Hi there. I just rediscovered this ol gem. Still amazed by the sheer level of detail you managed to put into this without all the bells and whistles from the most recent updates. Speaking of which: I‘d like to take your basic model, as shape and flight model are pretty much perfect and update it with some modern parts (including fuselage splitting where necessary), cockpit parts, glass canopy, maybe a custom engine and a different livery/color scheme, etc.
Is that ok with you? You will, of course receive appropriate credit for your beautiful original build.
Can’t be file size, SP builds rarely crack the 2mb mark. And the XML for this build is only 69kb if I’m not mistaken. Have you tried the workaround method for mobile devices? You can find a helpful guide here. Had the same problem before, now everything works perfectly for me. Link: https://www.simpleplanes.com/Forums/View/1572349/XML-Update-tutorial
@TWDDerSharkmarine
@TWDDerSharkmarine Mhh, yes that Mirage 4000 would have been one hell of a fighter! Love the Kfir too, it’s like Mirage 3/5 on Steroids. And Fairey Delta … man, what a concept! :-D
It’s hard to get the A-10 right. The overall shape is pretty damn good. Other flaws have been pointed out (you should have other people test your builds in the future!). But just one more basic thing for the sake of accuracy: The GAU-8 Avenger doesn’t have 8 barrels as you suggest, but 7.
Beautiful and a joy to fly - the effort you put into updating your '29 really paid off!
Just a quick note on the plane's historical background, should you care to update yours: The German MiG-29s were originally built by Mikoyan as A (single-seater) and UB (double-seater) versions for the GDR (German Democratic Republic = East Germany) air force.
When the Soviet Union started dissolving and the wall in Germany came down in 1989, these MiGs were set to be transfered into the Western German Luftwaffe. In 1990/91, MAPS (the newly formed joint venture between Mikoyan and Daimler Aerospace, based in Germany) was contracted to update/refit the planes to meet NATO standards. They underwent flight tests in 1992 and subsequently entered servive with the now unified Luftwaffe in 1993 as MiG-29Gs and MiG-29GTs (G for Germany, T for Trainer).
@Eugene14 Well that 50‘s French fighter called the Super Mystére just so happens to be the direct predecessor to the Etendard/Super Etendard series. So they’re actually directly connected. That’s what makes your name choice so confusing.
The only Airbus to ever go Mach1! 😉 Seriously though, absolutely beautiful design. But perhaps tone down the engine power just a little bit. It kinda wants to go supersonic in level flight. ;-)
@Dizwerwirt It’s a 9g airframe in real life. That doesn’t exactly come from nothing, you know? In fact, it is the first production plane in history that was intentionally designed to be aerodynamically unstable - accordingly, it’s also the first fly-by-wire production fighter. This build actually does a very good job at approximating the agility and (lack of) stability of the F-16.
@MAHADI Thanks, I tried that with the update that I just uploaded here (just re-download from this post). It does yield more control at slower speeds, also feels a bit sluggish now. Guess that’s something I can get used to, though.
@MAHADI, hey, care to check out the improvements? ;-) Don’t worry about the high number of drag points, the XML has been updated again since the original upload. The actual number is just above 2,000. I also followed your advice of shifting CoM and CoL, so now it flies reasonably well. It’s still got some handling problems at slow speeds but I’ll keep working on it, so that might improve with the next update.
@MAHADI Hey, thanks for the feedback and advice! I realize it’s got some flaws in the performance area. I have to admit that I rushed the build toward the end - and quality control obviously suffered. ;-) Had to get it out for the sake of „making it“, though, you know? I will post a much improved version at some point.
Turned out just as beautiful as I had hoped by watching the trailer! One thing came up while pushing this bird to its limits, though: I do have some trouble getting it past 570 kts (~ Mach 0.85) even in full AB at 20,000+ feet. Is this intentional?
What a beauty! No matter what livery and loadout the final build is gonna have, I’ll definitely fly it clean and with this exact paint scheme. Awesome preview!
@Diloph Very complicated way of saying this, but yes: Your flight computer (basic cockpit part) is turned 90 degrees on the y axis. So the missiles only lock on to targets to the right side of the plane.
Cool build, although it’s not a G model. But that’s been pointed out already. There are a couple more inconsistencies in the livery: The „roundel“ (in this case, the black cross) you used here is the one from the Wehrmacht‘s Luftwaffe (meaning the Nazi-German air force before 1945). Present day German Air Force’s cross is different. Also, the German flag is black, red, gold from top to bottom. ;-)
Awesome! Looking forward to yet another great fighter. Hey by the way: I was wondering why you choose to leave out the canopy bows on all your builds? Not that the quality suffers from
that in any way, but I feel like sometimes the canopy sections are part of a plane‘s characteristic look.
Dude, if you keep the great work all the way up to the end, this is bound to be the definitive Su-30 on the site. The shape is impeccable! Please tag me. This is awesome.
