Knight26 Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 Yes the redesign kick is still on. This time it is the Solaar (not misspelled) family of fighters, the Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3. These pains in my keester and in the keesters of most confed pilots have continued to evolve over the years since I first sketched them. However they really pale in comparison to the last redesigns and the cockpits, which have always been a major pain in my keester have finally gotten to me. Of course redesigning the cockpits will require me to redo the Mosquito's cockpit but I do not mind that. Anyway I will start with the Mark-1 Solaar since it is the progenitor of the line. It's role is as a bomber interceptor, as such it carries only heavy weapons, large bore MDC's and heavy Plaser cannons along with cluster missiles and rocket pods. I would like to keep the salient features as true to form as I can, i.e. the disk wingm weapons load, and centrally mounted engines, but nothing else is sacred. The problem is I am having trouble visuallizing what I want to do, so I am asking for suggestions. These are craft designed by human's but with strong influences from their alien allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 7, 2005 Author Share Posted February 7, 2005 The Mk2. Basically the Mk1 could not dogfight, the weapons had too long a refire rate and it was not designed to take on fighters. THe Mk-2 is the first attempt to rectify this problem, by adding a pair of smaller rapid fire MDC's and more manuevering thrusters, while still keeping its anti-bomber capability. I am thinking for this redesign I will reshape the wing to give it a more "human" shape, starting to move away from the disk shaped wing, and maybe make it a two seater, as well as mixing up the weapons some more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 7, 2005 Author Share Posted February 7, 2005 The Mk-3 is a the pure fighter of the trio and is introduced much later on. The anti-bomber role is taken away and using a common cockpit and fuselage a pure fighter was built. The outspaced engines help with manueverability and increase overall thrust and therefore accleration. It now carries exclusively anti-fighter weapons, six plaser cannons and eight missiles. SO I want to redesign these but I am stuck, part of me keeps saying to make them look like an F-16 fuselage with a disk wing, and another part to go for a more TIE fighter look. Then the a third part, well you get the idea... Any input is appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 you definatly need to redesign them. oddly I would name that ship like flying squirrel (misspelled). btw xwing on the rear/from view on the mk3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 Flying Squirrel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 yah cant fly but it can glide short distances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opus Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 I think you shoud move the cockpit back and put all of the weapons in the nose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 I am considering something like that Opus, I am also considering a mix of gunpods and fixed cannons. Anyway here is the first update, I've modeled a basic fuselage I kind of like, it still needs some refinement, I'm not quite sure I like the width. I've also played around with multiple wing configurations, trying to decide which one to go with, any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 SHorter chord wing with the same span, and the missile packs added. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 (edited) SLightly different wing, more imbedded into the fuselage, if I go with a shorter shord type I will likely add a nice set of LERXes. Also, I found a thumbnail, could not find anything larger, of an old 50's saucer fighter concept, if anyone has a larger version I would really appreciate it. HERE Edited February 8, 2005 by Knight26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 aaaarrrghhhh!!!! My stupid fragging work computer froze up on me, and when I rebooted all my progress was lost. Now I am always very conciensous about saving so I know I saved the drawing, but it is gone now, argh, I hate this POS computer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 Well since the loss of the last model I've cranked out a couple "thinking out loud" concepts, this one is the only one worth posting. Man this redesign is kicking my butt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kin Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 Yes the redesign kick is still on. This time it is the Solaar (not misspelled) family of fighters, the Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3. These pains in my keester and in the keesters of most confed pilots have continued to evolve over the years since I first sketched them. However they really pale in comparison to the last redesigns and the cockpits, which have always been a major pain in my keester have finally gotten to me. Of course redesigning the cockpits will require me to redo the Mosquito's cockpit but I do not mind that. Anyway I will start with the Mark-1 Solaar since it is the progenitor of the line. It's role is as a bomber interceptor, as such it carries only heavy weapons, large bore MDC's and heavy Plaser cannons along with cluster missiles and rocket pods. I would like to keep the salient features as true to form as I can, i.e. the disk wingm weapons load, and centrally mounted engines, but nothing else is sacred. The problem is I am having trouble visuallizing what I want to do, so I am asking for suggestions. These are craft designed by human's but with strong influences from their alien allies. HEY wow! Those look really cool! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 The originals or the redesigns? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kin Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 the originals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 I think Kin might be right, no reason to completely reinvent the wheel here. So I have scrapped the full redesign and instead am now going on a design optimization course. To that end, and to make my life easier, I have started redoing the ship, just using faces instead of elliptical cylinders everywhere. In this way it will stay true to the original concept, but will make detailing far easier. Here is the first render of the new concept. Something I am considering is eliminating the aft dorsal engine hump, keeping the ventral hump though, any thoughts? I'm also going to rearrange the weapons a bit and redesign them a bit as well. COmments, thoughts, opinions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jardann Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 One small suggestion. How about turning the squarish weapons/missle pods on the tops of the wings into cylinder shapes that protrude above and below the wings. That would effectively double the fire rate of the weapon. And I think it would look cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jardann Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 