Lynx7725

Damn man, three torps on the stubs, that would definitely take it beyond the light classification, besides it would not be able to mount full scale torps there.

Hey, what can I say? I like to make things go boom.

Depending on the size of your torps, they might fit on a stub.. one below, one alongside, one above; nothing says I have to hang all my ordnance BENEATH a stub in space.

Yeah, the chin guns might be good. The nose looks a bit squarish now, and can stand a bit of embellishment.

Looks good; I'm still getting used to the assymetrical design, but looks good.

Two things. First, looking at the top-down view, it seems to me that you have a tendency to have very squared-off rear ends on your crafts. Somehow, straight lines there bothers me.

Second, why hand a gatling on the stubs? I was thinking, have a pair of guns near the canards, one shooting over and one under. Then we can mount REALLY BIG ORDNANCE on the stubs.. say, 3 torps. On each stub. For a total of 6 torps.. Hmm, so much for "light" assault craft.

I think don't worry about it. So long both sides are balanced off in terms of amount of armaments per craft, it's okay.. (come to think of it, I don't think we've seen many "bad guys" crafts, have we?)

I think it's just that Zentrandude and me, we are used to games that showcase air/ space craft with limited number of armaments. (e.g. X-wings -- effectively 4 las and what, 6 Torps? F-14s -- after the missiles are gone it's done to one gun with less than a minute's ammo load..).

We're just not used to seeing crafts that seem to have a lot of combat endurance... for example, the Hornet (1 gun(?), 12 AARAAMs) vs your Splicer 5000 (6 guns, 10 missiles and 2 anti-ship torps). Not too sure whether it's comparing apples with apples, but man, it sure seems a lot more, especially the gun load.

i know what your thinking, every design he posted i had that thought. some games would class all his small craft as light destroyers/ heavy gunboats.

Brr. Now that you mentioned it, imagine what Knight26 would call a light destroyer or heavy gunboat.

I dunno. One common thread that bothers me for practically all your designs is the sheer amount of ordnance/ weaponry that your "small crafts" are packing.

IIRC, you were saying that these were roughly on par with current airframe sizes, and taken relative to the pilots you've provided that's about right. But at the same time, they are carrying a lot more internal armaments than current aircraft -- a lot of your weaponry are built-in as opposed to pod-mounted.

I mean, we all seen the A-10 loaded for bear.. but it's only got one internal 30mm Gatling, the rest are all "disposable" ordnance.

I'm just wondering about the feasibility of it is all. After all, miniaturization can go only so far.. some systems, like fuel tanks or main thrusters, still need to be relatively large (and thus space-consuming).

EDIT: As for the wings, I think it actually looks okay without any wings.. maybe resize the weapon "pods" a bit, but I think it may look okay.

However, if you need the wings to hang stuff from, I don't see why not, just that the current wing shape doesn't really fit asethetically. Given your expertise, I assume it works well enough aerodynamically though.

Looks good 'cept for the wings.. doesn't look like they belong, too blockly/ rectangular where they are currently.

Maybe can even ditch the wings entirely?

That shoulder gun came from the 2004 WRX Smokescreen.

EDIT: Hmm. That means there are holes for the guns on Meister? And if you have both 2004 Smokescreens.. you can have a Heavy-gun Meister?

There was an article somewhere on the web describing the abject failure of the mass attack chopper formations in the early days of the Gulf War II. ...

The Apaches encoutered a hail of fire during one battle in northern Iraq in Gulf War II. A lot of them were taking flak but they all survived. You tell me if you can fly anything through any hail of flak.

Hey, don't shoot the messenger. I just pointed out that there was this operational failure, I haven't given my opinion either way.

Fact is, I think there is a role for choppers in the armed forces. It's already an invaluable tool when it is a battle taxi. The ability to lay down precision firepower is very very important in CAS (to avoid blue-on-blue, for one), and choppers can do that very well.

Problem is, nowadays precision-guided munitions are getting better all the time. The niche position of the attack chopper is getting eroded by a high-flying plane (or drone!) dumping a laser-guided anti-tank missile into the top of the target tank.

Is this a good or bad thing? Can't really say, but you've got to keep the bigger picture in mind. Dropping a precision-guided munition from a drone up high is generally cheaper, safer (for the bomber, not the bombee) and in all probability faster -- you can have more drones per buck, so you can have more of them on time on target.

On the flip side, there are a lot more dependencies (i.e. things that can go wrong) in such a remote-precision-bombing model. Also, a human sitting behind the canopy of a attack chopper tends to be able to make snap decisions based on situational factors, snap decisions that can save lives.. so it's really a tossup, with the drone getting the advantage due to the safety factor.

My opinion is that the attack chopper community probably need to do a lot more to redefine its niche in order to stay viable.. there is definitely a place for the attack chopper in the modern battlefield, but there is a real need to move things along to achieve it.

Frankly speaking, I always thought the Ramrod robot design/ transformation sequence is dodgy at best, but the ship mode is nice.

It's one of those early animes that had a sembalance of story arc in it (rather than a monster-of-the-week series), but it honestly got derailed several times by long excursions to side-plots.

There was an article somewhere on the web describing the abject failure of the mass attack chopper formations in the early days of the Gulf War II. Apparently, the attack chopper didn't perform as expected when used in airspace where air superiority is not constant, and were quickly withdrawn to safer areas.

BTW, shouldn't this thread be in the other Vs. thread?

