WIP: XT-300 Piranha v1

[Vince T]

Edit: Images no longer available.

[Major Wes Janson]

Made me think about the far side joke about the flying Piranhas...

[General Edor Crespin]

I know it's probably just something with the picture or something, but why is the engine on the left transparent?

[Vince T]

Oh, yeah, that's just the picture. I just added a starfield filling end obviously fogot to set down the colour tolerance - that's why the nose is 'transparent, too.

[Major Wes Janson]

Oh, i didn't even see the nose. wait a second...

[General Edor Crespin]

One time I wrote a story where a T/I had a speckled white paint scheme (Starfield background..). I'll have to try that in XWA sometime.

[graphicx3000]

good as usual vince

[TK-204]

Agreed! Nice!

[Vince T]

Well, as my common level of detail rose with time passing I'm updating the XT-300 Piranha Model a little.<P>Question: What gun-layout would you prefer?<P>Layout 1: 'Classic' DIP Cannons on the wings.<BR> <P>Layout 2: Quad DIP Array Beneath the cockpit:<BR>

[Thesto Neroses]

Wouldn't the wing arrangement be more natural for the pilot's sightline?

[Beerman]

the wing config would increase chances of a hit, rather than grouping them. Plus, when you fire the quad config you'd see a big flat and imho unattractive line of lasers. bundeling them like a cort's turret would look dumb on a fighter, so wing config gets my vote

[K_Kinnison]

I dont like the wing configuration becasue the beams "flash" could blind the pilot, much like WWII P-38 Pilots at night. THat is the part of the reason of the flash suppresors on the wing tips of the X-wing.<P>Along that reason alone I would prefer the beaneath the cockpit design.. tho I would prefer them to be more forward of the cockpit. <P>IMHO i think to the sides of the cokpit on the port and starboard would be ideal as far as location and spread

[Vince T]

OK, here are two more:<P>Variant 3: 'Sawed' DIP Cannons similar to seen on the Barracuda<BR> <BR> <P>EDIT: Another one:<BR>Standard DIP cannons at the sides:<BR> <p>[ 30 January 2005: Message edited by: General_Trageton ]

[BattleDog]

The last one gets my vote. I don't like the sawn off ones in varient three.

[Geekwithpower]

Standard.<P>But, put those seperate cannons on a bigger brute, baby!

[Major Wes Janson]

I like the last two designs. <P>One more idea...what if you put a triple mount under the nose in a triangle formation, like a chain gun?

[Vince T]

@OPT, I already have <P>@Wes, I tried the gattling idea, but it looks rather crappy on the Piranha, taking away a lot of its sleekness.<p>[ 30 January 2005: Message edited by: General_Trageton ]

[Knight26]

I'd go with eihter versions, 2, 4, or 5. If the intakes need to be kept clear go with version 2. And, having them under the nose like that would actually make them highly accurate, plus they would easily concentrate their fire one point. Putting them beside the pit on the wings would easily blind the pilot when they fire so taht is a bad idea. I remember your original had them down on the wing tips, getting away from that is a great idea, keeping your weapons close to centerline provides for much great accuracy.

[mateus]

The 4th!<BR>Looking great!

[Beerman]

guess I shouldn't argue with the engineer

[Tony Knightcrawler]

I like the second one in your last post.

[graphicx3000]

#2 (1st post)

[Knight26]

Man but my profile was dated, didn't even realize it until I saw Beerman's post. And Beerman, wise is the one who heed's the advice of the resident aerospace and weapon's engineer.

[BattleDog]

Well if you put them on the underside you should integrate them into the fusalauge, rather than just glued underneith.<p>[ 01 February 2005: Message edited by: BattleDog ]

[K_Kinnison]

I prefer the last one.. bucause that was part of my idea, i think.