Subject:
|
Re: Unfinished Dropship
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Thu, 22 Dec 2005 04:46:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2782 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Kyle Vrieze wrote:
| |
In lugnet.space, Mladen Pejic wrote:
| |
I started this MOC back in August and stopped working on it by early
September due to school. Unfortunately, I lost interest in completing it,
and have to disassemble it for a new project I am planning for the winter
break.
A few notes about the dropship:
It’s crew consists of one pilot and one weapons officer. It was intended to
be armed and carry two APCs. The four drums on the sides are fuel tanks and
also house parachutes to assist in braking the dropship when landing with a
heavy load.
Aside from the overall SNOT construction, I discovered an interesting
new
use for part 30535.
That’s all folks! :-)
Mladen Pejic
|
I’m sorry this didn’t make it to completion, but glad you posted it. A
dropship needs a big squarish interior to hold the APCs or mechs or whatever,
but a big squarish interior leads to a big ugly box of an exterior. I like
how you used your unique studless-shell technique to solve this problem, with
a hexagonal cross-section. I had a similar idea with the
Aggressor, and when
I was finished I wished I had set the wider part of the cross-section at the
bottom instead of the top, like you did here. I love the retro-rocket array
mounted on the short leg of the hexagon.
|
Thanks Kyle!
Yes, doing a whole ship in SNOT helps get rid of boxiness. I still want to
experiment with other geometric shapes. I think even a pentagon cross-section
would work for a dropship... Just thinking about it gives me ideas about ramp,
weapon, engine, etc. placement. :-D
| |
I think you ended up with a very cool and well-detailed main body, but the
big challenge with a tube-style dropship is capping off either end in an
interesting way, and it looks like that’s where the project came to a stop.
|
Yes, exactly.
It’s funny how we have this weird dialogue as builders. You build something and
it inspires me, which in turn inspires you and so on. That is exactly what
happened after I looked at pics of your Aggressor. In fact, when I came to
building the front end, I looked at how you solved the problem before proceeding
with my own ideas. You are indeed correct when you say capping the ends is a
design challenge.
I think the front of my dropship would have been okay, as the four angled sides
create mandibles of sorts, which create nice niches for weapons and such. The
problem really came with the rear. If I placed a huge flat ramp there, the rear
would be very boring, as in my older
Landing Barge.
That’s why I think your sideways entry/egress scheme is better. It might
necessitate more structural beams about and below, but it would be worth it IMO.
It would also allow for a better engine design, instead of my awkward nacelle
solution. The only thing I would do different from you is make the hatches
double as ramps...
LOL I can’t believe how much I’ve just written about this. I just gotta try my
hand at another dropship next year!
| |
Anyhow, I’m glad you posted pics before disassembly. I’d like to do another
cap-ship at some point, and I can come back to these for ideas. Hope your
new project works out great!
|
Thanks again!
I’ll look to your work for inspiration as well. Heh.
Mladen Pejic
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Unfinished Dropship
|
| (...) I'm sorry this didn't make it to completion, but glad you posted it. A dropship needs a big squarish interior to hold the APCs or mechs or whatever, but a big squarish interior leads to a big ugly box of an exterior. I like how you used your (...) (19 years ago, 22-Dec-05, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
