Jump to content

Lindem Herz

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lindem Herz

  1. Republicans, Democrats, whatever, take it to PM before they lock us, will ya? On the other hand... I'm still wondering why the hell doesn't Boeing or Lockheed just take a licence for building Energiya, improve it, and present it as an EELV - the concept behind it was pretty much similar, a core module that can be adapted to a variety of missions just using plugins. Need some low weight up there, grab a Energiya core, swap the lower end with 4 engines with the 1 engine one, and strap two Zenit instead of four, you got a Energiya-M Need heavy duty lifting? Get a core, strap eight Zenits on it and a Energiya-M core as a second stage, instant Vulkan, 175 tonnes to orbit And hell, Zenits, at least the Energiya strap on versions, are supposed to be reusable. Those gray boxes all over it, parachute covers. The work has been done already, to pay the manufacturers, build most of it here, to keep russia happy build some of it there, to pay the engeneers, put the think tanks to work on improving it - instead of spending a lot of money working from zero. Heck, Lockheed is already importing part of it (the engines), why not import most of it?
  2. Worse, man, it was crushed to death when it's hangar's roof collapsed. Now, Ptichka on the other side... $25 million, as is, new everything and assembly required
  3. You are quite mistaken. The shuttle was NOT designed solely to build ANY space station. Certainly not the ISS, which was inconceivable at the time of its design. Actually, the shuttle is one part of the two part budget-tight NASA vision for space after Apollo (that is, after the whole permantent station on the Moon/mission to Mars ideas had been shed by the congress and the Vietnam War), which was having a huge space station up there and a Shuttle to service it. However, as it turned out, the budget was further restricted, and evetually there was only enough money to get one of those (and then some -__-), so NASA, instead of stepping back and doing a low cost-Russia style (highly successful, if not in scientific achivements or what not, at least in a LOT of experience) space station/expendable logistics approach, decided to push on with the low cost shuttle model, because without it there wouldn't be a not-so-costly way of putting their space station up there. Now, the jack of all trades - that's further cost problem. Even the Shuttle program was over the new budget, so NASA had to go to the Air Force and tell them they could launch their stuff on the shuttle and forget all about those costly expendable boosters. Problem was, the design required some extensive modifications (ei, more power for heavier payloads, enough thrust to launch polar orbits, enough cross range to be able to launch and land in Vandenberg doing just one orbit) That, of course, meant the shuttle was getting heavier, and suddenly it's recoverable booster was getting bigger (and more expensive to develop) than the Saturn V. NASA missed this second decision point and it's alternative (launching a Skylab like station on a Saturn V, service it using Gemini derivatives - like the Big Gemini - on Titan IIIs), and hoped than with a good enough launch rate, the development would pay off. But neither NASA or the Air Force could provide such a rate, so it was decided that practically EVERY US launch would be done with the shuttle. Of course, that's a flight a week launch rate -______-U Recipe for cr@p, I say. Further cut costs and weight limits decided that a big reusable booster would be impossible to develop and whatnot, so NASA went for smaller booster rockets (although they were supposed to be liquid, eventually they become solid as those are cheaper to design and fly - to be eventually replaced by liquid. Eventually) and external fuel to save weight on the orbiter. Compromise after compromise, eventually the Shuttle flew, and during the first years it was good, hell, in 1985, with it's average of one flight per month, it looked like the launch rate of once a week was even really possible, and on March of 1986 the first truly air force only shuttle mission was to be launched, STS 62-A, finally using those extra features that NASA really didn't need. Even then, the first drafts of Space Station Freedom were done, and it looked like they would get their Shuttle and Space Station in the early 90s. That is, until the Challenger blew up - and suddenly people realized that NASA was flying at breakneck speed on a ship that cut way too much corners - and HAD to work whatever happened, since it had no escape systems for the crew. The result - no more commercial satelites on the shuttle, air force was back to using the Titans for the time being, a helluva long turn around rate because the ship had to be virtually broke down and put back together to make sure it would work. All the things that the shuttle tried to avoid suddenly became a must. I love the ship, it's probably the most beautiful spacecraft I've ever seen and a wonderful example of technology - but it has been a doomed white horse since the morning of January 28, 1986. It has been almost 20 years since then. It's time to go. Wouldn't mind seeing them flying again as private ships in 30 or so years, but they have no place as the spearhead of minkind's reaches into space. Pull the plug as soon as it can be done. Now, 40 years old Soyuz, on the other side... that's a helluva good basic design
  4. Wasn't it supposed to fire only backwards?
  5. Hehe, and I thought I was gonna get away from making that thread Nop, nop, as far as I know, the lineart that Shin put up in the beginning of the thread are the only published pics of the LV-7 (they are somewhere in the interview with Kawamori at the end of the book). Shin then made colored versions of them. And sorry about the not yet made thread, but I've been quite busy lately. Will put it up tonight or else I'll kick myself - somehow.
  6. You're welcome Another unusual designs... well, there are quite some here. Between the Zaibach Empire planes and the Advanced Valkyrie series, plus some others from Air Calvary and some VF prototypes (you can really see the evolution in Kawamori's design philosophy here, both the VF-19Kai and VF-11MAXLKai development are most interesting), I could end up scanning more or less half of the book if let loose. Of course, I wouldn't complain about it at all I'll open a new thread. We've hijacked this one well enough. Here's the Battroid
  7. At the request of hellohikaru
  8. And here comes the big Seiran-99 photoshoot. Or something like that. 1 - Seiran with Fast Packs
  9. Problem with those sims is that they don't really have a Campaing feeling. They play like a group of related missions, carried out by Generic Pilot 1 to 54, you being Generic Pilot 22. Of course, I'm not asking for something like X-Wing Alliance (I play the game over and over again just to relive the moments), but at least in Il-2 Sturmovik you have an squadron with names, faces and even birthdates and places. Now, if only one could use the INCREDIBLE game engine of Lock On and put on a Wing Commander or X-Wing Alliance game model with an Area 88 like storyline on, that would be modern fighter pilot buff HEAVEN. Ah, btw, here is the Glider Armor. Looks like the Seiran can take some heavy beating with it.
  10. Don't forget the VF-9, that was born from Advanced Valkyrie, was recycled into Air Calvary Chronicles and finally came into light in Macross M3. Heck, when the first news about Zero came up telling about a Su-27 based variable fighter, I was almost CERTAIN that Kawamori modified the Seiran for 3D animation use. Unfortunately, it turned out the be the Sv-51, which I also dig nevertheless. Gonna scan the other variations later tonight. I found the Air Calvary Chronicles designs most interesting, specially the Asturia ones. Unfortunately, I think those two are the only published pics EVER of the LV-7 (as far as my kana goes, the name is Valorious Rapier LV-7, ヴァローリアス・レイピア LV-7), they are only ones that appear in the Design book and they are REALLY small. That's Kawamori's very early nineties. After all, the Varuta fighters were designed originaly for ACC, and for all we know, the preproduction stage for what evetually became Escaflowne began in the 89. Taking into account the multiple changes in that production, I'd make an educated guess and say the designs were at least three years old when they premiered in Macross 7. After all, they heavily contrast with the other two representative fighters of that era, the VF-11, YF-19 and YF-21 (won't take into account the VF-19, it had to be redisigned to be easy to draw). On the other hand, I just HAVE to say I really, really prefer the unmodified Elgerzorene (then called Sturmzorene) from ACC. Had more style. When making the changes for Macross 7, the Head mixed them up with what I consider the most uncool design of that time, the Me-175 Messergehrin (there were some worst ones, but fortunately they don't have a name to be remembered with). Here's the original Fz-109G Sturmzorene
  11. Yes, as far as I know, parasite fighters aren't anything new. From the SPB/I-16 you mention (nicely modelled in Il-2 Forgotten Battles: Aces), to the SR-71/D-12, there has been lots of proven examples. With an appropiate fly by wire system and laser aligment, I think a drone could attach quite easily to a mothership. After all, that's what the USAF uses to refuel, kinda. However, I would't qualify the mix of the Seiran-99 with the AXPT-108 (all that's known as a designation for that model) as a parasite/mothership scheme rather than a multi-part airframe. Both parts are at least as big as each other, and joined they form a different airfoil profile, let alone a different aerodynamic profile. And a sudden change of aerodynamic profile is akin to losing or gaining a wing, a tail or an engine pod in midair - don't think it's a good thing to happen Now, on a totally different matter, I have on my side a copy of the Shoji Kawamori Design Works and a plugged in scanner. Anybody has any request?
