|
|
 | | Re: 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... (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military, FTX)
| | | | | 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)
| | | | | Re: CVN - 65 USS Enterprise Aircraft Carrier MOC
|
| (...) I just saw this looking around on brickshelf yesterday, and was very impressed. I like that you managed to capture the shape of the carrier in a relatively small MOC. Daniel Rubin (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.build.military)
| | | | | Re: Crimson Skies
|
| (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.space, lugnet.build.military, FTX)
| | | | | Re: CVN - 65 USS Enterprise Aircraft Carrier MOC
|
| I feel kindah silly replying to my own post, but I want to let you all know that I uploaded more pictures to the Brickshelf gallery, and I also updated the MOCpages site. (URL) Gallery: (URL) some people want to know if I'm going to make a mini (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.build.military, lugnet.build.microscale)
|
|
