Just so you know, I changed the wing type from wing-3 to wing-2 in xml On all of the wings except the structural wings to make them into non bendable wings. I also adjusted the com and made all of the wings into symmetrical wings @TOHmaster
No fuselages: yes
Flight: 6/10 because it flies pretty decently but is a bit unstable and it does a weird jittery thing at high speeds when maneuvering quickly
Looks: 8/10 because It has a nice, sleek look that makes me believe you used fuselages
Extra details: 1/5 because it didn’t have any cool details other than the inlets that go all the way through the body.
TOTAL SCORE: 15/25
This was a good build that made me convinced that you used fuselages until I checked. It would have scored higher if the flight wasn’t as jittery and unstable and if you added little details to score those extra points.
No fuselages - yes
Flight: 9 / 10 because it flies really straight but could be just a little more maneuverable
Looks: 7 / 10 because it has a nice, smooth shape but not a lot of extra detail
Extra details: 2 / 5 because it has minor, but still very clean details (and only 33 parts)!
TOTAL SCORE: 20 / 25 because it is a mobile friendly, minimalistic, futuristic fighter jet that flies really good. With the addition of more detail, it could easily have a higher score. 2 Extra points were added because it is supposed To be mobile friendly and not filled with details
First of all, I said no reuploads in the rules, and second of all, you have 3 weeks to make an entry so you have plenty of time after your vacation to make an entry @DaBombx88
Oh ok. I was just looking through the top challenges with the challenge tag and found the original no fuselage challenge and decided to have a take on it @DaBombx88
Nah
there you go. It’s fast now
Lol @Panthers4741
Yes @TiFosiF
Grand Tour flashbacks
+2@PETG oof
Wat. How? @Tully2001
True @ThePilotDude
Bro I literally just made a post about how this username changing is confusing
+3So right after I made this post, I found out that different resizeable wheel types have different amounts of grip...
Yey
@FishMiner ok
@FishMiner ah. ok. so you were tired and hyped up by caffeine and didn't mean what you said?
Why would I rethink my grading system? Do you have a problem with it? (I’m not saying this to be rude, I’m just wondering)
WHY DOES HONDA KEEP CHANGING TO SOMETHING ELSE
How dare you
That’s not as “mechanical” @Gbhole
Das a lot of parts
@Jiakaiju make it a succesor
@11qazxc you can make anything
So I was just trying to take off, and accidentally went on my back. One second later, I go yeeting under the map at 546,145 mph. Bruh.
Just so you know, I changed the wing type from wing-3 to wing-2 in xml On all of the wings except the structural wings to make them into non bendable wings. I also adjusted the com and made all of the wings into symmetrical wings @TOHmaster
Lol @p0tato72
Noice
Bootiful
I don’t care... It’s called the easy challenge for a reason @ThatsAHotTopic
Sure. Just one, though @ThatsAHotTopic
LMAO IT HAS 69 PARTS @Biscool
+1there ya go my dude
+1
+1#hello#
+1Test
how tf does this run smoothly on my iphone 6
+2Just to let you all know, everything is allowed except for: fuselages, hollow fuselages, and fuselage inlets
+5Structural pieces? @Type2volkswagen
Not unlisted @FuzzyAircraftProductions
these people really be flexin with their spotlights
@Pugman don't be a jerk. This isn't your build to judge. If it's not impressive, then could you build it?
+1i currently can't help but if no one helps by tomorrow when i'm available, i'll help
@MAHADI oh spotlight
The problem with this is that it’s not a successor
+1No fuselages: yes
Flight: 6/10 because it flies pretty decently but is a bit unstable and it does a weird jittery thing at high speeds when maneuvering quickly
Looks: 8/10 because It has a nice, sleek look that makes me believe you used fuselages
Extra details: 1/5 because it didn’t have any cool details other than the inlets that go all the way through the body.
TOTAL SCORE: 15/25
This was a good build that made me convinced that you used fuselages until I checked. It would have scored higher if the flight wasn’t as jittery and unstable and if you added little details to score those extra points.
Great job! This is a beautiful build
+1Yes. No fuselages, nose cones, Hollow fuselages, or fuselage inlets @Hedero
No fuselages - yes
Flight: 9 / 10 because it flies really straight but could be just a little more maneuverable
Looks: 7 / 10 because it has a nice, smooth shape but not a lot of extra detail
Extra details: 2 / 5 because it has minor, but still very clean details (and only 33 parts)!
TOTAL SCORE: 20 / 25 because it is a mobile friendly, minimalistic, futuristic fighter jet that flies really good. With the addition of more detail, it could easily have a higher score. 2 Extra points were added because it is supposed To be mobile friendly and not filled with details
+1Ok I’m mega impressed By how this has 33 parts. I’m scoring it right now
As long as it’s not a replica @DaBombx88
Yeah @DaBombx88
First of all, I said no reuploads in the rules, and second of all, you have 3 weeks to make an entry so you have plenty of time after your vacation to make an entry @DaBombx88
Oh ok. I was just looking through the top challenges with the challenge tag and found the original no fuselage challenge and decided to have a take on it @DaBombx88
I’m not @DaBombx88