To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.spaceOpen lugnet.space in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Space / 30923
     
   
Subject: 
Re: Crimson Skies
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military
Date: 
Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:32:03 GMT
Viewed: 
1810 times
  

In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin wrote:
   In lugnet.space, Andrew Engstrom wrote:
   For example, the Coyote, Brigand, and Dust Devil are all conventionally
   configured.

Not really. I don’t think you understand what I was trying to point out.

Your plane follows the very typical composition with two large wings forward, with a standard tail design. It looks like any given forward-prop-driven plane dating from WW1 to the present.

The Coyote is a fighter-sized pusher prop flying wing, with wingtip verticals. There’s nothing conventional about that. snip <

The Brigand has the usual large forward wings, but has no conventional tail design.

snip < I can’t find any pics of the Dust Devil online, but I hope you understand the point I was trying to make.

-Grand Admiral
.space Curator

While I like Andrews plane, and can see where you classify it as ‘conventional’, my question is - how unconventional is too unconventional?
I know this borders on threadjacking or bumping, but I’ve been wondering if my latest bird was *too* far out to classify as Crimson Skies...

Oh, and Andrew, I really dig the backgrounds your pictures have. Seems so conventional to have MOCs put up against neutral backgrounds that the way yours were presented really stand out.

Thanks for the time,
TRS




   
         
   
Subject: 
Re: Crimson Skies
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military
Date: 
Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:42:32 GMT
Viewed: 
1556 times
  

In lugnet.space, Theodore Sammis II wrote:
   While I like Andrews plane, and can see where you classify it as ‘conventional’, my question is - how unconventional is too unconventional?
I know this borders on threadjacking or bumping, but I’ve been wondering if my latest bird was *too* far out to classify as Crimson Skies...

I don’t think it’s the shape of your plane that makes it a stretch for CS as much as it’s the high-tech looking weaponry. Exchange that stuff for some large primitive looking machine guns and I think you’d be a lot closer to the CS style... making the front canards a bit more squarish would probably also make it look less futuristic.

-Grand Admiral
.space Curator



   
         
   
Subject: 
Re: Crimson Skies
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military
Date: 
Fri, 6 Feb 2004 23:04:57 GMT
Viewed: 
2320 times
  

In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin wrote:

   I don’t think it’s the shape of your plane that makes it a stretch for CS as much as it’s the high-tech looking weaponry. Exchange that stuff for some large primitive looking machine guns and I think you’d be a lot closer to the CS style... making the front canards a bit more squarish would probably also make it look less futuristic.

-Grand Admiral
.space Curator



hmmm, bulkier, more primitive guns, I think I can manage that :) thanks for the input!

TRS

 

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR