Posted: 13 Jun 2005 00:50
Aydan, are you around? Wanna do a rerender of the Antonov, in the real liveries as posted?
Transport Tycoon Forums
The place to talk about Transport Tycoon
https://www.tt-forums.net/
Planeset [version 1.5.3 released 2006-10-24]
Page 94 of 147
Posted: 13 Jun 2005 19:17
AN-124 livery
Posted: 13 Jun 2005 19:23
The tail came out very nicely! But shouldn't the bottom half of the fuselage be blue, rather than the whole thing being white?
AN-124 livery
Posted: 13 Jun 2005 21:27
OK!
And how this looks?
And how this looks?
Posted: 13 Jun 2005 21:45
Better, I think. I need to see it in the game. 
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 16:25
An-225 Mriya
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 16:33
Now that is gorgeous. I truly wish we could use it, but alas, there simply are no more aircraft slots available. It's a limitation of the game that will not be lifted anytime soon, if ever. I bet they could use it in OTTD though.
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 16:37
that is indeed a nice looking plane...Grigory1 wrote:An-225 Mriya
but the shading in / and \ views are incorrect, just flipping the sprite is not enough.
in the near future, ottd should be able to load grfs as extra vehicles, as opposed to only replacing. Then you could add all the planes you want.
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 19:12
KrevRenko wrote:What about having An-225 Mriya as a refit for the Ruslan? There is only 1 AFAIK, but it's certainly an impressive one. Would probably look funny carrying grain tho.
Same question: Beluga, anyone? Those would be REALLY useful cargo planes...
I have made AN-225 look
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 21:14
And a very nice one to say the least. The only thing, it's 2 extra engines require more fuel, increasing running costs. This way you cannot add it in this set, as it is full.
The Mriya, will remain what it's called, it seems. A dream. At least for TTDP, anyway.
I may become subject to flaming or ignoration, but I have to say that there are a few planes that will probably be used less than the Mriya would be. But, since everything is almost done, there is probably no point in suggesting to dump a plane in favor of another. Although there is an ugly, small one...
OK, I'm quiet already.
The Mriya, will remain what it's called, it seems. A dream. At least for TTDP, anyway.
I may become subject to flaming or ignoration, but I have to say that there are a few planes that will probably be used less than the Mriya would be. But, since everything is almost done, there is probably no point in suggesting to dump a plane in favor of another. Although there is an ugly, small one...
OK, I'm quiet already.
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 21:27
Look, when we made the original US set, there were some trains that turned out not to ever get used, and which got dumped and replaced with others. Maybe the same thing will happen with the Planeset. We won't know until after it's released.
...Speaking of which, what are we sticking on now?
...Speaking of which, what are we sticking on now?
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 22:08
I have a grand idea.
Why don't we have 2 seperate GRF files?
Planeset from 1930-1970
Planeset from 1960-on.
It would save a lot of stress about space, and you could turn it on and off using the in-game GRF Manager, so once it's 1970, you turn off the A file and turn on the B file, just remember to sell your planes first.
It would mean rebuilding plane networks, but it would add more challenge!
Why don't we have 2 seperate GRF files?
Planeset from 1930-1970
Planeset from 1960-on.
It would save a lot of stress about space, and you could turn it on and off using the in-game GRF Manager, so once it's 1970, you turn off the A file and turn on the B file, just remember to sell your planes first.
It would mean rebuilding plane networks, but it would add more challenge!
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 22:15
No.
No, no, no, no, no...
No, no, no, no, no...
Posted: 14 Jun 2005 23:25
/me agrees with krtaylor.
(I guess it's a good thing my name isn't uzurpator.)
It could be done more elegantly than that; making sure that the aircraft that appear in both GRFs have the same ID, but I still think that would be too much hassle, especially for people with enginespersist on.
(I guess it's a good thing my name isn't uzurpator.)
It could be done more elegantly than that; making sure that the aircraft that appear in both GRFs have the same ID, but I still think that would be too much hassle, especially for people with enginespersist on.
Posted: 15 Jun 2005 00:29
That An255 is looking awesome! Too bad we can't use it ATM :/
Posted: 15 Jun 2005 00:38
How about this. Fix the shading, and I'll put it in the archive so we don't lose it. If we decide to scrap a plane, freeing up a slot, the AN-225 can compete to fill it. Or, if the Patch suddenly allows more planes, the AN-225 gets added straightway.
Posted: 15 Jun 2005 01:04
Thank. You. I couldn't agree more!krtaylor wrote:No.
Posted: 15 Jun 2005 10:13
@Spaceball
Not to critisize your work, which I think is wonderful by the way, but since when do A321 freighters exist? Let alone that KAL Cargo is operating them. Maybe they operate A300 freighters.
I don't mean to be an @$$ but I just noticed something strange. Keep on doing the good work!
Ciao MD-11
Not to critisize your work, which I think is wonderful by the way, but since when do A321 freighters exist? Let alone that KAL Cargo is operating them. Maybe they operate A300 freighters.
I don't mean to be an @$$ but I just noticed something strange. Keep on doing the good work!
Ciao MD-11
Posted: 15 Jun 2005 13:47
MD-11: Not all airplanes have initially cargo versions of them. As any plane type gets older and used airframes become available, somebody develops a cargo conversion. I don't remember A300's, B757's and B767's having cargo version available initially but there are modified A300B2/B4's for cargo IRL.
Therefore I've decided that all aircraft (except airships) can be refitted for cargo.
Therefore I've decided that all aircraft (except airships) can be refitted for cargo.
Posted: 15 Jun 2005 14:17
@459
You are totally right. So maybe we will see A321Fs in the future. Can these new aircraft still be refitted into coal freighters. I always find this very strange. Isn't this considered to be a dangerous good to transport by air? And how about the transportation of food in the arctic and tropic scenario. That was not possible untill the patch came out? I hope that is still possible.
Well, success with the development of the set.
Ciao Ingmar
You are totally right. So maybe we will see A321Fs in the future. Can these new aircraft still be refitted into coal freighters. I always find this very strange. Isn't this considered to be a dangerous good to transport by air? And how about the transportation of food in the arctic and tropic scenario. That was not possible untill the patch came out? I hope that is still possible.
Well, success with the development of the set.
Ciao Ingmar