Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

3DVir Inter Astrum Reboot

1121315171824

Posts

  • KhayKhay0 Posts: 0Member
    This ship seems to be begging to be buried under dozens and dozens of aftermarket equipments :D
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    nice, preferrd the more streamlined earlier design for the liner though, that old one could have been atmosphere capable as well. still great work on the redesign.
  • colbmistacolbmista2 Posts: 0Member
    nice, preferrd the more streamlined earlier design for the liner though, that old one could have been atmosphere capable as well. still great work on the redesign.
    he put that one one the backburner beacuse it looked to much like a ship design from b5
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    And tonights update. Got the base of the engine assembly done, added magnetic bumpers for the folded radiators and started work on the commo tower. Still need to add connectors for the radiators, tart up the engine bells, add a bit of detail to the heat shield and do the passenger module. So far I'm pretty jazzed with how it is coming together.
    w7h0.png
  • TomboTombo0 Posts: 0Member
    Looking good :thumb: How long/wide is it and what's its capacity? Also how will the passengers disembark? Is there a shuttle bay or are there simple docking ports?
    I suppose if you were feeling masochistic you could put a hinge on the front and have the whole heat shield swing out to reveal a shuttle bay :p. On second thoughts that would be rather silly
  • TomboTombo0 Posts: 0Member
    Why the heck am I getting bloody double posts? Sodding computer!
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    Tombo wrote: »
    Looking good :thumb: How long/wide is it and what's its capacity? Also how will the passengers disembark? Is there a shuttle bay or are there simple docking ports?
    It's 250m long, but the habitation module is 58m tall and 94m in diameter. I'm guessing around 200 to 250 passengers and 50 crew. I'm planing on a collapsible docking ring rather than than shuttlebays.
  • KhayKhay0 Posts: 0Member
    The placement of the communication mast is really great.
    I didn't imagine it being THAT big :)
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    great work
  • publiusrpubliusr550 Posts: 1,747Member
    Looks quite realistic
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    Thanks for the comments guys.
    I've started texturing, going for an overall very drab monotone scheme. Basically just have the heat shield and forward hull done so far.
    hfta.png
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    very nice, the texture effects are pretty good on that.
  • colbmistacolbmista2 Posts: 0Member
    Not really a fan of the heat sheild texture
  • StonecoldStonecold331 Posts: 0Member
    Texture on heat shield looks interesting, but do you intend to simulate "burns" from previous aerobrakings? If so, it won`t do without some post-render correction (or completely different texture). And those white details on forward hull looks somewhat like cathedral windows :)

    Other then that - awesome looking model, just as all your works are.

    Here is a reference image (note - the hottest place is the bottom of the capsule. Look at how burn marks change from white to black with change in temperature gradient):
    31353_iss16_landing07.jpg
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    Man what a busy week! Didn't have a chance to work on much but the ferry is just about done and I started working on the next round. This one is going to be frontier fighters designed to be rugged multipurpose craft for service in the boonies. This one is the American. The cockpit is a placeholder. I think it stick with the establishe look of the US craft, maybe a bit too advanced looking for the purpose but I'm happy with the overall shape.
    qzza.png
    Also going to see about developing this one, maybe soviet, maybe CEGD. The shape came from a rough I did as a suggestion on spacefighter's 'history of spacefighters' thread. I re-arranged the parts and sort of dig the way it came out. Obviously this is just a rough idea.
    ksyu.png
  • BorklessBorkless171 Posts: 0Member
    Looks great! That top render reminds me of the Boeing JSF, but somewhat cooler looking. It has a sort of jovial brawler look to it.
  • StonecoldStonecold331 Posts: 0Member
    I like the shape of US fighter. Sort of crossbreed between Corsair II and "classical" US designs of VIA. It got nice vibe of blend between past and present designs.

    Soviet|CEGD fighter looks somewhat strange. Maybe overly-pointy wings make it look this way, I don`t know.
  • TomboTombo0 Posts: 0Member
    You can definitely see the lineage in the US fighter, especially in the wings and the end of the fuselage. That other fighter has a certain Soviet vibe in the bow section, beyond that it's totally unique. Hmmm, maybe its a CEGD fighter which incorporates design technology "borrowed" from the R-USSR. Are those wings variable geometry?
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    both of them very nice, the american fighter looks like it could turn out to be something awesome. that russian one(looks like it should be a bomber a bit like the tupolev tu160) based on my design is also pretty cool, i agree the ends of the wings are a bit pointed but for now they look good like that. despite being a seemingly very simple element of the design it's nose looks great.
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    Thanks as always for the comments.
    @Borkless;I like ships with personality too! I'm actually thinking of making this the JSF of its day; overbudget and long delayed also trying to do waaay too much with one airframe.
    @Stonecold; Thanks, that was exactly what I was aiming for, it's going to be an older design that was originally a frontline fighter that has relegated to less important duties. In that respect I imagine it would be like an F-4 or MiG-21 in the later stages of their careers.
    @Tombo; Right now they are variable geometry but that might be going away. Also might make it a soviet/cegd joint design.
    @Psacefighter; Thanks! It wouldn't even be here if it weren't for you. The pointy wingtips will probably be rethought as well.

    Here is an update. I'm really thinking about doing it in a bare metal finish and am playing around with the reflectivity and shine.
    One thing for certain is it is going to have a sharkmouth :)
    o12q.png
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    bbzwbbzw wrote: »

    Here is an update. I'm really thinking about doing it in a bare metal finish and am playing around with the reflectivity and shine.
    One thing for certain is it is going to have a sharkmouth :)
    o12q.png
    bare metal is nice and so are the panel lines but i think i preferred the overall shape in the previous picture of it. it seemed stretched a bit more on the nose-tail axis and it looked a little more streamlined which i preferred.
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    Not stretched or shrunk a bit, just a different angle.
  • TomboTombo0 Posts: 0Member
    You know spacefighter has an interesting point about the Soviet/Imperial fighter. That part of the fuselage between the engines could hold a bomb/missile bay. Or maybe even a swap-outable* mission adaptable pallet, you known the sort of thing - recon pack, strike missile launchers, or extra fuel tanks.

    *It's a real word honest :p
  • KhayKhay0 Posts: 0Member
    The air-intake-looking thing under the nose reminds me of the XF-32 :)
    Not so sure about the other craft, though. It doesn't look bad, but it really stands out of the usual shapes we saw so far. But then again it didn't realize the awesomeness of the Mig-233 before the final sheet, so maybe it will turn out absolutely great as well.
  • StonecoldStonecold331 Posts: 0Member
    I think, the main visual problem with Soviet-CEGD fighter is that design is too "nose-heavy". Wings are moved to the back too much in swept position. If you could move wings a bit forward (for example, make the base of the wing delta-shaped, instead of arrow shaped), or give it somewhat longer tail - it would look better IMHO.
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    Was thinking about the JSF and F-4 parallels and think by lopping the nose off and changing the engines it can either be an earlier (or later) mark if we go the F-4 route or the navalized version on the JSF one. Either way, I like the look of the snub-nose one, looks tough and scrappy to me. Might switch the engine pods and have the squarer ones on the snub nose.
    g39.png
  • StonecoldStonecold331 Posts: 0Member
    Looks like earlier model to me. Also, why nose intake, if there`s no thruster in the fuselage? Maybe you can add third, central thruster, to justify the intake (since I DO like the shape...)?
  • colbmistacolbmista2 Posts: 0Member
    Stonecold wrote: »
    Looks like earlier model to me. Also, why nose intake, if there`s no thruster in the fuselage? Maybe you can add third, central thruster, to justify the intake (since I DO like the shape...)?
    could be an aurodynamic thing to keep it it stable in flight intakes have more then one purpose you know
  • spacefighterspacefighter2 Posts: 0Member
    better with the nose on although the version without the nose could be some kind of prototype or another version.
  • bbzwbbzwbbzwbbzw1 Posts: 0Member
    A little progress made on the engines. To be honest I never really thought of the blunt noses on the US fighters to be intakes, but sort of shrouds for flat panel sensors or something.
    zkd.png
    I'm rapidly falling out of love with the idea of a bare metal finish...
Sign In or Register to comment.