To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.build.militaryOpen lugnet.build.military in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Building / Military / 1643
1642  |  1644
Subject: 
Re: Crimson Skies
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military
Date: 
Fri, 6 Feb 2004 17:42:32 GMT
Viewed: 
64 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





Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Crimson Skies
 
(...) hmmm, bulkier, more primitive guns, I think I can manage that :) thanks for the input! TRS (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Crimson Skies
 
(...) 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 (URL) latest bird> was (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military, FTX)

7 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

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