@TDevil36 Hey, thanks! And I agree, I’m a relative noob when it comes to proper balancing. And yes, you’re absolutely welcome to tinker around with it. I’d appreciate credits, should you choose to publish something resembling my design.
Otherwise, make sure to tag me, I‘d love to see what can be done with it!
Dude, I don’t know who „helped“ you with the translation, but neither is „Spuckfuhrer“ the correct translation of „Spitfire“, nor is it a German word at all, nor does „Fuhrer“ (or correctly: Führer) mean „father“.
„Father“ in German is „Vater“
„Führer“ in English is „leader“
„Spitfire“ roughly translates to „Spuckfeuer“
Aside from that: neat idea and solid build! :-) I’d up the rate of fire for the two 20mm cannons, so they feel like having little more ‚output‘ like in real life.
Beautiful build! One thing I was wondering about, though: the prop blades seem weirdly „offset“. Is there a reason for that and if so, how did you do it? ;-)
@Yojuta You need to download the „build“ (i.e. the cockpit part and the two blocks) on this page and use it as the basis of your entry for the challenge. That way, your build will automatically be credited as a successor to this challenge once you upload it. Now you’ve entered the competition. Looking forward to seeing your entry!
@JettStorm Could be. ;-) In fact, I had something like that in mind when I made this. Wasn’t really into the ARMA III version, either. It was too similar to the original with the redesigned parts looking sorta gaudy and cliché, imho.
@ComradeKaiser7 True that. The beginning was kinda sleepy but now this has really taken off (pun intended). Excited to see what else is going to happen! I love these „X parts or less“ challenges. Hope there will be more in the future.
@Subdskdhej It's a pretty accurate replica. The Harrier is a subsonic design, so it's not meant to be very agile at high airspeeds.
T!
Hi there. I just rediscovered this ol gem. Still amazed by the sheer level of detail you managed to put into this without all the bells and whistles from the most recent updates. Speaking of which: I‘d like to take your basic model, as shape and flight model are pretty much perfect and update it with some modern parts (including fuselage splitting where necessary), cockpit parts, glass canopy, maybe a custom engine and a different livery/color scheme, etc.
Is that ok with you? You will, of course receive appropriate credit for your beautiful original build.
Cheers!
T
Can’t be file size, SP builds rarely crack the 2mb mark. And the XML for this build is only 69kb if I’m not mistaken. Have you tried the workaround method for mobile devices? You can find a helpful guide here. Had the same problem before, now everything works perfectly for me. Link: https://www.simpleplanes.com/Forums/View/1572349/XML-Update-tutorial
@TWDDerSharkmarine
@TWDDerSharkmarine Wait, how come you can’t update the XML file?
@TWDDerSharkmarine Mhh, yes that Mirage 4000 would have been one hell of a fighter! Love the Kfir too, it’s like Mirage 3/5 on Steroids. And Fairey Delta … man, what a concept! :-D
@TWDDerSharkmarine 😍 Which one‘s your favorite?
It’s hard to get the A-10 right. The overall shape is pretty damn good. Other flaws have been pointed out (you should have other people test your builds in the future!). But just one more basic thing for the sake of accuracy: The GAU-8 Avenger doesn’t have 8 barrels as you suggest, but 7.
Beautiful and a joy to fly - the effort you put into updating your '29 really paid off!
Just a quick note on the plane's historical background, should you care to update yours: The German MiG-29s were originally built by Mikoyan as A (single-seater) and UB (double-seater) versions for the GDR (German Democratic Republic = East Germany) air force.
When the Soviet Union started dissolving and the wall in Germany came down in 1989, these MiGs were set to be transfered into the Western German Luftwaffe. In 1990/91, MAPS (the newly formed joint venture between Mikoyan and Daimler Aerospace, based in Germany) was contracted to update/refit the planes to meet NATO standards. They underwent flight tests in 1992 and subsequently entered servive with the now unified Luftwaffe in 1993 as MiG-29Gs and MiG-29GTs (G for Germany, T for Trainer).
Cheers!
@BaconEggs Thanks for clarifying! And amazing level of simulation you built into this one. Really enjoyable to fly!
Ah! There you go. This one’s got four engines in exactly the right places for VTOL! :-D
T!
@Eugene14 Well that 50‘s French fighter called the Super Mystére just so happens to be the direct predecessor to the Etendard/Super Etendard series. So they’re actually directly connected. That’s what makes your name choice so confusing.
@bilibiliQCWL No big deal. I’ll adjust it myself 😉
The only Airbus to ever go Mach1! 😉 Seriously though, absolutely beautiful design. But perhaps tone down the engine power just a little bit. It kinda wants to go supersonic in level flight. ;-)
@Dizwerwirt It’s a 9g airframe in real life. That doesn’t exactly come from nothing, you know? In fact, it is the first production plane in history that was intentionally designed to be aerodynamically unstable - accordingly, it’s also the first fly-by-wire production fighter. This build actually does a very good job at approximating the agility and (lack of) stability of the F-16.
