[Speedbuild] Messerschmitt Me 262 - World's first jet fighter

[AquaAlmond Productions]

Hello, here is a speed build I did of the Messerschmitt Me 262. The Messerschmitt Me 262 was the world's first jet fighter flown in Apr 08, 1941 by Germany.

Tell me if you want more speed builds like this in the future in the comments, and what planes you would like me to do a speed build of.

The song is DEAF KEV - Invincible if you were wondering.

Aircraft Download - https://www.dropbox.com/s/fb1jd4jldfzcs26/Messerschmitt%20Me%20262.craft?dl=0

Edited February 18, 2016 by AquaAlmond Productions

[Azimech]

Quite frankly ... I think there are enough speedbuilds already. Have you ever looked at what's been parked at KerbalX.com? The balance is off, most of it is simple fighter jets nowadays.

I don't mean to sound grumpy but I wouldn't be surprised if no-one will have attention for stuff they already build at home in 2 minutes.

You've done your best and I appreciate that. Looking forward to see more, detailed & complex designs from you.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Azimech

[Columbia]

4 minutes ago, Azimech said:

Quite frankly ... I think there are enough speedbuilds already. Have you ever looked at what's been parked at KerbalX.com? The balance is off, most of it is simple fighter jets nowadays.

I don't mean to sound grumpy but I wouldn't be surprised if no-one will have attention for stuff they already build at home in 2 minutes.

You've done your best and I appreciate that. Looking forward to see more, detailed & complex designs from you.

I agree with this in some points, but for small fighter jets like this, I think simplicity is more or less.. key. Unless you want to cram in detail. In that case, it can take more than three days or a week to finish.

[Azimech]

3 minutes ago, Columbia said:

I agree with this in some points, but for small fighter jets like this, I think simplicity is more or less.. key. Unless you want to cram in detail. In that case, it can take more than three days or a week to finish.

Yeah, and it's the cramming in of detail that makes it stand out of the crowd.

[Rune]

Yea, and no. I think all levels of detail have a place on the exchange. What makes a ship truly shine is not part count, it's how good it is at doing what it does. If it's meant to be a replica, yeah, go crazy on part count, and who cares if it moves (i.e: MJ's stock AT-ST). But I will still contend that something as deceptively simple as my KMU has also a lot of merit... it took a lot of thinking to get it to be a mere 10 parts and make it functional.

As to the OP's build, well, I would have to fly it to form an opinion, but just by the video, I would have tweaked a bit more (gear menus, control surfaces). Still, a speedbuild is meant to show you how to build simple stuff, right? I found it rather well done, something to inspire others to build stuff when they get to their computers.

 

Rune. Not everything has to be a 1000 part work of art, sometimes you want cheap planes to spam them for a battle, for example.

[Majorjim!]

2 hours ago, Rune said:

Yea, and no. I think all levels of detail have a place on the exchange. What makes a ship truly shine is not part count, it's how good it is at doing what it does. If it's meant to be a replica, yeah, go crazy on part count, and who cares if it moves (i.e: MJ's stock AT-ST). But I will still contend that something as deceptively simple as my KMU has also a lot of merit... it took a lot of thinking to get it to be a mere 10 parts and make it functional.

 

As to the OP's build, well, I would have to fly it to form an opinion, but just by the video, I would have tweaked a bit more (gear menus, control surfaces). Still, a speedbuild is meant to show you how to build simple stuff, right? I found it rather well done, something to inspire others to build stuff when they get to their computers.

 

Rune. Not everything has to be a 1000 part work of art, sometimes you want cheap planes to spam them for a battle, for example.

I agree and disagree Rune, as always

 Thank you for mentioning me, That build was as it is, just a test to see how close I could build the AT-ST and forget about part limits. I also like making simple craft like the KMU you made above. Where we disagree is you point here:

 

2 hours ago, Rune said:

 it took a lot of thinking to get it to be a mere 10 parts and make it functional.

 

This is the minimum number of parts that you need to make it work. This is easy to do because you know what parts you need to make it work, any less and it would not function. This for me is the most basic and easy way to build.

Now.. Your SSTOs do not count as they are very hard things to build. I am constantly amazed by your ability to make simple, yet beautiful and very capable SSTO craft Rune. Those builds are constantly impressive.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Majorjim

[Azimech]

And of course there is always room for any kind of build over here, OP asked a direct question if we want more speed builds in the future, so I merely gave my own opinion.

That said, if praise is something one's after, it's increasingly hard to impress, and it's been like this for years. You get a reset button when Squad introduces a whole lot of new parts and people start tinkering. After a while of ooh's and aah's a new norm is born.

Generally speaking, speed builds don't impress me. The focus on speed always makes you forget details and you go for a less than perfect solution. I tend to spend hours on small craft, my ego is such that if I upload something, I've seen every detail both in functionality and looks multiple times. If I leave something in its probably something that cannot be solved or I'm unable to. And I think there's a lot of people who feel the same.

[AquaAlmond Productions]

7 hours ago, Rune said:

Yea, and no. I think all levels of detail have a place on the exchange. What makes a ship truly shine is not part count, it's how good it is at doing what it does. If it's meant to be a replica, yeah, go crazy on part count, and who cares if it moves (i.e: MJ's stock AT-ST). But I will still contend that something as deceptively simple as my KMU has also a lot of merit... it took a lot of thinking to get it to be a mere 10 parts and make it functional.

As to the OP's build, well, I would have to fly it to form an opinion, but just by the video, I would have tweaked a bit more (gear menus, control surfaces). Still, a speedbuild is meant to show you how to build simple stuff, right? I found it rather well done, something to inspire others to build stuff when they get to their computers.

 

Rune. Not everything has to be a 1000 part work of art, sometimes you want cheap planes to spam them for a battle, for example.

Thanks ! I was trying to go for a low part count.

[AquaAlmond Productions]

I'm thinking of building a Horten Ho 229 for my next speed build. If anyone has a request for me to build a certain aircraft than I will gladly do so.

[The Optimist]

21 hours ago, AquaAlmond Productions said:

I'm thinking of building a Horten Ho 229 for my next speed build. If anyone has a request for me to build a certain aircraft than I will gladly do so.

"Meh"

-IGN 6/9

[AquaAlmond Productions]

27 minutes ago, The Optimist said:

"Meh"

-IGN 6/9

I ended up doing a speed build of a Dassault Mirage 2000. Here's the forum post link http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/132510-speedbuild-dassault-mirage-2000

[Columbia]

1 hour ago, The Optimist said:

"Meh"

-IGN 6/9

That was.. a helpful review. 

/sarcasm