|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:28 |
|
|
Terrible Robot posted:I would pay so much money to see this become reality. gently caress. You'll be able to play the original on the Xbox One soon, and supposedly it'll look better than ever. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/06/xbox-expanding-backwards-compatibility-program-to-original-xbox-games/
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Live action crimson skies reboot looking good Area 2088.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
n0tqu1tesane posted:You'll be able to play the original on the Xbox One soon, and supposedly it'll look better than ever. That is not the original Crimson Skies, but that is neat. The original came out for the PC back in 2000, and it was loving amazing. I still have the fullsize box and the manual done up like a period magazine for air pirates. xthetenth posted:Let me tell you about this LP: I love a good LP, thanks Terrible Robot fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:Area 2088. What's this? All I found was a teaser for a movie in 2012 which in itself looks cool but doesn't have anything close to Crimson Skies in asthetics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fhVjs6htko
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Inacio posted:And since I had fun doing that: Thanks for doing those.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 06:18
|
|
|
Inacio posted:
FYI Your scale is off on the SR-71 front view. The wingspan should be about half the XB-70 like in the other pics. These are cool though. You should add a standard C-172 or something as a reference like how the Voyager Man is added to everything
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 08:57
|
|
|
Stolen from the gif thread. http://i.imgur.com/jy7D4tg.gifv
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 13:45
|
|
|
F-16 Pez dispenser
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:What's this? All I found was a teaser for a movie in 2012 which in itself looks cool but doesn't have anything close to Crimson Skies in asthetics: It's a reference to this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
Fund this
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
Yes please
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/RachelEPas/status/875065527726727169 Didn't know UA was trying to roll their own afterburners.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:https://twitter.com/RachelEPas/status/875065527726727169 Right over the trench drain too. That's a huge pain in the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:FYI Your scale is off on the SR-71 front view. The wingspan should be about half the XB-70 like in the other pics. I've gone down one heck of a rabbit hole https://streamable.com/64wyj
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:https://twitter.com/RachelEPas/status/875065527726727169 Nothing new. My wife's CRJ's pop wing tank leaks at least once a month, she works for UEJ.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:like how the Voyager Man is added to everything Pioneer, not Voyager.  Pioneer 10 and 11 had the plaque with the etching of the people on it. Voyager 1 and 2 had golden records that are etched with instructions of how to play them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
So without need to explain why I googled that immediately and found a 75 page assessment from Wright-Patt on it. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/529372.pdf EDIT: link fixed Mazz fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
Mazz posted:So without need to explain why I googled that immediately and found a 75 page assessment from Wright-Patt on it. Wait, it was a real (crazy) proposal? I thought it was a photoshop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Mazz posted:So without need to explain why I googled that immediately and found a 75 page assessment from Wright-Patt on it. it works if you specify http instead of https http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/529372.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:it works if you specify http instead of https Yep, thanks, that's what I thought it was but I wasn't going to bother on my phone since it wasn't even showing me the right link, fixed it above Mazz fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
I never understood how they got images like this. But now I do! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tgOyU34D44 Very very cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Oh the humanity! https://twitter.com/msiggyy/status/875387281426841602
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
https://pgsil.github.io/plane-view/ Should probably only work on Chrome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Inacio posted:https://pgsil.github.io/plane-view/ Works in Firefox too. The XB-70 suddenly seems small, compared to the 380. Well done! Now you just need to add all other planes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
Inacio posted:https://pgsil.github.io/plane-view/ In top view your XB-70 is deflected from the horizontal by some small amount. If you line the noses up it really shows.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:09
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:In top view your XB-70 is deflected from the horizontal by some small amount. If you line the noses up it really shows. This what you mean?  I noticed it too. Really odd. I got these from NASA, Navy and Airbus, I didn't really make the vectors myself. e: but at least the scale should be roughly correct now Ola posted:Works in Firefox too. The XB-70 suddenly seems small, compared to the 380. Well done! Now you just need to add all other planes. Thanks! All that's needed to add more planes is a vector file (AI, PDF, SVG, etc) with a 3-view of the plane (front, side and top views). If you really want me to add more planes, link me some of those files and I'll give it a go! It's really not hard at all to add more. Example: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/McDONNELL_DOUGLAS_F-4_PHANTOM_II.svg
