30.3k ChiChiWerx Comments

  • Fiat G.91 R1 7.3 years ago

    I've built--but never posted a G.91 myself--this one is better...simply elegant!

  • Fiat G.91 R1 7.3 years ago

    Molto bene!

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.3 years ago

    @WalrusAircraft I'm partial for the Airship Battleship, if you are.

  • Convair CV-240 7.4 years ago

    Don't see many of these on the site...nice!

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @Synthex4060 thanks!

  • Tu-22M3 Backfire 7.4 years ago

    Cool, thanks. So you're using extra VTOL engines to get the power boost and the XML modded exhaust nozzles to get the large plumes, thanks!

  • Tu-22M3 Backfire 7.4 years ago

    Quick question: How do you do the "afterburner" setting? Well, not how do you activate it...how do you build it?

  • Su-35 7.4 years ago

    I'm partial for US aircraft, but this one looks awesome!

  • Thanks! 7.4 years ago

    Love the Steampunk vibe!

  • Best Flying Movie? 7.4 years ago

    @AerodynamicallyConfused hmmm...interesting. I'll have to go back and look again. Much of the flying footage was taken during actual combat missions over Germany by the combat camera crews and the film also uses Luftwaffe footage. The B-17 crash landing was flown by Paul Mantz, a famous Hollywood stunt flyer...later died filming an attempted landing in the "Phoenix" in "Flight of the Phoenix". Could be FW-190s, which look a lot like P-47s...heck, could even be P-47s, as you say, not sure. Sure doesn't detract from the movie for me, at least not so much. The flying scenes are good enough that they are impactful, are interesting, drive the story forward. I was most drawn to the stresses of WWII bomber combat, command problems and team-building the movie spends most of its time on and are very true to life. But I will look out of P-47s the next time I watch the movie!

  • Tu-22M3 Backfire 7.4 years ago

    Impressive.

  • Grumman F6F Hellcat 7.4 years ago

    Flies nice, looks good and the wing fold mechanism is fantastic!

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @WalrusAircraft I like the idea of something creative, haven't done anything like that yet...Steampunk airship sounds fun. Any specific ideas?

  • F6F Sneak Peek! 7.4 years ago

    A little difficult to tell from the screenshots, but the general shape looks spot on, really like what you did with the cowling.

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @WalrusAircraft that's good. I've only collaborated with Kevinairlines in the past, but I think he's still in school because I am sure my slowness aggravates him...I have responsibilities and cannot spend every hour I have on the PC. I do have an idea for a little done theme--Golden Age racers. The only problem is that they're rather small, probably no more than 40' wingspan. I've also been considering the F-105, Su-9 or F-104. Do you have any ideas?

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @WalrusAircraft not sure...I have a long list and not enough time!

  • FRIENDZONED 7.4 years ago

    Just be nice, spend time with her and she'll eventually come around...worked for me!

  • F6F Sneak Peek! 7.4 years ago

    I have to agree with @Zandgard , the landing gear needs to be longer and beefier

  • WHY IT TOOK SO LONG?! 7.4 years ago

    It looks good when flying! Though you might have saved a few parts, it's a learning process and I commend you for trying it out

  • Focke-Wulf Ta 152 and TU-22M 7.4 years ago

    Nice, both look very good.

  • WHY IT TOOK SO LONG?! 7.4 years ago

    I like it...it's an alternative with the problems and compromises of conventional shapes (can't do convex, can't adjust the third side, etc., etc.). Anyone can make a perfectly shaped airplane by using more polygons, which is what Sauce is doing here. If he used two or three the number of parts, some of that "bumpiness" would be gone, but as it is right now, I think this is no worse and probably more accurate a shape than just about any other Viper on the site.

  • Lockheed F-104 Starfighter 7.4 years ago

    Love it! Great build, fun to fly, like riding a rocket! That's hard to do with a '104 in SP.

  • Lockheed F-104 Starfighter 7.4 years ago

    You, know, it's funny how you used your U-2 for this build. In reality, Clarence Kelly Johnson, the designer of both the F-104 and the U-2 used the F-104 as the starting point for the U-2; he swapped the wings out for the long wings and eventually changed the tail, but in the original drawings the U-2 is merely an F-104 with long wings!

  • Lockheed U-2 Dragon Lady 7.4 years ago

    @BogdanX, just trying to be constructive here...it looks really good and 30 seconds on a PC will fix the pitch up issue. As it is, it's barely controllable at full nose down trim and staying below 30-40% power.