It might also look good to move the weapons pods inward and maybe blend them into the fuselage a little bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 My thoughts for the weapons packs are this: Missile Packs (2x3): The two triple missile packs will stay but will be moved around to find the optimum placement. Rocket Packs (2x70): The rocket packs will be completely redone and I am considering either making them into traditional rocket pods on extended hardpoints, or flush mounting them to the vnetral fuselage. MDCs: I am thinking here of podding the cannons into two tri-barrel rotary cannon pods. THese pods would be attached to hardpoints and could be ejected once empty to allow the fighter to return for Refueling and Rearming (R&R) faster. Plasers: I think I may ditch the large caliber Plaser cannons and instead go for a quartet of wing or chin mounted cannon instead. This would give the Mk1 some self defense capability. I will post pics of what I am thinking later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 "Bigger guns, we need Bigger F'ing Guns!!!" Just kidding, but if you think you need bigger guns then these you need help, oh and 2 points to whoever can tell me what movie that's from. Anyway we are a decision time. I have put together three possible configurations for the Mass Drivers on this fighter. Option one is two large six barrel rotary cannon pods, and I do mean big. Option two is four smallers three barrel rotary cannon pods, makes the design a bit more symetric but takes up a lot of space and limits over the shoulde visibility. Option three, burying the cannons in the twin six-barrel cannons in the wings. We could run into some structural issues here, but I can take care of that. Right now I am leaning towards options two or three. Anyone else care to comment? Also yes I realize the design similarity to the Macross GU-11, that may or may not remain, I haven't decided, just a nice little nod at this point. No matter what the pods will be fixed up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 Option 2: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 Option 3: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 first 1 looks better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 first 1 looks better. DO you mean Option 1, with the two cannons? Please be more descriptive folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 10, 2005 Author Share Posted February 10, 2005 Does size matter? Just kidding, but in this case yes, I scaled down the cannons by 25% and rearranged them a little bit, I also added the Heavy PLASER cannons over the wings, though i may stick them under the fuselage. I then added a set of preliminary rocket pods, which I may change and or move around, possibly under the fuselage. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 11, 2005 Author Share Posted February 11, 2005 Update, I redid the rocket packs, moved the Heavy Plaser down, adding mounts to them, the barrels were free floating, and slapped the old thrust vectoring plates back on. YOu'll notice that they have opennings in them, basically when they slap together and close those opening duct the thrust out to slow the fighter down. Also I redid the rocket packs to carry fewer, but much larger and much faster rockets, Kinetic Kill Weapons, gotta love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 11, 2005 Author Share Posted February 11, 2005 Yes another update: I added lateral thrust control vains to the engine exhausts, I also moved the wing back 2.5 ft and added temporary place holder LERXes in. I will have to refine the shape and chamfer them down but you get the idea. Oh yes I also added a set of tails, dorsal and ventral, they will fold for storage and landing. I think it makes it look quite a bit more agressive and almost shark like. Any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 11, 2005 Author Share Posted February 11, 2005 Update: Trying to figure out the LERX and right now I am trying to decide which type to go with, a hard edged LERX, or a more softer edged one similar to the rest of the wing. I have two examples below of what I am thinking, they will be fixed to fit the design better, but which do you guys like more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 13, 2005 Author Share Posted February 13, 2005 I've fixed up the Lerxes, I'm pretty happy with them and reformed the cockpit pod, I think it came out ok, though I may do a remodel of the whole region, narrowing it. Forming a canopy that looks good will be a major pain at that point though, let me know what you all think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 get rid of the fins, it looked better without it. now it looks like something i use as a weight on my downrigger when im fishing. also try to move the cockpit way back so it has terrible visabilty but give it a very strong sensor package that the pilot doesnt need to see outside a window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 13, 2005 Author Share Posted February 13, 2005 @ZD: I don't think I will get rid of the tails entirely, I may play with them a but not entirely eliminate them. As for the cockpit, were this an early or even mid war design I might consider a design with poor visibility that relies more on sensors. However as this is late war GF has learned that a fighter without good visibility is as good as dead considering how badly sensors get scrambled in heavy fighting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 16, 2005 Author Share Posted February 16, 2005 Ok, not much progress this week, trip has not allowed me much time to work, and using the touchpad on the LT makes it a little difficult, i think I need to pick up a travel mouse. Anyway I added the folding joint to the tails, need to flesh it out more. I also added a quite simple undercarriage, that i need to fix up, add details through and really think through. It will be a traditional undercarriage though with wheels as oppossed to skids like on the Splicers. Also, I played around with the idea of making the nose more traditional in nature. I'm still debating whether to stay with the bullet nose or go wing the more conical nose. What do you guys think, appreciate your comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 16, 2005 Author Share Posted February 16, 2005 New Nose, sorry about the pic size, widescreen laptop, resize in the future, my bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted February 16, 2005 Share Posted February 16, 2005 'Disc's of Doom'.....heh, sounds a bit like my wife's pancakes . Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted February 20, 2005 Author Share Posted February 20, 2005 Haven't had much time to work on this this week since I am on travel but today I played with the thrusters and nose a little. I am considering changing the nose to be more like that of the Phantom-4, of course if I go th, this route I will refine it more, and I also will redo the canopy. I will also play with the MDC pods tonight, thoughts? And Graham, remind me not to eat at your place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.