Iz pretty gud. Tomcat is popular on this site for many reasons, so lots o' builds. This one flies smoothly just like the other US fighter builds, and I'm glad the swing wing doesn't affect turning performance (for example my old F-14 became much less agile with the wings swept back).
.
In terms of the proportions the engine nacelles seem a bit squished in the front; from the side view there should be some of them interrupting the silhouette of the fuselage lines. Also the landing gear seem too short? The topmost edge of the main wheels should be in-line with the engine nacelles, which would help fix some of the issues with loadout 2. Also the fuselage should slope upwards from just in front of the canopy's back edge, which would again fix the issue with loadout 2 as the Phoenix would be able to ride further from the ground. Still I like the lines and color scheme (I'm weak to the 70's High-Viz pattern), and it even has the early early IRST sensor on the nose instead of the TV camera.
.
Sorry to critique. I'm verr picky when it comes to shaping.
@DarkMarble1 Feel free to use it. For rp sake it's only preproduction by 2023, so it isn't quite done with testing and evaluation. So maybe full production a year or so later, if that affects any story beats you got.
@ChrisChrisThePy Eyy watch da spam fam .-.
.
I assumed realistic flight model since I know you're one of the builders that prefers to build lifelike rather than arcade. I'm just tired of seeing another Mihaly Su-30 being built. X)
@Tomcatbetterthanhornet I dunno...I'm feeling the 2020 burnout bad, plus I have too many ideas stored on my computer. I may go back and finish a build that's been sitting around on my computer for a while before moving to the next current project
@DarkMarble1 I promised you...what, a couple months ago, that I would get this done? I'm really just fulfilling what I set out to do lol
.
Now you should have the appropriate F-14 to do your RP stuff with.
Same deal as the F-18; smooth handling, good model (so many lights lol), and low part count so pretty much any user can download and fly it.
.
@ReinMcDeer I started using the activation groups for my flaps, but that comes with the disadvantage that they're either on or off (unless you do some funky tree stuff to get intermediate positions). Still it frees up VTOL for other uses and Trim for...trim. :) I see where you're coming from though and that's fine.
@MemeLordMASTERMEMES That I am. It's on my profile as "F-14A (1982) REMASTERED," along with two unlisted variations.
.
I've been cool with him using my builds for his stuff, and so far he's been pretty good about at least mentioning I was the creator when he does. (His Pimp my Tomcat challenge for instance.)
Well it's nice to see my F-14 get this much mileage. :)
.
Some of the carrier stuff was fun and cheeky, and I see his customized version of my F-14 made a cameo too.
I usually prefer flight handling that's more grounded (haha) and realistic, but this is smooth for a plane with more arcade-like agility and speed. Build looks good without the need for tons of detail parts. I would have the flaps on VTOL or an activation group instead of Trim (save that for the trim control), but I see why you did it for the cobra.
.
Bombs could use a shorter delay than the default. More useful for the convoy mission and such.
.
Overall I like this. Nice and simple Hornet with smooth handling. :)
Well it appears my F-14 has been Ace Combat Superplane-ified with this one. I like how the vertical tails are set up like the X-02 and the engine exhaust are similar to the ADF and ADFX. COFFIN cockpit is kewl. I dunno what happened with the kink in the fuselage by the front cockpit but okie lol.
.
Control wise it should have been tweaked for less sensitive pitch control to get rid of that wobble. Readjusting the balance between CoM and CoL would help too. Also I'm firmly in the camp that doesn't really enjoy crazy speed and acceleration, but I won't knock the build for that. Just isn't my thing - especially with the need for gentle pitch inputs from the pilot (AKA the player).
@ChrisPy ...Wait...seriously? That sounds derpy as heck. X)
.
I suppose I could adjust the tailplanes to have a funky tree that pitches down when the brakes are pressed.
@Nerfaddict The blueprint I used had cutaways for the fuselage, so I used those to form a "core" for the build. UNFORTUNATELY the cutaways were smaller than the rest of the views, so another thing to adjust on the real build.
@JSwannyGaming148 It's already almost full size so I'm gonna figure out the missiles. Though somewhere in the build I lost 3ft from the length so that needs to be fixed
Oh...I guess my Osea roundel from my MiG-21 is here. Kewl. Well hopefully it worked out well. :)
.
Dat pfp tho; Pixy, uh...you okay? Going ultra instinct there? Gonna pull a Fist of the North Star on someone? ...Cipher?
@ChrisPy Honestly I think his Phantom rolls better with just the custom ailerons than mine with both the custom and stock ailerons.
.
.
I'm debating on and off if I wanna build another set of F-4 Phantoms; another Navy/Marine F-4B or J, an F-4E(J) or F-4G, and an RN FAA F-4K FG.1. I want to see how much I can improve after the F-14, F-15, and F-1.
@Hedero The Heinkel 178 if I recall the configuration was a single-engine turbojet in the fuselage, rather than the twin engine in pods style of the 280. Both jets had the same razorback spine, so appearance wise they were quite alike there. The 178 also didn't have the twin tails.
.
I'm just going off memory since I'm too lazy to look it up lol.
@BubbleLukasie Lemme see if I can get it to work on one of my jets and I'll just copy/paste the function into here. I'm no sn0wflakes, but I'll see if I can do it.
.
Here's what I did.
.IAS < 120.894 ? clamp(Activate3,0,-1) + Roll : Roll
.I used the right wing as reference. For the left wing just take the clamp command and replace '-1' with '1.'
@WolfSpark I do have plans to continue building Vietnam-Era jets. The RA-5 is definitely on there especially since it'd probably be a fairly simple jet to replicate.
.
I might like to see this ejection seat. I dunno when I'll use it but one day.
.
@Homerboi Hello
@BubbleLukasie I might give it a shot. I do want to keep making more than just US or Soviet/Russian fighters, which has kind of been my focus unconsciously (hence the Japanese F-1). Also you say the Rafale-C, which is the Air Force single seater; I'll be sure to look for the appropriate blueprint when I get to it.
.
@SwiftFoxe ...Hmmm...I'm a bit reserved when it comes to stealth aircraft just because I don't think my panelwork is good enough to make a full aircraft using that technique COUGHF-22COUGH. I'll keep the YF-23 in mind for a future project, but it ain't happening soon - especially with me doing Uni summer classes
Eventually I'm gonna take a crack at the Voodoo as well, but I have to agree with you; thing is that to my knowledge the F-101 didn't have all that exciting of a career (with exception of the RF-101C), So perhaps not as many people know about it compared to, say, the F-15.
.
Small correction in the blurb on the jet's background; the F-101C was not a carrier version, but rather a modified and updated F-101A. If either jet had a tailhook it was for emergency landings only since the undercarriage on Air Force jets (except the F-4) were far more trim compared to navy jets.
.
Unfortunately my crappy laptop probably would have a stroke if I tried to download this, but I will say nice job on the build regardless. :)
@DarkMarble1 I would be okay with it, but from reading the blurb on your F-14 variant...isn't it based on the -14D Super Tomcat? I actually have some plans in the future to do an F-14D (and maybe and F-14A+/B), which would just be a modification of my F-14A that I would publicly post.
.
I'm just asking since it sounds like you'll need a completely different cockpit layout, but go ahead anyways. :)
This looks pretty cool. I'll be sure to test this out against some of my builds and see how it does.
.
Are those my AGM-45's? I can't 100% tell but it looks like it.
@Cobrahuey It's my home state too :) Figured I would try something fun for this build. It was that or an Ace Combat marking set (COUGHpixyorcipherCOUGH)
@UFNNICF5TF In terms of the technology advantage I don't feel like it's fair to judge the Su-27 (assuming we're talking plain jane original Su-27 and not the SM1,SM2, etc) with the latest and most advanced F-15C. If we must compare the two I wouldn't go any further than the model of F-15C that was concurrent to the introduction of the Flanker-B, or to be EXTRA fair the F-15A and Flanker-B. In that case we're a bit more even tech-wise and the Flanker is arguably more agile than the Eagle (hypermaneuverability vs energy fighting)
.
Honestly I don't think either fighter is obviously better; it all comes down to who's in the seat and who makes the fatal mistake first. The Eagle has shot down MiG-29's before and that fighter is often said to have much better overall maneuvering.
Iz pretty gud. Tomcat is popular on this site for many reasons, so lots o' builds. This one flies smoothly just like the other US fighter builds, and I'm glad the swing wing doesn't affect turning performance (for example my old F-14 became much less agile with the wings swept back).
.
In terms of the proportions the engine nacelles seem a bit squished in the front; from the side view there should be some of them interrupting the silhouette of the fuselage lines. Also the landing gear seem too short? The topmost edge of the main wheels should be in-line with the engine nacelles, which would help fix some of the issues with loadout 2. Also the fuselage should slope upwards from just in front of the canopy's back edge, which would again fix the issue with loadout 2 as the Phoenix would be able to ride further from the ground. Still I like the lines and color scheme (I'm weak to the 70's High-Viz pattern), and it even has the early early IRST sensor on the nose instead of the TV camera.
.
Sorry to critique. I'm verr picky when it comes to shaping.
@DarkMarble1 Mind if I tag you in an unlisted post?
@Shippy456 Thanks :)
@DarkMarble1 Feel free to use it. For rp sake it's only preproduction by 2023, so it isn't quite done with testing and evaluation. So maybe full production a year or so later, if that affects any story beats you got.
@ChrisChrisThePy Eyy watch da spam fam .-.
.
I assumed realistic flight model since I know you're one of the builders that prefers to build lifelike rather than arcade. I'm just tired of seeing another Mihaly Su-30 being built. X)
I just hope it ain't an Ace Combat 7 livery. I've had my fill of Sol Squadron colors on Su-30's.
@Tomcatbetterthanhornet I dunno...I'm feeling the 2020 burnout bad, plus I have too many ideas stored on my computer. I may go back and finish a build that's been sitting around on my computer for a while before moving to the next current project
Alright I'm not gonna lie this combination looks badass. I love the colors on the Navalized version too
@DarkMarble1 I promised you...what, a couple months ago, that I would get this done? I'm really just fulfilling what I set out to do lol
.
Now you should have the appropriate F-14 to do your RP stuff with.
Same deal as the F-18; smooth handling, good model (so many lights lol), and low part count so pretty much any user can download and fly it.
.
@ReinMcDeer I started using the activation groups for my flaps, but that comes with the disadvantage that they're either on or off (unless you do some funky tree stuff to get intermediate positions). Still it frees up VTOL for other uses and Trim for...trim. :) I see where you're coming from though and that's fine.
@Voskhod Don't you dare try to start that here! XD
@MemeLordMASTERMEMES That I am. It's on my profile as "F-14A (1982) REMASTERED," along with two unlisted variations.
.
I've been cool with him using my builds for his stuff, and so far he's been pretty good about at least mentioning I was the creator when he does. (His Pimp my Tomcat challenge for instance.)
Well it's nice to see my F-14 get this much mileage. :)
.
Some of the carrier stuff was fun and cheeky, and I see his customized version of my F-14 made a cameo too.
I usually prefer flight handling that's more grounded (haha) and realistic, but this is smooth for a plane with more arcade-like agility and speed. Build looks good without the need for tons of detail parts. I would have the flaps on VTOL or an activation group instead of Trim (save that for the trim control), but I see why you did it for the cobra.
.
Bombs could use a shorter delay than the default. More useful for the convoy mission and such.
.
Overall I like this. Nice and simple Hornet with smooth handling. :)
@Ouroboros I've done that with my builds before too. I've forgotten an occasional feature in my rush to get the project done.
@Notaleopard I did. That one is gonna be even worse for my computer lol
Well it appears my F-14 has been Ace Combat Superplane-ified with this one. I like how the vertical tails are set up like the X-02 and the engine exhaust are similar to the ADF and ADFX. COFFIN cockpit is kewl. I dunno what happened with the kink in the fuselage by the front cockpit but okie lol.
.
Control wise it should have been tweaked for less sensitive pitch control to get rid of that wobble. Readjusting the balance between CoM and CoL would help too. Also I'm firmly in the camp that doesn't really enjoy crazy speed and acceleration, but I won't knock the build for that. Just isn't my thing - especially with the need for gentle pitch inputs from the pilot (AKA the player).
@HawkerAviation Oh hush hush, you :)
.
Tis only the precursor to greater things in the future...
@psychoslayer Tried that, doesn't work that well. I've found a much better system for doing spoilerons on my recent F-14 and F-1 fighters.
@DimitriIqbal91 Not right now. This was just me dipping my foot into the water, so to speak. Eventually there will be an F-22, but not now.
@ChrisPy ...Wait...seriously? That sounds derpy as heck. X)
.
I suppose I could adjust the tailplanes to have a funky tree that pitches down when the brakes are pressed.
@Nerfaddict The blueprint I used had cutaways for the fuselage, so I used those to form a "core" for the build. UNFORTUNATELY the cutaways were smaller than the rest of the views, so another thing to adjust on the real build.
@JSwannyGaming148 It's already almost full size so I'm gonna figure out the missiles. Though somewhere in the build I lost 3ft from the length so that needs to be fixed
I apolgize, but I won't be tagging people whenever it comes out. Sowwy.
@CodenameMorgan No problem. :)
Oh...I guess my Osea roundel from my MiG-21 is here. Kewl. Well hopefully it worked out well. :)
.
Dat pfp tho; Pixy, uh...you okay? Going ultra instinct there? Gonna pull a Fist of the North Star on someone? ...Cipher?
@WarHawk95 Seems to only detect the bomb though; the advanced targeting reticle AND the lock-on ring are gone when I try this.
@IrFritzruss Do you happen to know or recall the path to accessing XML aircraft and assembly files on windows?
Awww, thank you so much everyone. :D
.
I was NOT expecting so much traffic on this post lol
@ChrisPy Honestly I think his Phantom rolls better with just the custom ailerons than mine with both the custom and stock ailerons.
.
.
I'm debating on and off if I wanna build another set of F-4 Phantoms; another Navy/Marine F-4B or J, an F-4E(J) or F-4G, and an RN FAA F-4K FG.1. I want to see how much I can improve after the F-14, F-15, and F-1.
This is gonna be sweet :)
Pretty interesting skeleton to test a swing wing with. Looks like we'll have another F-14 to look forwards to. :)
@Hedero The Heinkel 178 if I recall the configuration was a single-engine turbojet in the fuselage, rather than the twin engine in pods style of the 280. Both jets had the same razorback spine, so appearance wise they were quite alike there. The 178 also didn't have the twin tails.
.
I'm just going off memory since I'm too lazy to look it up lol.
@BubbleLukasie Lemme see if I can get it to work on one of my jets and I'll just copy/paste the function into here. I'm no sn0wflakes, but I'll see if I can do it.
.
Here's what I did.
.IAS < 120.894 ? clamp(Activate3,0,-1) + Roll : Roll
.I used the right wing as reference. For the left wing just take the clamp command and replace '-1' with '1.'
@WolfSpark I do have plans to continue building Vietnam-Era jets. The RA-5 is definitely on there especially since it'd probably be a fairly simple jet to replicate.
.
I might like to see this ejection seat. I dunno when I'll use it but one day.
.
@Homerboi Hello
@BubbleLukasie I might give it a shot. I do want to keep making more than just US or Soviet/Russian fighters, which has kind of been my focus unconsciously (hence the Japanese F-1). Also you say the Rafale-C, which is the Air Force single seater; I'll be sure to look for the appropriate blueprint when I get to it.
.
@SwiftFoxe ...Hmmm...I'm a bit reserved when it comes to stealth aircraft just because I don't think my panelwork is good enough to make a full aircraft using that technique COUGHF-22COUGH. I'll keep the YF-23 in mind for a future project, but it ain't happening soon - especially with me doing Uni summer classes
Eventually I'm gonna take a crack at the Voodoo as well, but I have to agree with you; thing is that to my knowledge the F-101 didn't have all that exciting of a career (with exception of the RF-101C), So perhaps not as many people know about it compared to, say, the F-15.
.
Small correction in the blurb on the jet's background; the F-101C was not a carrier version, but rather a modified and updated F-101A. If either jet had a tailhook it was for emergency landings only since the undercarriage on Air Force jets (except the F-4) were far more trim compared to navy jets.
.
Unfortunately my crappy laptop probably would have a stroke if I tried to download this, but I will say nice job on the build regardless. :)
@HawaiiRanger No problem friend. :)
@DarkMarble1 I would be okay with it, but from reading the blurb on your F-14 variant...isn't it based on the -14D Super Tomcat? I actually have some plans in the future to do an F-14D (and maybe and F-14A+/B), which would just be a modification of my F-14A that I would publicly post.
.
I'm just asking since it sounds like you'll need a completely different cockpit layout, but go ahead anyways. :)
@DarkMarble1 Nice :)
This looks pretty cool. I'll be sure to test this out against some of my builds and see how it does.
.
Are those my AGM-45's? I can't 100% tell but it looks like it.
@Cobrahuey It's my home state too :) Figured I would try something fun for this build. It was that or an Ace Combat marking set (COUGHpixyorcipherCOUGH)
@Mikey101234 HAH! I was so hoping that was the case! XD
@UFNNICF5TF In terms of the technology advantage I don't feel like it's fair to judge the Su-27 (assuming we're talking plain jane original Su-27 and not the SM1,SM2, etc) with the latest and most advanced F-15C. If we must compare the two I wouldn't go any further than the model of F-15C that was concurrent to the introduction of the Flanker-B, or to be EXTRA fair the F-15A and Flanker-B. In that case we're a bit more even tech-wise and the Flanker is arguably more agile than the Eagle (hypermaneuverability vs energy fighting)
.
Honestly I don't think either fighter is obviously better; it all comes down to who's in the seat and who makes the fatal mistake first. The Eagle has shot down MiG-29's before and that fighter is often said to have much better overall maneuvering.
@Alphawolf41 Indeed. Am excited :)
@UFNNICF5TF ...I don't get it? X)
@HawkerAviation Bro lay off the caps for real. X)
.
Appreciate the enthusiasm tho.
@typeZERO See problem is the entire series is FULL of that kinda crap so I'm just numb to it. And I'm a fan of Strike Witches.
@ChiChiWerx I'll consider the invitation, thank you. :)
@typeZERO Baka hentai ecks dee