15.1k Rodrigo110 Comments

  • Pastanzi 730L 'Estremofilo' 6.3 years ago

    Is this the build that you said you expected to get 100 upvotes?

  • Boeing 787-8 American (Farewell Build) 6.3 years ago

    A sad farewell. I’m sorry, you really are a valued member of this community

    +1
  • -Space Dreamer mk1 (Read Description) 6.3 years ago

    Oh right, sorry about that @QingyuZhou

  • -Space Dreamer mk1 (Read Description) 6.3 years ago

    @QingyuZhou check this out if you can, it’s a great build.

  • -Space Dreamer mk1 (Read Description) 6.3 years ago

    Wow, this looks great! Great job!

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.3 years ago

    You didn’t read my comment. You are stating things I didn’t say. I already said that I know it’s not meant to be used on a build, and I said it’s not a bad thing. @Ajforever51

    +1
  • Znate Hafner Rotabuggy 6.3 years ago

    I don’t know why, but I really like this

    +1
  • How do i reduce nose drop? 6.3 years ago

    Apply a tiny bit of rotation with rotation on 1% with the fine tuning tool on the horizontal stabiliser until there’s no nose drop.

    +1
  • A huge unfinished project throughout the year 6.3 years ago

    If you don’t finish it I suggest you get some help from a few great builders to finish it for you

  • OwO whats this? 6.3 years ago

    I use it constantly

  • Uss beast (SOLVED) 6.3 years ago

    Use an aircraft that’s very good at landing on USS Beast and has good low handling speed like this.

    +1
  • the geebee of the hell 6.3 years ago

    Decent build, terrible name. Don’t include the name of the challenge in the name of the build

  • S-1 God-Class Submarine "Zeus" 6.3 years ago

    Oh right yeah I vaguely remember @stig27

  • Overload and fine-tuning on IOS 6.3 years ago

    No, not restricting everything. Developer settings might be useful to some people, but to most, it’s useless. iOS is more secure, faster and better optimised; while android is more customisable @DerekSP

    +1
  • Overload and fine-tuning on IOS 6.3 years ago

    It’s a well known fact that iOS is more secure than android. It’s not a matter of opinion, it’s a matter of technological facts @DerekSP

  • Overload and fine-tuning on IOS 6.3 years ago

    Yes, that would be a great way to do it. I’m not sure why they don’t! It would be great with things like maps, though mods that actually change how the game work might not work. @GeneralOliverVonBismarck

  • S-1 God-Class Submarine "Zeus" 6.3 years ago

    Have we had a conversation about this? If we have please link me to it @stig27

  • S-1 God-Class Submarine "Zeus" 6.3 years ago

    But how do you know that I’m Greek? @stig27

  • Explosion Rocket 6.3 years ago

    Only one and a half years late!

  • Overload and fine-tuning on IOS 6.3 years ago

    An OS is not an secure as its user! I don’t know where your got that from! Viruses can originate from so many different places that have nothing to do with the fault of the user. The virus that could infect you via Bluetooth is a prime example of that. @DerekSP

    Why Android is less safe than iOS is irrelevant, it’s the fact that it is less safe that matters. Apple couldn’t create mod support without opening a ‘hole’ in the software! Allowing mod support is basically allowing code from 3rd parties to change the code in the app that’s downloaded from the App Store. Obviously if they allowed it they’d have to allow it for every app; and that would mean that every single app could be tracking your keystrokes, watching you or listening to you if anything went wrong. You wouldn’t even know about it. Obviously Android has more features, but I find so many of them utterly useless. So many skins to choose from, and most of them look bad; so many options in developer settings; and most of them just cause stupid and weird glitches that aren’t beneficial at all. The thing is, the fact you go downloading things on websites that aren’t completely safe makes it likely that you’ve probably been infected a few times; you just wouldn’t know about it. @Minecraftpoweer

    +1
  • Overload and fine-tuning on IOS 6.3 years ago

    Yes, obviously the mods on this website aren’t dangerous; but it’s not a case of only opening it up for this website. If Apple was to allow modding on SP it would also allow modding everywhere. And not only that, it would creates holes in the software where malware could easily get in via clicking a dodgy ad or something like that. Also, Apple doesn’t cost that much to repair. You can replace an entire battery for only $20! The screen replacement is more expensive, but that’s not Apple; that’s all the 3rd party repair shops. The fact is, Apple is so much more secure than its competitors because it covers all the holes in the software to allow nothing to get in. I think it’s a fairly obvious choice to take being safe on your device rather than being able to download mods on a random game. @Minecraftpoweer

  • Overload and fine-tuning on IOS 6.3 years ago

    Except for the fact that that would leave Apple devices much less secure to hacking. You know there’s a reason that Apple devices are the best at protecting your private information? I’d take my privacy over some mods on a random game. @Minecraftpoweer

  • S-1 God-Class Submarine "Zeus" 6.3 years ago

    Greece wildfires? @stig27

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.3 years ago

    Yep; too immature to let it go unlike Blue0Bull. Didn’t expect anything more from you @BaconAircraft

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    Alright good. It just annoys me when people don’t read what I say and misinterpret it. @Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    That was because you said “sure you’ve seen me on discord”, and I wanted to put it right because you made it seem like I was lying. Anyway, now it’s all cleared do you want to? @Blue0Bull

  • Mod request 6.4 years ago

    @ViridiCinis is always a great modded to ask for help. If you ever need help with a modding request ask here.