Again, thanks for all the positive and constructive feedback, people! Very helpful indeed.
@Tang0five Thanks for the compliment and the spotlight … much appreciated!
@MAHADI Thanks, I tried that with the update that I just uploaded here (just re-download from this post). It does yield more control at slower speeds, also feels a bit sluggish now. Guess that’s something I can get used to, though.
@MAHADI, hey, care to check out the improvements? ;-) Don’t worry about the high number of drag points, the XML has been updated again since the original upload. The actual number is just above 2,000. I also followed your advice of shifting CoM and CoL, so now it flies reasonably well. It’s still got some handling problems at slow speeds but I’ll keep working on it, so that might improve with the next update.
Thanks everyone for the upvotes! I’ll also be happy to include suggestions and improvements in the next version. So don’t hesitate to comment!
Cheers
@MAHADI Hey, thanks for the feedback and advice! I realize it’s got some flaws in the performance area. I have to admit that I rushed the build toward the end - and quality control obviously suffered. ;-) Had to get it out for the sake of „making it“, though, you know? I will post a much improved version at some point.
T
Beautiful rendition of a beautiful build! Thanks for the tag.
@ArkRoyalTheDDhunter Ok
Turned out just as beautiful as I had hoped by watching the trailer! One thing came up while pushing this bird to its limits, though: I do have some trouble getting it past 570 kts (~ Mach 0.85) even in full AB at 20,000+ feet. Is this intentional?
@Gx Bern-WHO-li?!?
@ReinMcDeer Now, here is a man of distinct musical taste.
Take me on your mighty wings …
T!
What a beauty! No matter what livery and loadout the final build is gonna have, I’ll definitely fly it clean and with this exact paint scheme. Awesome preview!
@Diloph Very complicated way of saying this, but yes: Your flight computer (basic cockpit part) is turned 90 degrees on the y axis. So the missiles only lock on to targets to the right side of the plane.
Cool build, although it’s not a G model. But that’s been pointed out already. There are a couple more inconsistencies in the livery: The „roundel“ (in this case, the black cross) you used here is the one from the Wehrmacht‘s Luftwaffe (meaning the Nazi-German air force before 1945). Present day German Air Force’s cross is different. Also, the German flag is black, red, gold from top to bottom. ;-)
Awesome! Looking forward to yet another great fighter. Hey by the way: I was wondering why you choose to leave out the canopy bows on all your builds? Not that the quality suffers from
that in any way, but I feel like sometimes the canopy sections are part of a plane‘s characteristic look.
@ollielebananiaCFSP Ah, ok, I see. Thanks.
Are those sound mods on PC?
@HelloX Haha, well, it happens. 😉
Dude, if you keep the great work all the way up to the end, this is bound to be the definitive Su-30 on the site. The shape is impeccable! Please tag me. This is awesome.
T
@TDevil36 Hey, thanks! And I agree, I’m a relative noob when it comes to proper balancing. And yes, you’re absolutely welcome to tinker around with it. I’d appreciate credits, should you choose to publish something resembling my design.
Otherwise, make sure to tag me, I‘d love to see what can be done with it!
What a delightful little contraption!
Kinda stupid: yes
Completely awesome: HELL yes!
I like it!
Also: more rockets = more better
Dude, I don’t know who „helped“ you with the translation, but neither is „Spuckfuhrer“ the correct translation of „Spitfire“, nor is it a German word at all, nor does „Fuhrer“ (or correctly: Führer) mean „father“.
„Father“ in German is „Vater“
„Führer“ in English is „leader“
„Spitfire“ roughly translates to „Spuckfeuer“
Aside from that: neat idea and solid build! :-) I’d up the rate of fire for the two 20mm cannons, so they feel like having little more ‚output‘ like in real life.
Beautiful build! One thing I was wondering about, though: the prop blades seem weirdly „offset“. Is there a reason for that and if so, how did you do it? ;-)
@Yojuta You need to download the „build“ (i.e. the cockpit part and the two blocks) on this page and use it as the basis of your entry for the challenge. That way, your build will automatically be credited as a successor to this challenge once you upload it. Now you’ve entered the competition. Looking forward to seeing your entry!
@JettStorm Could be. ;-) In fact, I had something like that in mind when I made this. Wasn’t really into the ARMA III version, either. It was too similar to the original with the redesigned parts looking sorta gaudy and cliché, imho.
Hey, thanks for the upvote, by the way!
@Destroyerz117 Gotcha, thanks! I’ll check it out when I get there. ;-)
Love the updated version! That made me wonde, however: How did you update the upload without creating an entirely new post?
@OculusWalker Not that I’m aware, either.
I like how unassuming this is. How did you get it to fly so smoothly?
@ComradeKaiser7 True that. The beginning was kinda sleepy but now this has really taken off (pun intended). Excited to see what else is going to happen! I love these „X parts or less“ challenges. Hope there will be more in the future.