  • Lockheed U-2 Dragon Lady 7.4 years ago

    It actually looks like a U-2, which is better than most of the U-2s on the site (@BogdanX 's U-2 is also excellent), especially as you're on iOS, which is impressive...however, your workaround to bury the engine is what's causing the pitch-up, not the amount of lift (check your CoM vs. CoT). If you could get someone to nudge the engine higher in the engine bay, I bet this would fly great! As it's currently configured, it's a bear to fly...much more difficult to control than in real life.

  • Sukhoi Su-52 7.4 years ago

    Nice...the missile launching system is great!

  • M-95 7.4 years ago

    I like it, very realistic.

  • Little teaser of that I've been doing 7.4 years ago

    Hey, you're the one who's posting a preview, not me. But, just to show there's no hard feelings, here's something you might like, A-4 El Tordillo.

  • Is it EVER going to be possible for me? ?? 7.4 years ago

    Make something original (not a successor) and well built. Plus, you might want to fill the screen with your screenshot when you post your builds.

  • THE F-16 , AS PROMISED! 7.4 years ago

    Then, I assume (see, I'm assuming again), you plan on modifying the engine's acceleration?

  • THE F-16 , AS PROMISED! 7.4 years ago

    @Sauce...no...but one can never ASSUME anything...this is my why of asking, "gee, Sauce, how are you going to reduce the number of drag points?"

  • THE F-16 , AS PROMISED! 7.4 years ago

    How many drag points do you think it will have? The potential drawback being there are so many drag points, you may have to multiply engine power by 10x, resulting in acceleration matching the Millennium Falcon jumping into hyperspace... I'm highly curious to see how you will get around that problem, good luck because she looks beautiful!

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @KCferrari go ahead and Mod as appropriate!

  • Recessed Gun Ports? 7.4 years ago

    My work around for the 105 would be to put a flat black block simulating a port or recess, the the gun barrel sticking out but painted the same color to blend. Not an actual port, but probably close enough to make it work...

  • Realistic Mach 2 Performance? 7.4 years ago

    You're talking about your F-105 you just pulled down, correct? I just posted my Viggen, very similar stats and I had to Mod my engine for 4.5x power to get the performance required to propel the at least semi-realistic build. But, acceleration is unreasonably swift. I have no idea how to mid engine acceleration, wish I did, but I think it's better than putting up with a 300 mph supersonic fighter bomber. As for the gear, probably have as much weight as you're dealing with. A trick I discovered that instead of using the resizable wheel, use the small double wheel. Of course you only have one wheel per gear, so you would have to do other tricks to make that work. Can't wait to see your 105, I was thinking of building one next...

  • Lockheed C-36 Electra 7.4 years ago

    iOS no less!

  • JU-87 Stuka 7.4 years ago

    Nice work! Easy to hit targets with.

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @Blue0Bull thank you!

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    If you want a build of the Viggen with fewer parts, check out @Syrhex4060's Viggen here. I like his build so much it inspired me to build my own.

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @Marduk it took a lot of tweaking to get it where it is, I'm glad you like it.

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    @Tang0five thank you, thank you very much! The trick is in selecting the right subject and the Viggen is quite a charismatic jet.

  • Saab JA 37 Viggen 7.4 years ago

    Synthex4060, this impressive build inspired me to build my own version. You have managed to elegantly capture the Viggen with fewer parts, even after my efforts, I still love this build!

  • F-16 7.4 years ago

    @YL my apologies, Google Translate did not adequately interpret your comment. Nice work on this F-16

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    Thanks @Bladeguy57 and @MadBomber!

  • Saab JA37DI Viggen 7.4 years ago

    Thank you @Ian1231100 @Gestour @RAF1!

  • F-16 7.4 years ago

    There are a couple of minor similarities--the technique he uses for the blended fuse and the nose shape, but I don't think this one is yours...too many major differences, plus the wing loading and dimensions are way off

  • Custom Landing Gear Help! 7.4 years ago

    @Kevinairlines yes, absolutely

  • Custom Landing Gear Help! 7.4 years ago

    @Kevinairlines the custom gear is fixed, I am almost done with this latest build, but I've been busy the past couple of days and haven't had the time to finish it up, but it takes off absolutely straight now, finally!

  • Custom Landing Gear Help! 7.4 years ago

    @Kevinairlines for your camo, use Overload and adjust all the mass for your camo "pieces" to .1, or less--absolutely critical if you want to end up with a flyable aircraft!

  • Weaponbaytest 7.4 years ago

    This, by the way, is how the F-22 launches its missiles, now you can make a realistic F-22...I like it!!!