Page 135 of 313
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 11:01
by Sleepie
All three look good, well I would say C looks most futuristic so it maybe the best choice
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 11:48
by Need_Help
Wacki wrote:Need_Help wrote:I vote for B, but change a bit. I think you can make a 'logo' just like the real one on the place as shown as the picture before my post. Maybe a round 'dot' and the company colour. Another problem is, the 'head' should be smoother, this is too 'sharp'. The wings should be larger, because the engine behind there is a lot bigger, and its too long, which makes it not realistic. You should use a reference image when you model it, to make it looks real
(not just looking at it, but following exactly what is the scale of the plane)
Thanks
Which model you meaned? S_U52 or BL_LB80? I made both of them according to blueprints!!! So models and sizes are realistic!!!!!!!!!!
I mean this
http://www.tt-forums.net//files/bakewel ... 80_154.jpg
You are modelling it with reference image? (putting it in your viewport, and model it with top, side, front, back views according, and exactly as the reference image). It doesn't seems right, the engine and the plane is ok, but the 'wings' are so small. Please, show me your reference image that you used to model the plane
Thanks
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 11:50
by Purno
Version C, IMO. But wouldn't it be cool to add 2cc right away?
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 12:19
by DeletedUser21
Yes I vote C aswell, rectangular engines are abit like (sc)ram-jet technology. (Altough this plane won't get that fast.) It sure looks futuristic.
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 12:26
by Wacki
Need_Help wrote:
You are modelling it with reference image? (putting it in your viewport, and model it with top, side, front, back views according, and exactly as the reference image). It doesn't seems right, the engine and the plane is ok, but the 'wings' are so small. Please, show me your reference image that you used to model the plane
Thanks
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 12:53
by DarkFenX
B and C are done very well imo.
Vote for C, like others - it's more futuristic
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 12:59
by brupje
vot for B and C ;p make it an upgrade or somethign
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 13:15
by Need_Help
Oh well, it surpriced that there is a plane like that, I didn't see any plane like that in airport/TV. Well, for your Kelling plane, its not bad, but not logic
How can a plane 'turn' with a wing like that? And I also think that the plane won't be able to take off with that design
But well, this is just game, everything can happen
Thanks
Note : Will there be 'Airbus 380' in OTTD?
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 13:25
by Wacki
Purno wrote:Version C, IMO. But wouldn't it be cool to add 2cc right away?
I am not sure, that I understand you. You mean somethings like that?
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 13:28
by brupje
Need_Help wrote:
Note : Will there be 'Airbus 380' in OTTD?
If you build it ;p
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 14:21
by DeletedUser21
Wacki wrote:Purno wrote:Version C, IMO. But wouldn't it be cool to add 2cc right away?
I am not sure, that I understand you. You mean somethings like that?
2cc? Means 2 company colours.
Tough this new render with 2 engines at each side are pretty neat too!
/me waits for the warp nacelles.
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 20:38
by ZxBiohazardZx
@tagdaze: can you please do a try for a more detailled version of the depot, i made big progress but i really cant get the details in i want to be there, for ideas check this picture:
its not that i quit modeling, i just have to do more blender tutorials, your monorail looked very nice.....
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 20:41
by Sergej_S
Wacki wrote:Which is better?
I personally like the real prototypes, which existed in a history and have the real characteristics,
That is period 1920 - 2007.
Sergej
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 23:44
by Born Acorn
That's good for you, but we need a range from 1920-2050.
Posted: 22 Mar 2007 23:49
by Sleepie
Born Acorn wrote:That's good for you, but we need a range from 1920-2050.
Maybe even beyond 2050
Posted: 23 Mar 2007 12:10
by NukeBuster
Wacki wrote:Purno wrote:Version C, IMO. But wouldn't it be cool to add 2cc right away?
I am not sure, that I understand you. You mean somethings like that?
Like the 2 engines A LOT.
Posted: 23 Mar 2007 17:34
by DarkFenX
I like it too, but don't think that such a small plane like kelling should have 4 engines...
Posted: 23 Mar 2007 18:21
by Wacki
DarkFenX wrote:I like it too, but don't think that such a small plane like kelling should have 4 engines...
It is true, I made it 25mx25m, so I attach only 2 engines!!
Posted: 24 Mar 2007 10:58
by Wacki
I try to make new plane: Sonic Cruiser.
Posted: 24 Mar 2007 11:18
by DeletedUser21
Hell yeah! That looks very very very awesome!
Wow! Keep up the good work man! Soon and you are done with all the planes just in 1 go at them.
Two thumbs up!