Excuse me, but can we keep this in the designated thread? After all, that's what the pinned thread is for...

As this is really a redub of an anime called Bismark -- I just know some casual facts, Comickaze probably can fill more details in -- there should be some toys released, but not in great numbers.

I always did liked the mecha design.. but I never really got to see it top to bottom, so can't say much about the series. if there is an affordable set out, it would be nice to get it.

<innocent look>

They count paint as parts?

</innocent look>

:D

Lynx: I kind of see where you are going, this one along with the last two are designed by the same company are designed to be highly modular, hence the similar configurations. Right now though the only common componets are the cockpit, guns, torpedo packs (though modified on this one). I admit I have a bad habit of sometimes making craft look too similar to one another, but if I do I try to make sure that they are either all made by the same rave, or in this case the same company, kind of like the Solaar fighters of the GF as well.

I figured you would go for the "same company" defense..

Thing is, it looks very similar to your "Chopping Block" thread (sorry, can't keep the designations straight anymore). Same nose, canopy and general delta wing design.

If your ship background is that it is an upgrade to the "Chopping Block" craft, then I think it's good -- after all, in RL we do have planes upgraded beyond their original specs (think F14, A10, C130 (!), etc. etc). Having a massdriver (or what looks to be a massdriver) grafted to a small craft sorts of appeal to me.

Have Gun, Will Travel.. but I digress. As a long time sci-fi wargamer... the fluff justifies everything.

But it seems to be a totally different design.. sharing common components, sure, but still a different design. If we compare the original designs from your "Chopping Block" and this, there are marked differences.. but much less so in the redesigns.

As a side-track, do you intend to have squadron and pilot nose arts? would be interesting to see.

I dunno. I think you need to rethink your design philosophy -- all of your redesigns are starting to look the same (same narrow nose, for one).

That's fine if it's all by the same company.. but even common module requirements at government level (such as cockpit/ ejector seats etc.) don't result in craft design so similar to each other IMO.

Ah, bring back good memories of my recruit days when I handled an M203.. I was accurate with the "curry powder" rounds too!

Loved the look and feel of the M16/ M203 combo.

what do I think?

Not going to happen.

I'd rather say:

Not in my lifetime.

You never know. What with improved healthcare and cure for cancer and AIDS... you might live longer, but you wished you didn't.

So you might just be around to see the first anti-matter explosion, or the first anti-matter generator.. the two might be the same though.

Actually it's likely to happen.. given the amount of research in this area, some practical application is bound to come out sooner or later, and given it's easier to have an uncontrolled reaction than a controlled reaction, a bomb is the most likely first product.

I'm just waiting for a laboratory somewhere to vaporize itself and the surrounding countryside...

Thing is, making devices this powerful have very nasty side effect. Just as the world now has a real fear of nuclear material ending up in terrorist hands, the idea of a small bomb with the yield of several nukes is extremely uncomfortable..

Well...at least they're accurate...all meat IS flesh, after all...

I just want to know -- who's pound of flesh?

rei was a bonus item that came with volume 9 of the japanese edition EVA manga. asuka it appears is a mail-away if you buy the magazine and send money.

FYI, not just the Japanese edition of the manga. The.. well "A" chinese translator either in HK or Taiwan gotten a deal I believe, and that's how I got my Rei posable.

I'm so happy nobody is using 404.

(HTTP Error Code 404: Not Found... usually an unwelcomed error. Code 403 and 500 are normally the other errors encountered. )

that swat ingram is awesome. whats the second sd ingram in that pic? can't remember..

That's not an Ingram. The Ingram is Shinohara Heavy Industry AV-98 model specifically.

The other Shinohara Heavy Industry model is the AV-0 Zero. IIRC, it may have the Peacemaker monikor, but I'm not sure whether that's official.

Kinda sad that Iran boasts more air-to-air kills with OUR fighter than us.... also note they are the only people to still actively fly F-14As Those birds are as old or older than many of our tomcats still on the flightline and so far as I know, the IIAF has no intention of retiring them any time soon!

Let's rub it in some more...

They did it with A-models.. with the underpowered, somewhat unreliable engines.. no phoneixes.. using locally produced parts..

The shame of it all. The biggest, baddest bird off a steam cat and the only nation flying it is using it off LAND bases! :D

The gap you see is an old aero habit, you always want to put a gap between intake and fuselage or wing, this keeps boundary air from entering the intake and causing compressor stalls.  True it is not needed anymore, I will look into a reshape.

Ah okay, good to know. It just looks... well, ugly.

One thing though.. what's the thrust-to-weight on this thing? If it's one of those "too much thrust for its own good" cases, then it's might be an irrelevant issue.

Heck look at the blackbird, it has its landing gear arranged the same way in the wing, but its fold inward instead of forward, don't ask I just like longitudanally folding gears.

No problems there.. It's just that it looks as if a hard landing will push the struts up through the wings. Didn't that happen to WWII fighters?

Those "holes" are the missile tubes, I'll work on the endcovers later, and just like on the RAM launcher I work on they will pop off immediately prior to launch.

Won't it be better if it's an actual cover and not a pop-off? (I assume you meant endcovers as in the cloth strips used on MGs on WWII aircraft) The holes look like they would create quite a large amount of drag in an atmosphere, even with the exhaust/ flow through. Less of an issue in space I guess, but FOD would still be troublesome though.

EDIT: I should read -- and remember! -- things better.