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    But sure, let’s stop arguing; and not say anything about it. Can we be friendly again and forget about this? @Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    It’s not particularly sad, the only reason you wrote that is because you wanted to have the last word (even though you stated a lie in the comment). I’m not going to not respond to a comment which is saying something false about me@Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    If you can read my comments and give me a single example of me saying that there was anything wrong with this being impractical, then you can say that. If you can’t, then stop; you’ve been proven wrong so many times it’s just embarrassing @Blue0Bull

    +1
  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    Ironic considering you are the one that began all of this @BaconAircraft

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    Alright, and you have seen me on discord, because I stopped an argument between you and somebody else. @Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    Well, I kind of have to because you keep saying things I’ve already addressed. I’ve seen your arguments on discord before; I feel like you’ve just started arguing because you enjoy it; because you seem to have more than your fair share @Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    I have absolutely no issue with the fact that this can’t feasbily be used on the build, so by literal definition; you are wrong by saying I’m complaining. I suggest you just stop. @Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    You obviously have nothing more to say, and instead you are just circling around using your old arguments which I’ve already said aren’t true, so... I know what I’m doing better than you do. And complaining isn’t it. Please educate yourself on the difference between an observation and a complaint, and stop going round in circles for no reason. @Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    You as well as @Blue0Bull are misinterpreting me. I absolutely love this build (and you’ve done a wonderful job on it), but I am simply saying it is not something which people could use on a build feasibly because of the part count, so it’s more like a beautiful display piece. There’s nothing wrong with that, as I’ve already said, which is something Blue0Bull and BaconAircraft don’t seem to understand. @TakeYourLife3000

    +1
  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    You didn’t comment an opinion, you commented a misinterpretation of what I said. But still, :) @Blue0Bull

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    It’s an observation, and I have a right to observe and say that this cannot be used on an actual build (which as I stated, isn’t a problem). Stop bringing up ridiculous arguments and causing a commotion where there isn’t one. @Blue0Bull

    +2
  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    It’s not whining, you two are actually ridiculous. Stop creating a problem where there isn’t one, and move on. If it wasn’t for your uncalled for and useless reply that comepletely missed the point of my comment (where I wasn’t complaining! For the last time!), this would have never happened. @BaconAircraft @Blue0Bull

    +3
  • Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye, PAF 6.4 years ago

    Yeah fair enough @Pilotmario

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    Why on earth do you think that’s a complaint!? It’s an observation! You literally couldn’t miss the point anymore. I was observing that you can’t use it on a build, not that it was a problem. @BaconAircraft

    +1
  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    I’m not complaining about how it can’t be used, I only stated a fact that it can’t be used. The fact is, 3552 parts is way more parts than should have been used, but since it’s basically a display that’s nice to look at; it doesn’t matter hugely. I only said that you can’t feasibly use this on a build. Everything I’ve said is true; but you are just taking it out of context @Blue0Bull

    +2
  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    Do you not read? You are just repeating what I’m saying and trying to use it against me. I am not complaining! and I have no problem with this! I already said that it’s basically for display, I was just saying that it’s not practical. I’m not saying that’s necessarily a bad thing; depending on what the user was going for. @Blue0Bull

  • Breguet Br. 763 “Deux-Ponts” 6.4 years ago

    Wow, this looks very unique. Unfortunately, it doesn’t perform as well as it looks.

  • Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye, PAF 6.4 years ago

    I know, and it is quite nice, but it’s not so drastically different from the original to warrant 26 upvotes @Pilotmario

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    I’m not complaining, and I don’t want to build one myself. You are completely missing the point. The fact is, nobody can feasibly use this on an actual plane because of its part count, so it’s not practical. Instead, it’s more like a beautiful and intricately detailed statue which, as nice-looking as it may be, cannot be practically used. @BaconAircraft

    +3
  • Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye, PAF 6.4 years ago

    I don’t think it’s really fair for a successor that didn’t really change much of the original to get 26 upvotes

  • [WEBW] F-136 GE600 SVTOL 6.4 years ago

    I think 3552 parts is way too many parts than this needed. As it is, nobody can use it; which leads me to suppose that the only reason this exists is as basically a very complex and beautiful structure which doesn’t actually have a practical use; which is fine. It’s like a sculpture.

    +11
  • CO-pilot no mods 6.4 years ago

    That’s actually really cool!

  • J101 Ver.1.5 “Sleet” 6.4 years ago

    This is much more deserving of a feature than other builds that have been featured in the past, and at the present. @Tully2001