  12. Damn, double post. Ah, might as well use it. Does anybody out there knows something of the feasibility of THIS design. As far as I know, it's supposed to attach and detach in midair - but I don't know how possible it is without entering into a world of pain like a flat spin or something. Last post about the Seiran 99, I swear.
  13. Ok, while we're at it, I think I'll hijack the thread just a little bit. Here's a pic of the Fast Pack Battroid mode (not really the same as the solo one, guess is a second version or something - it's more bad ass anyway )
  14. Inspired is an understandment. The forward fuselage is virtually identical. I LOVE it
  15. Unless you're talking about X-Wing Alliance, which had a helmet mounted HUD - and which I assume it's the real deal in the Star Wars universe. Why you can't see it from the outside - Polaroid Effect. I thing it would be easier to project confusing reflections from a rounded helmet mounted HUD in the middle of the cockpit than from a piece of plane glass in one end. Specially in outer space, where you don't get too many light sources to outshine them. Thus, a polarized glass. Then again, that's only an educated guess, so shoot me down if I'm wrong.
  16. Now, only for the kicks, where I can get a copy of that R2 Movie edition DVD? (Amazon.co.jp doesn't have it in stock )
  17. I'll say it once, and for all. When in doubt, to make an aircraft as cool as humanly possible, you just need to paint it black and white. If you, don't want black, go for something dark.
  18. Ok then, bashing the members is finished, let's go back to bashing that plane. I love it when people don't only tell me when a fictional plane is crappy but WHY it's so crappy. BTW, that tanker fuel made, hanging in the air fire ring that appears in the trailer, it's that even possible? It's not like those planes, although refueling, ain't flying at a couple hundred miles per hour, you know.
  19. If he's doing the DYRL versions, Perfect Memory wouldn't help him much, the ARMDs were heavily redesigned for the movie. If he still wants one, last time I checked you could get them at a nice little store (Action Theatre, if I remember correctly) at Metreon, San Francisco, $30 the reprint. Thet's where I got my copy. Been a couple of years since, though, so I don't know if they still carry them. Still looking for the Gold Book, sadly...
  20. I'm having quite the problem uploading. Running either passive or active mode, this thing seems to only send information upstream in bursts, reaching peak levels up to 24 kbps, normally settling in 10 kbps for a couple of seconds(max 5) then hugging ground zero for a minute or two or five. Downloading seems normal, though it goes slow, average 3 or 2 kpbs. Any idea about that?
  21. Movie only, it's the song which opened Sharon's Earth concert, if I remember correctly.
  22. I think I'm gonna puke. Utterly stupid redesign based on the need to look cool and badass to appeal the current trend. Problem is, even though it's over 60 years old, Bugs Bunny and pals are cool and badass enough when they find someone good enough to draw them in the mood. They went over the line here. I'll pass. And probably the kids who won't won't remember it after the next trend sets on.
  23. X-Wing Alliance was developed by Totally Games, Lawrence Holland's company, who was involved or, as Totally Games, entirely developed, most air or space combat simulations (not sure about Rogue Squadron series) of Lucasfilm Games and Lucasarts during the 90s, from Battlehawks 1942 (kudos to whoever remember the third use of that game engine ) to Secret Weapons of Normandy. That includes all the X-Wing Series, of course
  24. And if all that it's true, there goes any chances of seeing Lord Vader kick some more ass onscreen.
  • Create New...