Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 7th, 2019, 9:15 am
Nice additions.
Page 18 of 52
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 7th, 2019, 10:40 am
Nice work.
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 7th, 2019, 1:21 pm
Nice work, guys. I especially like the DC-5 series.
Been toying with the Britten-Norman Trislander since I need it for an AU I'm working on. Borrowed some components from DP's Islander, such as the undercarriage, engine nacelles and windows:
Been toying with the Britten-Norman Trislander since I need it for an AU I'm working on. Borrowed some components from DP's Islander, such as the undercarriage, engine nacelles and windows:
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 7th, 2019, 3:29 pm
Such a distinctive aircraft! Nice to see it represented here.
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 10th, 2019, 12:30 am
Italy, Aeronautica Umbra Trojani AUT.18
A competitor to any Italian monoplane fighters with a service number ending in "0"
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 12th, 2019, 1:03 am
Italy, Caproni Ca.335 Maestrale
What Belgium wanted before the war.
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 12th, 2019, 7:35 am
Great additions, I love how you bring us these lesser known types that deserve recognition.
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 14th, 2019, 9:47 pm
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 15th, 2019, 8:18 pm
Sorry! I was totally forgoten about this plane!
UK - Westland Lynx - UK Land-based variants
UK - Westland Lynx - UK Land-based variants
Re: FD Aircraft 16
Posted: April 15th, 2019, 8:46 pm
@Toxic Loki
To begin with, I'm afraid that Your C-201 is misscaled (all sources I saw give the length to be 13,8m, which is ca. 305 pixels, and on this drawing it's 350 pixels long - nearly 16m long). Besides that, it's also rather crude styllistically. Horizontal stabilizer is full of double black lines (or rather whole black blotches), there are "heavy corners" ( http://shipbucket.com/styleguide#21 ) in some places, curves/arcs also don't look good (for example, upper contour of fuselage looks like it was "pumped up" in the middle, instead of being smooth arc all the way), the antenna masts IMHO should be three pixel thick (and forward one should be outlined in black), and finally, the window frame should be 3-pixel thick instead of just two (it's thick enough to be that wide), plus the forward contour of the windshield should be black because there is a frame there too.
@Darth Panda
Excellent work!
To begin with, I'm afraid that Your C-201 is misscaled (all sources I saw give the length to be 13,8m, which is ca. 305 pixels, and on this drawing it's 350 pixels long - nearly 16m long). Besides that, it's also rather crude styllistically. Horizontal stabilizer is full of double black lines (or rather whole black blotches), there are "heavy corners" ( http://shipbucket.com/styleguide#21 ) in some places, curves/arcs also don't look good (for example, upper contour of fuselage looks like it was "pumped up" in the middle, instead of being smooth arc all the way), the antenna masts IMHO should be three pixel thick (and forward one should be outlined in black), and finally, the window frame should be 3-pixel thick instead of just two (it's thick enough to be that wide), plus the forward contour of the windshield should be black because there is a frame there too.
@Darth Panda
Excellent work!