a V-22?
Mom: No honey, we have a V-22 a home.
The V-22 at home:

(awesome build btw.)

holy, I didn't expect this

@Urocyon dang it beat me to it

Big proop.

YES YES YES! One of your most interesting builds! Excellent handling, realistic performance and cool design! So much room for improvement! I'd love to see a Special Ops variant in deset camo with some modifications such as V-tail for steep combat landings, some basic weaponry, a FLIR turret, more ECM and defence equipmemt and a hell lot of antennnas!

BIG PROP

Thumbnail is kind of dark, I almost didn't notice it at first