 | | New Fad? —Paul Hartzog
|
| | | well i agree with what the others have said very nicely done, cube door, struts and all but i'd like to say that i think the little ships are the best part those things are darn cool i'd love to see that become a fad and see some LUGfest MBases w/ (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: New Fad? —Thomas Avery
|
| | | | | (...) Thanks! (...) Thanks again! I was quite inspired by the long, sloped pieces. They're cool. (...) Every moonbase needs a few small, personal craft! :-) TJ (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: New Fad? —Paul Baulch
|
| | | | (...) Actually, I'd like it to be taken further into a Moonbase-related standard, where the ships can't exceed a certain compact size, say 16 studs by 10 studs by 8 bricks high (for example). Then people can give their moonbase modules parking lots (...) (22 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Anthony Babington
|
| | | | | "Paul Baulch" <paul@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message news:HCyJrD.1971@lugnet.com... (...) standard, (...) opening (...) actually, I was pondering something very much like this just today (I'm working on a supermodule landing platform. it'll be part (...) (22 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Jeffrey Benson
|
| | | | | | What would really be fun about the standard ... someone could build a Moonbase "SUV" dealership, with these huge over-sized craft. There could be a bunch of folks standing around outside protesting the craft "WHERE WILL YOU PARK?" or "MARTIAN* (...) (22 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: New Fad? Multi-Level Moonbase —Fred Trayers
|
| | | | | | | Hi Folks- Let me begin by saying that I'm a moonbase novice. I've yet to create a module, so feel free to disregard the following comments until you feel that I've been around the block enough... However, one of the limitations of the Moonbase (...) (22 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: New Fad? Multi-Level Moonbase —John P. Henderson
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I agree with Fred's sentiments on this. I have thought about building more modules myself, but time is not likely to allow more than one more out of me before BrickFest. My concept for my next one will allow for at least three levels, maybe (...) (22 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: New Fad? Multi-Level Moonbase —Markham Carroll
|
| | | | | | | | | "Stickboy" <f_trayers@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:HCzMIx.Dxs@lugnet.com... (...) that (...) designers (...) There is also the possibilities of using multiple large, gray baseplates, like 1 x 2 and 2 x 2. I had plans of doing a 1 x 2 monorail (...) (22 years ago, 8-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: New Fad? Multi-Level Moonbase —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) HA! Saw these in a MichLUG meeting gallery: (URL) (22 years ago, 8-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: New Fad? Multi-Level Moonbase —Mike Case
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Even though I'm even more of a moonbase novice than you are (especially since I don't have an active project right now), but I figured I'd toss in my two-credits-worth anyway. I think you've got a great idea. I've got an even crazier (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Scott Lyttle
|
| | | | | | Did you see the "Life on Mars" Truck Tour? That was quite cool..as I recall, there was the following: monkeys around a tall black object (think the dimensions were 1:4:9) martians spray painting graffiti on the side of the disco wall a martian (...) (22 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Jeffrey Benson
|
| | | | | | (...) Hah! I wish I had seen that ... do you know where there are pictures? Dead fleebnorks, now why did I think of that. Ooooh! Inspiration: a bunch of "space hippies" with placards that read: "No Blood for Fleebnorks!" :) Maaaaan. Now I really (...) (22 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) Ok. I have to strongly disagree here. In my legoverse landing gear is an easily exploitable weakness on military ships. Landing gear on my military ships (any size that can land) is always built directly into the hull of the ship to eliminate (...) (22 years ago, 8-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Jeffrey Benson
|
| | | | | (...) Perhaps the requirement be that the ship is "functional" so to speak: i.e., there is crew access, and it won't tip to one side or the other when landed. Jeff Benson jbenso1@towson.edu (22 years ago, 8-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Paul Baulch
|
| | | | (...) Whoa! My bad. I didn't mean to imply that fixed landing gear was unacceptable, it's totally fine by me. What I meant was that I viewed the presence of landing gear of some kind as mandatory. I've made fighters without landing gear at all, it's (...) (22 years ago, 9-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New Fad? —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) easily (...) (any (...) Um... Perhaps my reply came across a little more argumentative than I intended. (...) I see, that makes much more sense than my original assumption. (...) -Mike Petrucelli (22 years ago, 9-Apr-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
