Profile image

XF-11

43.9k PointlessWhyshouldi  4.0 years ago

Spotlights

General Characteristics

  • Created On iOS
  • Wingspan 101.8ft (31.0m)
  • Length 67.0ft (20.4m)
  • Height 24.3ft (7.4m)
  • Empty Weight 31,778lbs (14,414kg)
  • Loaded Weight 43,505lbs (19,733kg)

Performance

  • Power/Weight Ratio 1.291
  • Horse Power/Weight Ratio 0.16
  • Wing Loading 10.9lbs/ft2 (53.4kg/m2)
  • Wing Area 3,977.0ft2 (369.5m2)
  • Drag Points 1516

Parts

  • Number of Parts 4332
  • Control Surfaces 0
  • Performance Cost 13,312
  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image
    32.3k CRJ900Pilot

    Super cool design! This is the best XF-11 on the site, by far. There are a few problems though. Firstly, I'd just like to say this is constructive criticism and I mean no hard feelings. That being said, lets begin:
    - It can't track straight on the runway. I would imagine this has to do with either the cockpit, or not building with 0 mass and drag parts from the beginning. That, coupled with the slow nose wheel and nothing to reduce its effect at high speed, makes it hard to keep straight on takeoff and landing.
    - There are gaps, almost everywhere. Most notably on the gear doors, but there are many areas that can be smoothed out more
    - Part efficiency, or lack thereof. While the custom engines and props are cool, they aren't needed. 128 parts for just the prop blades(can be done with 4) probably 400 parts for each engine (can be done with 2) , 20 parts for the exhaust pipes alone (can be done in less than 5), probably 250 parts for each roundel (can be done in maybe 50 at most), 20 parts for black lines on spoilers (can be done in 2), 400 parts for gauges you cant even see as they're behind the seat, etc...
    - Smaller details are neglected. There is part of the glass canopy showing into the nose wheel well. There are hinges connected to nothing in the main gear wells. Intakes lead to nowhere. There should have been a solid black wall in there to simulate depth. There's a random fuselage hanging off the back of the left boom?
    - Flight performance. It turns better than most fighters. Keep in mind this plane was bigger than the Lockheed Constellation, shown in this picture yet it turns faster than a P-51. No wonder the wings break off so easily. Speaking off, that's another not needed feature. It complicated the whole plane, and adds parts to the wing as you have to build two that are connected, rather than just one big wing.
    - Paint. It's very bland. It's hard to tell from pictures as they are mostly black and white, but from the few color pictures, the plane is more of a grey/aluminum color, not white. A few ticks darker in the paint menu, and a touch more metallic would've fixed this. Also, the engine is painted white, which makes it hard to notice it. Plus its all white, so its even harder to notice the 400+ parts worth of detail
    I feel bad for critiquing so much, I can only imagine how much effort you put into this build. I estimate tha

    Pinned 4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    Jundroo : makes a game where people will be able to share builds
    HappyFeetWhyshouldi : ok let's make a 4000 parts plane

    ok so let's be serious two minutes, the build is awesome, it does look like the real plane, details are unbelievable just as the custom landing gears, spoilers, control surfaces ect....This build is for sure really REALLY good. BUT there are some flaws : first the part count (yes some people will say "blablabla it's not that bad" but it is !) I know there is a lot of details and custom parts but absolutely NO PART ECONOMY ! Which is a shame for a plane with this ammount of details, for exemple in your jauges each line is ONE part, but you can make two and up to four lines with one part...Also the tail doesn't really look like how it should where the fuselage and the vertical stabilizer meet which is unfortunate for a build of this quality. (And I'm going to say it again, so much parts is great to show what you can do, it's like a piece of art, but high part count doesn't mean good build)
    However don't think that I find your build bad, it's magnificent ! Better than a lot of builds :))

    Pinned 4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    Forty-three thirty-two

    Pinned 4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    133k Kennneth

    cheeseburger

    Pinned 4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    @masotan15 could do the same plane, WITH ONLY 202 PART!! and he did a great job. It's not necessary put a lot of useless part only for decoration if nobody can play with it because their computers will explode, yeah it is a beautiful airplane but is useless.

    +1 2 months ago
  • Profile image

    0of my computer

    3.3 years ago
  • Profile image
    31.1k Spikerya

    somehow my laptop can handle this... Razer ftw!

    3.3 years ago
  • Profile image
    4,449 Shippy456

    Caught your name change! @PoinX25tlessWhyShouldI

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image

    Ok @JamesieMcPlanesieThe2st

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    I mean there's detail and then there's just making things from a gazillion parts for no reason...
    I mean this is pretty good but I could have made something of equal level of detail (maybe slightly simplified gauges) from about 1500 parts.
    There's a reason most video games have a rendering system...

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    1,749 zazy

    rip my pc

    +2 3.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    4,381 Stanmich

    I'm saying now, this may be more detailed than the 172S.

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    What kind of quantum computer ∞tb RAM iPad are you using?!

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    My phone is shaking in fear.

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    11.5k shipster

    I think I know who won the competition...you brought a nuke to a watergun fight

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    195 Wisely

    Is my iPad nasa grade? No but I will Experiment and see if my iPad can Handle this also this is beautiful and awesome looking nice job

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    @kenneth_ did these pictures. @Aweyer26

    +2 3.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    7,543 Aweyer26

    idk how you get the ray tracing working so well. What effects are you using for these pictures @PoinX25tlessWhyShouldI

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    I’m sorry. :( @NaONCo2HCH2

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    20.3k MAINE

    Too many parts to be played by the majority. But, I still upvoted

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    RTX ON!

    3.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    2,762 Madness

    bro u deserve more than 1k votes :D

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    Cool! @CRJ900Pilot

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    32.3k CRJ900Pilot

    @PoinX25tlessWhyShouldI I do, its CRJ900Pilot#6712

    4.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    -takeoff- could be due to connections
    -roll- yes it has great roll however the wings do snap off the only reason I’ve added this is because I don't like FT so much and it most likely was a hard plane to fly and want it to try to be realistic and harsh on the pilot
    -I like to put detail so no way im degrading the part count lol (I do do lower more part efficient builds but I just love detail so much)
    -gaps- im so sorry I’ve been trying to attempt smooth panelling my next build will be 10x better I hope
    -paint- the XF-11 1 was pure white and black the prototype 2 was the one with a slight aluminium colour

    Don’t be sorry for critiquing im very glad you did!, it will be able to help me grow as a builder.

    Also do you have discord? @CRJ900Pilot

    4.0 years ago
  • Log in to see more comments