 | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter —Kyle Keppler
|
| | | (...) This might come off as mean, but I really dont care until you have something to show us. Show us the MOC--give us pics. If you really must do the coming soon crap, give us a teaser picture. Oh, and since you've built up the suspence, we're (...) (21 years ago, 16-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | (...) Really good? That's up to other AFOLs to decide. I guarantee it's unique as far as Star Wars fighters go. ~Clangador (21 years ago, 16-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | (...) You can see a teaser of the TriWing fighter here. (URL) (21 years ago, 17-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter —Kyle Keppler
|
| | | | Awesome. A pic goes a long way ;). --Kyle (21 years ago, 17-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | Okay, here it is. The TriWing fighter folder is open at Brickshelf. (URL) based it off the Fokker Dr.1 triplane of World War 1 fame. With the Rebelion having a X-wing, Y-wing and such, it's a natural play on words to have a Tri-wing fighter. (...) (21 years ago, 17-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | | (...) I think there's already a T-Wing fighter with 3 "wings". You've made a neat looking _airplane_, but I can't see the connection to Star Wars. Why does it have a propeller? Why doesn't the cockpit have a canopy? It has tires---can't it hover? It (...) (21 years ago, 17-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | | | (...) Answers to questions. It was made for the Rebellion. (Plus, it has Rebellion plates on the wings.) To provide thrust to fly. Because it's an open cockpit aircraft. It can't hover, but it can fly very slow. My MOCs never do. (...) Thanks. (...) (21 years ago, 18-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | | | | (...) But, but, there's no air in space for the propeller to work. "Oh no, not again..." Does anyone else here remember the great ".space-spaceships-m...ave-wings" fiasco about 2-3 years ago? There was a contest even... :] KDJ ___...___ LUGNETer (...) (21 years ago, 18-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Joseph Sibilia-Young
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) And what a fiasco it was! So big it made the .Space Timeline -Joseph (21 years ago, 18-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Ah, I still have the link! Galaxy Enforcer Contest: (URL) never saw the .Space timeline, do you have a link? KDJ ___...___ LUGNETer #203, Ontario, Canada (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Ley Ward
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) (URL) on the .space homepage, just scroll on down, a little further, there you go. Enjoy. We expect to hear from you within the week or we'll have to come and find you. Peace and history, Professor Whateverly (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) And June 19, 2001 will live in infamy..., "I have 5 questions for you, Kyle..." ;] KDJ ___...___ LUGNETer #203, Ontario, Canada (21 years ago, 21-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Yes, the space modification for the fighter is in the upgrade package. It's a shield that holds in air so the prop can use it (the air) to fly thru. (...) I was just reading about that last night. How odd. But really. Not all air vehicles in (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —James Howse
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Sorry, But this would be like picking yourself up by holding onto your bootlaces. I'm quite happy with the bubble of air in a shield idea, but there's nothing for the bubble to push against which is what would make the airplane go forward. All (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Ah, well I failed to mention it only works in conjunction with the bubble tender class spacecraft. (Which comes with the space upgrade package.) You see, the bubble tender class lays a long bubble out before the triwing for it to fly thru. (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I propose a new rule: If the word count in explaining whatever contrived technology is required for a moc to work exceeds the piece count of said moc, then the builder gets slapped upside the head with a fish. <slap> <>< (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Jon Palmer
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I think I may love you. (URL) [ j o n ] (URL) zemi.net> (URL) moonbase> (URL) myspace> (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I'll just have to make a bubble tender MOC that exceeds the word count then. It shouldn't be to hard. ~Clangador (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Ley Ward
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Uh-oh! So, um, can I avoid the fish if I testify that I (URL) wasn't really> um (URL) explaining> um (URL) anything at all...>? I suggest that the practice of posting further explanations that obfuscate rather than clarify, utilize Junior (...) (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Bubble Tech. Revealed! —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Continually laying bubble. I like it! (...) Ah, well, let's see here. I believe my "tech guys" in the R&D department came up with quite an astounding breakthrough as far bubble technology goes. The bubbles are made from a mixture of (...) (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Bubble Tech. Revealed! —Ley Ward
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Astounding indeed! LOL! Of couse, when metal becomes tensely liquid, it is very unstable, especially when it is high. The only saving grace is that when it is transparent it is easier to ascertain its motives... ;-) Only oxygen? Mmmmmm (...) (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Bubble Tech. Revealed! —Chris Yoder
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) No, no. Not pure O2. I should have specified. 21% O2, 78% N2, 1% "the rest of the stuff (in an earth-like atmosphere)." I'm not making the same mistake NASA did. (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Bubble Tech. Revealed! —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) And NASA forgot the bubble tender, too. So does the bubble tender make a lot of noise? I'd imagine that helps a lot on the annoy-enemy-encampme...s-at-sleep missions. Does the continual bubble coming out of the bubble tender make it move (...) (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Bubble Tech. Revealed! —Bill Pfund
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Of course, the bubble tender's use is in space, where noise could not be heard; therefore, the enemy is still asleep! Bill (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Travis Matheson
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I love creative Technology. ;-) I guess such a ship could be used to rescue people from damaged space craft or to enable direct connections between capital ships, but that is boring, this is a far more useful use of the technology (...) oh oh (...) (21 years ago, 20-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | (...) Say, I hear tell there's this "Terran Federation" what's looking for a few ships of some kind--*any* kind--and maybe they would be interested in buying some. I mean, they *do* have three thousand seven hundred somethingorother sectors to (...) (21 years ago, 18-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Tri-Wing Fighter Redux —Chris McNamee
|
| | | | Well, it's certainly a very good representation of the tri-plane. Doesn't go with Star Wars much, but it's neat none the less. (21 years ago, 18-May-04, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