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
...i added the f-4. send help i can't stop https://pgsil.github.io/plane-view/
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
There's a lot of SVG on Wikipedia. Here are a few fighters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dassault_Rafale_version.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Viggen.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:JAS39_Gripen.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eurofighter_Typhoon_line_drawing.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Panavia_Tornado_IDS.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GENERAL_DYNAMICS_F-16_FIGHTING_FALCON.svg Unfortunately, the F-14, F-15, both types of F-18, F-22, F-35, Mirage 2000, Jaguar, Draken, all had some jpg/png/gif rubbish instead of SVG.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
Oh lord, that's a lot of planes. I'll add planes if yall send me proper files. This is how I make them: - in Illustrator (or equivalent), change the scale to cm (right click the rulers) - select one of the three views, and scale with 1cm = 1m (41m length -> 41cm in Illustrator, 33m wingspan -> 33cm in Illustrator) - make the artboard fit the plane tightly - save as SVG Noone probably cares enough, but I need to give myself a break. i hope i dont end up adding even more planes any time soon but i doubt i can control myself
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
Mazz posted:So without need to explain why I googled that immediately and found a 75 page assessment from Wright-Patt on it. This is cold war as gently caress. I'm not even sure why they thought they needed this in the first place aside from "some sort of C-5-esque carrier aircraft" could be useful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Apparently this gif is as old as me* and I'm 30 *probably not actually true pik_d fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
Inacio, that thing is cool and good and so are you. Also, it works just fine in Opera as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
CBJamo posted:Inacio, that thing is cool and good and so are you. Also, it works just fine in Opera as well. Thank you! Glad you liked it!
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:What's this? All I found was a teaser for a movie in 2012 which in itself looks cool but doesn't have anything close to Crimson Skies in asthetics: Sorry mate, it looked futuristic to me so I imagined a futuristic reboot of the series, which would just have to be called Area 2088. As penance, I'll link the Strike Command Let's Play again. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3815107 It's a goon-run PMC, air ops only since we don't have a boat. Yet. The way it goes is, goons sperg out about what planes to buy next for 15 pages. Then Yooper feeds us story and plot twists for 8-10 more, then we get a mission description, people post detailed operational plans with silly code names and we vote on them. When an actual mission finally happens, Yooper grabs a beer, fires up C:MANO and livestreams the mayhem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:So somewhat related to discussion a few pages ago, but I've been building up as large a collection as possible of ugly, oddly-designed, ill-advised and otherwise generally vaguely suspect airplane designs and I think it might be of interest here. The criteria are flexible and subjective but the intention is to be as representative as possible of aircraft of all types and eras that are either ugly (oddly proportioned, bedecked with radar blisters, boxy, etc.), strange (unconventional configuration or propulsion setup, niche specialization), or an interesting failure; or preferably some combination of all of those. Here's an imgur album of all the pictures below for easier scrolling, although they're out of order and unlabeled Very cool, looking forward to going through this when I have a bit more time
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
What does it mean that half of those links are purple for me?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:28 |
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:So somewhat related to discussion a few pages ago, but I've been building up as large a collection as possible of ugly, oddly-designed, ill-advised and otherwise generally vaguely suspect airplane designs and I think it might be of interest here. The criteria are flexible and subjective but the intention is to be as representative as possible of aircraft of all types and eras that are either ugly (oddly proportioned, bedecked with radar blisters, boxy, etc.), strange (unconventional configuration or propulsion setup, niche specialization), or an interesting failure; or preferably some combination of all of those. Here's an imgur album of all the pictures below for easier scrolling, although they're out of order and unlabeled Super nice. I suggest the Facetmobile. http://www.facetmobile.com/ I've met the designer a few times, gives an excellent talk at Oshkosh about why aircraft fail. Also tells some pretty funny stories about how the security apparatus reacts when a Northrop aerodynamicist shows up at Oshkosh in a faceted airplane. Also needs some F7U Gutless Cutlass. Slo-Tek fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 06:01
|
|
