 | | F-2 Bat —Philip Painter
|
| | | Hello once again .spacers Here's me latest, The F-2 Bat. (URL) I'd be pleased to hear any comments or criticisms you may have. Thanks. (URL) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.announce.moc, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Mark Sandlin
|
| | | | | (...) Groovy. I like the studless look. It does bear resemblance to Dan Jassim's Comet Fighter, but that's not a bad thing. I love the engine nozzles underneath. Smoove. Obligatory GA comment: It needs landing gear. -Grand Admiral and Keeper of (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Gil Shaw
|
| | | | | (...) This is a beautiful study in simplicity = awesome. Clean, clean, clean. Great work Phil. Cheers, -G (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Anne Carasik
|
| | | | | Dude, niiiice. :) I really like the simple and smooth look. Looks like a very manueverable fighter. -Anne (...) -- For SCO to attack IBM using IP (\`--/') _ _______ .-r-. is somewhat like trying to eat >.~.\ `` ` `,`,`. ,'_'~`. a live tiger. -Ian (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Anthony Sava
|
| | | | | (...) That looks so very very cool. I'm not a space fan, but I am certainly drawn to swooshable things. And I gotta agree with you, swoosh factor of 10, man. I disagree with Mark that it needs landing gear. With the way you built it, with those 8 (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Mark Sandlin
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, aside from the well-known fact that I have a thing for landing gear, the "realistic" rationalization is that it would be far cheaper to build landing gear into fighters than it would to engineer a hanging rack system for fighters with (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Anthony Sava
|
| | | | | | (...) Again, I'm going to have to disagree, if we're going to dive into a 'realistic' rationalization here. For you see, from my perspective, normal landing gear in a zero gravity environment are totally useless. After all, landing gear serve only (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | (...) If we're talking about small fighters, might it be cheaper to have your pilots wear evac suits in a non-pressurized landing bay? Entry to the bay could be through a single airlock, and the individual ships could be moored or clamped into place (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Anthony Sava
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I love that idea. But Mark was talking about cost-effectiveness, and my belief is that this way would be a tad bit more expensive to build and maintain. --Anthony (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Expensive? Bah! I build my ships out of solid gold with platinum wiring and diamond-encrusted control surfaces. Phooey on your bean counting! Dave! (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Aaron Sneary
|
| | | | | | | | (...) snip (...) If you will remember, the standard TIE fighter pilot had to wear and EVA suit during the entire flight. Most SW tech manuals that cover this small fighter point out that to make it cheap and fast, it has NO environmental systems (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Michael Bosch
|
| | | | | | | | (...) It may be cheaper to do EVAs and have individual access locks et al., but wouldn't the safety of the pilots be put into more-than-acceptable risk everytime they go in or out? One could have a compromised suit, your lockingport could not exist (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | | | | | (...) What, you mean your pilots and techs aren't wearing powered armor suits like the troops and officers? Personally that is why I never build escape pods, all the crew are wearing or have instant access to powered armor. (...) Well all my (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Aaron Sneary
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Who needs fighters? I say take out your enemies with your broadside, pull up inside their safe firing distance, and launch your power suited marines out the torpedo tubes with plasma cutters, airlock override scramblers, and auto-frap cannons. (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well broadsides have this nasty habbit of not hitting small manuverable craft, like enemy fighters. Fighters will chew through marines real easy regardless of whether they have powered armor. Of course the marines do have the mini-nuke (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Mark Sandlin
|
| | | | | | In lugnet.space, Anthony Sava wrote: (snip a whole lot of stuff) So um... what if you want to land the thing somewhere other than the mother ship? :) -Grand Admiral and Keeper of Fleebnorks (URL) "Adopt a fleebnork. They're DYING!" -Sally Struthers (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Adrian Drake
|
| | | | | | | (...) Crash, of course. Adrian (URL) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Anthony Sava
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, Philip DID say none of his ships would ever be landing on a planet. And one man fighters would probably have a limited fuel supply, so going too far probably wouldn't be an option. And I doubt you'd want to land on an enemy ship. So as (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Mark Sandlin
|
| | | | | | (...) It'd be a problem if you wanted to land somewhere there wasn't a highly specialized docking system. But I already DID say that. ;) -Grand Admiral and Keeper of Fleebnorks (URL) "Adopt a fleebnork. They're DYING!" -Sally Struthers (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Philip Painter
|
| | | | | Thanks for the comments, guys. I'm glad you like it. And while it does look a lot like Dan's Comet Fighter, the similarity is honestly coincidence. The ship I had in mind when I was shaping it was Tim's Tadpole. As for the landing gear bit, I (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Chris Maddison
|
| | | | | (...) Beautiful, clean, elegant. Studless is never a bad thing. Well done. -Chris (21 years ago, 21-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —David Simmons
|
| | | | | Hey Phil, The totally studless look is very stunning. The color scheme and the wing design just howls Original Star Trek to me. It looks a baby Romulan Bird of Prey. Dontcha just love these new long, curved slopes? The engines are really snazzy too! (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: F-2 Bat —Andrew Saada
|
| | | | (...) Philip, To mimic what Gil said, "This is a beautiful study in simplicity" = superb. I love the juxtaposed angles at the rear and those engines are a perfect fit. Space-y suavity. -ªþ§ (21 years ago, 30-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | |
