Results 6 – 10 of about 100.
|
Search took 0.00 CPU seconds.
|
|
| |
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:11:31 GMT, Mark Sandlin <sandlin@nwlink.com>
wrote:
> Matthew at moulton@hscis.net wrote:
>
> > I disagree, I think it has more to do with overall size and capacity
> > than it does stud length. The Behemoth on my site is 90 studs long,
> > which doesn't sound too impressive until you note that it's also
> > around 60 studs wide and around 18 studs high.
>
> Ok, you have a point there.
>
> > I think that the ship
> > should have to have an overall volume of a certain amount. For
> > instance the Behemoth would have an average volume of 97,200 bricks.
> > So you could have two classes of large ships, those that are 50,000 to
> > 100,000 brick volume and then those that are 100,000 or higher. So
> > basically if you wanted to find the average volume of your ship you
> > would take the heigth, width, and lenght, and then multiply them
> > together.
>
> Hmm, so my Mithrandir would be approx. 74,480 if you don't count the engine
> pods on the sides of the main hull. The problem is that the ship has many
> different widths all along its length. If I include the engine pods, the
> number goes up over 200k, which is obviously inaccurate. I suppose we'll
> just have to shoot for a "relative" volume that excludes protrusions and
> wing-like bits, like what you've mentioned below.
>
> > Of course the only bad thing is that I could put a rather
> > large antena on the top of my ship and suddenly it's volume would be
> > huge. So I think you'd have to exclude anteni, radar, extraneous
> > weapons, etc.
>
> Yep. Even my 74k figure is off, because of the skinny portions of the ship
> mixed with the command tower in the middle. I'd guesstimate the actual
> number would be somewhere around 45-50k. I suppose one could measure out
> different portions of the ship, calculate them, and then add them together.
>
> > On the other hand it could just be a judgement call. I
> > mean if it looks big then it's gotta be big right? Well, those are
> > just some of my thoughts.
>
> Yeah, I guess if it gives sort of a "massive" feeling, then it's a capital
> ship. I suppose our points were the same... I was just trying to say that
> something long n' skinny doesn't necessarily qualify as a cap-ship, but
> short n' massive certainly can.
What if you classified them differently. Say starships, capital
ships, etc. I think of a capital ship as a sort of mobile space base,
which may carry a heavy payload, onboard fighters of some kind,
sustainable crew, etc. I mean think of say an air craft carrier, that
is basically a capital ship. It houses smaller fighters, people can
live on it, and it carries a heavy payload. Okay so then you have
starships which I would classify as being exploring type ships. Again
being able to sustain a crew (any size), equiped with a variety of
exploring devices such as shuttle craft, storage units, excavation
equipment, science/research facility, etc. Another large type of ship
would be like the Nostromo in Alien, basically just a REALLY large
cargo ship. Again it should be able to sustain a crew, have storage
areas, mining/excavation equipment, mining ships (think rock raiders),
etc. I mean the Nostromo was like HUGE and yet it's crew was like
what, 7? I think that the ship should be big enough to sustain a crew
and itself without having to dock frequently for refueling, supplies,
etc. What would be some other classes of large ships? Perhaps a sort
of town/civilian ship?
-Matthew
-http://members.hscis.net/~moulton/
|
|
|
| 
moulton
(score: 1.055)
|
|
| |
Okay my next project (which I estimate to take at least a year or two
to complete) will be a Star Trek Voyager type ship...minifig scale.
Now I already know how I'll build the decks, turbolift, shuttle bay,
etc. The problem is I'm wondering about stability. Now I know that
because the saucer section will be around 10 base plates long I am
going to have to use superglue to help keep the whole thing together.
