Phyrox

Don't get me wrong, I love my cars. When I lost my dream car chevelle, I was bummed. But that is a sorry statement indeed...in all seriousness, there is a lot more to life than sheet metal and big blocks

Too bad you have to sell, but I understand the need. I have never been the biggest fan of the early "plain jane" camaros, so it isn't the tragedy that it might be. Hope you get a good sale on it.

I don't think it has been discussed much. My only working knowledge of submarine-launched aircraft comes from World War Two and earlier, so maybe there were experiments since then that I am unaware of. I don't recall any fighters launching from subs. Most of the big interwar powers toyed with the idea of aircraft launching submarines, all of which carried observation aircraft, not fighters. The only classes I can recall off the top of my head are the modified British M-class and the French Surcouf...but I know there are more. During World War Two of course the Japanese I-400 class is the best known of the aircraft carrying submarines, and it did have a dedicated attack aircraft designed for it (not a fighter though). As for as how they launched, they were all (to my knowledge) seaplanes. Most were not really "launched" by the submarine as much as carried on board and "released" onto the open water with the help of a crane. The later Japanese craft however had catapults similar to what was seen on aircraft carriers to actually launch the aircraft. It is entirely conceivable that some post-war experiments with small rocket/jet fighters would have taken place, very similar to the early submarine-missle experiments. In fact...now that I think about it, this sounds familiar. Maybe the sub used to test the "loon" or whatever the US V-1 was called was used to test fire a small manned aircraft? Hope someone else has more on your "sub launched fighters"

Well, not exactly a supercar, but this is what I'm workin' on: I call it "blasphemy"

Jeesus, 1st Border Red Devil always seems to be in a bad mood. Whether someone makes an offhand comment about Southern Cross, or expresses distain for a forgotten D&D campaign setting...the guy is nothing but bile. Relax. Some people don't like what you do. If someone, god forbid, gets their facts wrong...there are ways to bring it to their attention that don't involve such inappropriate outbursts.

So...you like Underworld, and underage girl's panties. I don't think we'll take your endorsement too seriously.

had to change to .gif, but at least it worked:

try#1

I have the ones I used to put that image together, but I have larger, better ones now. edit- won't let me attach the other three images. I'll try again later.

I don't want to get in the way of the current discussion, but I figured I would post a small picture of the project I posted about a long time ago in this thread. It is my fictional seaplane racer. I ended up using floats from a Kawanishi E7K. It is much larger than the real interwar raceplanes...but what can ya do? I know I am not the most skilled modeller (i don't even try to weather), but with my limited skill set, I am very happy with the results.

Quite right. Those same "purists" also seem to forget that the original '64 GTO was a pretty mundane-looking car. It is only nostalgia that argues otherwise. GTOs didn't really look like musclecars until 66. Even then it isn't too aggresive. You have to wait until, what...68 before it starts to look like something other than a regular people-mover with a special package. edit: although, I should add, I am probably as much a "retro-freak" as anyone.

Hmm, Most of his (non-Mac 7) stuff from his design works are good. Everything else is not. Most of it is just forgettable. Nothing that stands out like the VF-1. I like some of his Armored Core stuff, but there is not as much variety as there could be. I hate to say it, but I'd call him a one-hit-wonder.

I'd agree with Berttt. The info is good. The writing is too lose. After years of reading papers, I still find it difficult to offer specific advice on how to "fix" this problem. I usually say something along the lines of "tighten up your prose." But that might not be very helpful. First of all, try to eliminate or minimize overtly subjective statements. Aim for it to be more akin to an essay. It will read better and be taken more seriously by its readers. Write like you are giving a speach, not talking to a buddy. "...had itchy triggers fingers on nuclear missiles ready the blow each other into oblivion and take as much as the rest of the world they can with them." ^ Again, I cannot put my finger on it, but sentences like this would seem to turn off some serious readers. While sort-of true in a general sense, it simplifies and exaggerates something which most of your readers will already understand (so it is oversimplified and redundant). Don't think I am crapping on your work up there. It is good. Some decent research and well put together. But you asked Berttt for clarification, and I figured I would add what I could. Good work.

Ok, this is a question for the auto modelers here. Where would I go to look for lists of car models representing older, classic european cars. I have been into aero modeling for awhile, and know how to get just about anything that flew...but with automobiles I have a hard time finding anything that isn't a musclecar or a rice rocket. To hint at what I am looking for, at the moment I am smiten with the Alfa Romeo 8C, and the Aston Martin C-type. Please help me...I don't know where to look.

I raced one the other day, swerved at him doing about 120 and he freaked out and I cut him off... I told BSU about it... Seems I am a bit of an a-hole. 344553[/snapback] poo like that gets people killed.

THAT isn't a jaguar, THIS is a jaguar:

There is nothing "rude" about correcting someone's mistakes. It is all in how you do it, and he did a fine job. No capitalization is sloppy, but using the wrong word changes the meaning of a statement. You don't have to be on a grammar forum to care about using the right words.

I know you are just joking...but none of those movies have monkeys in them. Apes: yes, monkeys: no. One of my pet peeves.

WHOO! Mike RB is back! