@Kangy So „mission accomplished“? You gotta be kiddin: Vietnam was a f*cking disaster, both in terms of PR and traumatic damage to all nations involved. But we’re way too far into politics here anyway, let’s talk about planes again.
Cool unique design! Just for some historical context: the X-10 wasn’t actually named ‚Navaho‘. That was the name of an earlier cruise missile design, the SM-64 Navaho, of which many design features were adopted for the X-10. 🤓🤓🤓 Exiting geek-mode now. Sorry.
@Maverick09 Look, I don’t have a problem with patriotism, but I do take issue with a „joke“ that calls for annihilating entire countries, no matter how evil their leaders may be. It’s happening right now around the world and it just isn’t a joke. Thanks for understanding and wanting to cooperate.
@Seeras @Maverick09 While we’re at it, can we please stick to the rules of not blurting out political messages along with pur builds? „Bomb Iran…Turn Iran into a parking lot.“
What the f*ck?! I get it, it’s at least partially satirical, but it’s just bad, infantile humor. Please remove.
As a fellow Tornado-lover I really appreciate this build. There are so many good things about it, I don’t know where to begin: the overall shape, the thrust reversers, the custom afterburners, the cockpit (!)… the two-tone Marineflieger livery. Awesome!
However, allow me to also suggest some ideas for further improvement:
Loadout/weapon stations: the two outboard weapon stations never really carry any weapons on the Tornado: they’re reserved for counter measures (electronic and chaff/flare dispenser). The inner stations usually carry one drop tank and one A2A missile each, there is no third station on that pylon, like, for example, on the F-15 Eagle. The heavier ordnance is carried under the fuselage
Variant: the fact that the German Navy‘s ‚Marineflieger‘ used the IDS variant. However, your build pretty much resembles the British GR.4 variant with enhanced sensors under the chin. Germany never had this variant. So it’s either IDS or Gr. Mk. 4. The German air force also uses the ECR Tornado which is geared for electronic warfare but, for example, doesn’t have the two cannons. Check out my IDS build for reference. It’s way lower quality than yours in many respects. But it does stay true to the variant‘s specifics.
But again: all of this is just nitpicking because I love this plane so much. 😉
@Sockdragger thanks, I‘m glad you enjoy flying the Pigeon, and I appreciate the kind words! The actual wings are scaled way down and hidden inside the cosmetic wings right at the wingroots. I think they’re marked green or something, so I can find them myself 😉
@MrCOPTY Well, in fact I didn’t. It’s custom-made my friend! Although I will say I did try out the premade one in an attempt to save parts, but I really couldn’t make it fit, so I didn’t end up using it after all.
That is one sexy aeroplanium! Also: why do the flaps get stuck after take-off? Was kinda hoping for the button on the lever to undo this, but no such luck… am I doing it all wrong?
@Lerkov1991 Thank you! Sort of. It's still a work in progress, but lately, I rarely find time to work on SP stuff. But I'm glad you're still interested. I might upload the project's current iteration soon.
Cool project. I really dig the form factor and the general design. Internal weapons bays are also super cool!
Some tips that might help improve flight characteristics:
Have the v-tail stabs face down a little more and give them combined pitch/roll/yaw control by using rotators instead of default control surfaces. You may also want to increase their overall size a little bit.
Focus less on speed and more on agility (see above)
Whatever landing gear you end up using: move the main gear a good bit forward for a more realistic look. Also, the plane will rotate better on take-off. I know, they‘d be in the way of the bay door opening. But you‘ll find a way ;-) The plane‘s tiny anyway, you might as well end up extending its overall length…
This is gonna be an excellent fighter when it’s done, I’m sure.
That camo is simply amazing! Don’t dig the fact that there’s no cockpit, and the afterburner effect is pretty lackluster but HOLY CRAP THAT CAMO IS GORGEOUS!
@Stephen22 Too little time. I’ve been working on builds on and off but couldn’t bring myself to finish either of them so far. They’ll come… eventually. 😉
Hey, cool little build. Just noticed the issue with the flaps. The problem is that SP physics doesn’t recognize extra control surfaces made from wing parts in the position where flaps would typically be located. There are two ways of fixing this:
make extra flaps, scale them down and hide them in the fuselage, but FORWARD of the actual main wing. Or:
Make hidden wings with integrated flaps. Again, those wings are ideally scaled down (to 0.2 or so) and hidden in the fuselage or inside the cosmetic wings. Check out my old „ACAS“ build to se how this works. It’s far from perfect, but illustrates my point well. Cheers!
@Numbers2 just checked, they work fine. But since they’re LGBs… well, you do actually need to „lase“ the target, using the LITENING pod which has its own camera view. It locks onto the target automatically but you need to be at an appropriate angle for the pod to acquire lock and to release the bombs.
Hi there, cool build! There’s one detail you missed about the Danish F-35A variant: the ‚hump’ on its back (between the v-stabs) is not a luneburg lens. That’s actually the housing for the brake chute. A number of countries have set this as a requirement, among them Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and, prospectively, Germany. You can find more info here: https://www.f35.com/f35/news-and-features/the-f35a-drag-chute-system.html
And luneburg lenses are detachable (though not in-flight), so they’re not used permanently or on every sortie/mission. Same goes for the aforementioned drag chute system, by the way.
@AshdenpawTG22 that’s rather simple… the difference is: the MiG-29 exists, a Su-29 does not. 😉 I mean, technically, there is an Su-29, but that one’s a straight-wing, piston-driven aerobatic/trainer plane.
T!
+1Mhm, clean Tomcat… 😏
TOMCATS!!
+1@L1nus And that really shows! To me, this is the definitive F-14A in SP to date. Bravo!
Is it invincible? I get hit by AA missiles and nothing happens. Other than that: great build!!
+1T as in funky TREES
@Kangy So „mission accomplished“? You gotta be kiddin: Vietnam was a f*cking disaster, both in terms of PR and traumatic damage to all nations involved. But we’re way too far into politics here anyway, let’s talk about planes again.
+1Awesome detail with great parts economy and flight model!
Beautiful build, and presentation, aesthetically speaking. Ok parts economy for a fully armed fighter. Performance and armament are kinda comical.
Details:
- Storm Shadow is a subsonic cruise missile. Not a hypersonic weapon. I literally killed myself with it while in a slight turn
- Afterburners don’t work quite right: flame is always present, nozzles close as AB is fully engaged (it’s the other way round IRL)
- acceleration is waay over the top
- maneuverability is fun but far from realistic
+1Holy moly, this is some high quality modeling! Flies very smoothly as well. Great work!
+1Cool unique design! Just for some historical context: the X-10 wasn’t actually named ‚Navaho‘. That was the name of an earlier cruise missile design, the SM-64 Navaho, of which many design features were adopted for the X-10. 🤓🤓🤓 Exiting geek-mode now. Sorry.
+5@Maverick09 Look, I don’t have a problem with patriotism, but I do take issue with a „joke“ that calls for annihilating entire countries, no matter how evil their leaders may be. It’s happening right now around the world and it just isn’t a joke. Thanks for understanding and wanting to cooperate.
+1@Seeras Thank you.
@Seeras @Maverick09 While we’re at it, can we please stick to the rules of not blurting out political messages along with pur builds? „Bomb Iran…Turn Iran into a parking lot.“
What the f*ck?! I get it, it’s at least partially satirical, but it’s just bad, infantile humor. Please remove.
@SC2311 Thanks, I really wasn’t fishing for compliments here, but I appreciate the feedback!
+1As a fellow Tornado-lover I really appreciate this build. There are so many good things about it, I don’t know where to begin: the overall shape, the thrust reversers, the custom afterburners, the cockpit (!)… the two-tone Marineflieger livery. Awesome!
However, allow me to also suggest some ideas for further improvement:
But again: all of this is just nitpicking because I love this plane so much. 😉
+1Thanks, @jamesPLANESii, for your upvote. This actually means a lot coming from an absolute expert builder such as yourself!
Hey @WinsWings, thanks for the runner-up accolades! Really appreciate your words on my build.
+1Looks cool but it constantly wants to nose-dive and is missing trim!
I had this as a toy like 30 years ago! I think it was from the MicroMachines franchise. Always loved the design. Cool build!
+1I am so glad someone else is as bad at making screenshots as me - while building awesome planes at the same time! 😉
@WinsWings Sure sounds like he might have another one coming, though... ;-)
@jamesPLANESii come on man, you can do it. I know you can! 👊
@Sockdragger thanks, I‘m glad you enjoy flying the Pigeon, and I appreciate the kind words! The actual wings are scaled way down and hidden inside the cosmetic wings right at the wingroots. I think they’re marked green or something, so I can find them myself 😉
@MrCOPTY Cool beans! Appreciate the feedback and the praise.
+1@MrCOPTY Well, in fact I didn’t. It’s custom-made my friend! Although I will say I did try out the premade one in an attempt to save parts, but I really couldn’t make it fit, so I didn’t end up using it after all.
+1@WinsWings @Vikram123 Thanks guys!
+1So cool! Finally someone is showing the A-10‘s even uglier, rejected, sibling some love! I was about to build this as well. Now, I don’t have to! ;-)
+2@WisconsinStatePolice Got it. Didn‘t see it that way.
+1So why not commit and call it an F-15 replica? It’s got the all stuff.
+1Actually testing this while sitting on the toilet. 🤯
@LunarEclipseSP You build Big Rigs, they build a toilet. Both in in SimplePLANES. So go figure.
+1@BaconEggs Got it, thanks!
That is one sexy aeroplanium! Also: why do the flaps get stuck after take-off? Was kinda hoping for the button on the lever to undo this, but no such luck… am I doing it all wrong?
T
@Lerkov1991 Thank you! Sort of. It's still a work in progress, but lately, I rarely find time to work on SP stuff. But I'm glad you're still interested. I might upload the project's current iteration soon.
+1Cool project. I really dig the form factor and the general design. Internal weapons bays are also super cool!
Some tips that might help improve flight characteristics:
This is gonna be an excellent fighter when it’s done, I’m sure.
+1@Eggplant Yeah, SP has some strange ways of screwin with us. I get it.
That camo is simply amazing! Don’t dig the fact that there’s no cockpit, and the afterburner effect is pretty lackluster but HOLY CRAP THAT CAMO IS GORGEOUS!
@Stephen22 Too little time. I’ve been working on builds on and off but couldn’t bring myself to finish either of them so far. They’ll come… eventually. 😉
+1Hey, cool little build. Just noticed the issue with the flaps. The problem is that SP physics doesn’t recognize extra control surfaces made from wing parts in the position where flaps would typically be located. There are two ways of fixing this:
@Tridentgamer calm down already. Some of us have lives beyond SP. I just fixed the airbrake issues and re-uploaded the build. Enjoy.
@Numbers2 True that. It can be a little annoying to get just the right angle. Glad it’s working for you, though.
@Numbers2 just checked, they work fine. But since they’re LGBs… well, you do actually need to „lase“ the target, using the LITENING pod which has its own camera view. It locks onto the target automatically but you need to be at an appropriate angle for the pod to acquire lock and to release the bombs.
You’re really good at this, aren’t you! :-)
+1Hi there, cool build! There’s one detail you missed about the Danish F-35A variant: the ‚hump’ on its back (between the v-stabs) is not a luneburg lens. That’s actually the housing for the brake chute. A number of countries have set this as a requirement, among them Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and, prospectively, Germany. You can find more info here: https://www.f35.com/f35/news-and-features/the-f35a-drag-chute-system.html
And luneburg lenses are detachable (though not in-flight), so they’re not used permanently or on every sortie/mission. Same goes for the aforementioned drag chute system, by the way.
Cheers
+1@AshdenpawTG22 No worries, I was just nitpicking ;-)
@SilverStar I had my suspicions… when I loaded the helo in game, it didn’t seem that oversized at all. Thanks for clarifying!
Very nice model! Why make it so over-dimensional, though? Easier to work on details?
@AshdenpawTG22 that’s rather simple… the difference is: the MiG-29 exists, a Su-29 does not. 😉 I mean, technically, there is an Su-29, but that one’s a straight-wing, piston-driven aerobatic/trainer plane.