Basically each deck is going to be super glued, but then each deck
will be sectional. So without the decks you'll be able to see the
turbolift shaft and the bottom deck section. All the other decks will
be stacked on top to make up the saucer. I also know that I'm going
to have to make the rear of the ship VERY heavy in order to keep the
ship from tipping forward on the saucer section. What I really don't
know is how well a ship of this size will stay together. Has anyone
had experience making something this big? How well does the glue hold
things together? So far the biggest ship I've made is the Behemoth
witch just under 3 road plates long and about two wide at it's maximum
width. I did make the Behemoth completely sectional and it holds up
okay but any bigger and I'm sure it wouldn't hold together if I picked
it up. The other thing I'm wondering about is what sorts of methods
have people used to make such ships sectional. So far I've mainly
always used the male/female locking pieces like the original 6985
Cosmic Fleet Voyager uses. Any ideas or suggestions would be GREATLY
appreciated. Thanks! : )
-Matthew
-http://members.hscis.net/~moulton/
|
|
|
|
moulton
(score: 1.055)
|
|
| |
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000 14:39:40 GMT, Mark Sandlin <sandlin@nwlink.com>
wrote:
> > I'm thinking that a ship should have a minimum length of about 60 studs.
> > General mass and large size will be good too. Like if the ship is large but
> > is tall or wide instead of long.
> 60 studs? That's kind of short, IMO. For instance, of the ships on my
> website, the Mithrandir is the only one I'd consider to be a "capital" ship,
> and a small one at that. Some of my other ships are more than 60 studs long,
> and certainly not capital ships:
>
> (Most of these numbers are approximated)
>
> Mithrandir: 152 studs
>
> Spaceplane: 99 studs
>
> Lightnin' Jack: ~90 studs
>
> Osprey: ~75 studs
>
> Angel: ~75 studs
>
> Of course, the Spaceplane is long mainly because of the length of the
> forward fuselage, and the Angel is sort of long n' skinny too. The Osprey is
> fairly wide, to accomodate the APC, however.
I disagree, I think it has more to do with overall size and capacity
than it does stud length. The Behemoth on my site is 90 studs long,
which doesn't sound too impressive until you note that it's also
around 60 studs wide and around 18 studs high. I think that the ship
should have to have an overall volume of a certain amount. For
instance the Behemoth would have an average volume of 97,200 bricks.
So you could have two classes of large ships, those that are 50,000 to
100,000 brick volume and then those that are 100,000 or higher. So
basically if you wanted to find the average volume of your ship you
would take the heigth, width, and lenght, and then multiply them
together. Of course the only bad thing is that I could put a rather
large antena on the top of my ship and suddenly it's volume would be
huge. So I think you'd have to exclude anteni, radar, extraneous
weapons, etc. On the other hand it could just be a judgement call. I
mean if it looks big then it's gotta be big right? Well, those are
just some of my thoughts.
> > -Another section idea would be large bases.
> Would a Space Donut Shop fit into this category? It's 2.5 baseplates long.
> Built on an asteroid. ;^)
My favorite space station was that one made mainly out of blue bricks
in one of the earlier lego catalogs. #250 if I remember correctly.
Here is a link to a picture of it on BrickShelf:
http://www.brickshelf.com/scans/0000/0250-1987/0250-32.html
Anyway it's really cool, I always use it as a primer for building my
own space bases.
-Matthew
|
|
|
|
moulton
(score: 1.055)
|
|
|
|
moulton
(score: 1.055)
|
|
| |
Why is it that if I group objects together and then exit the program
and come back the pieces are magically gone? I mean I'd like to group
things to gether but I don't want to end up losing everything I've
done. So far I've learned that the you should always save at least
two copies of whatever you're doing. My other question is are there
any tips on doing angled building? I've been making instructions for
my Rapier model and it's fast becoming a pain in the ass due to all
the strange angles of pieces. Take a look at my site and you'll see
what I mean. Mainly on the back end. So anyway I'm wondering if like
say I put a right wing piece down and put it at a certain angle, is
there a way to add a left wing piece and get it to mirror the angle of
the right wing? I tried some experimentation with entering in the
values manually but that didn't seem to work very well. Any help
would be greatly appreciated!
-Matthew
http://my.ispchannel.com/~mmoulton/lego/index.html
|
|
|
|
moulton
(score: 1.055)
|
More: Next Page >>
|
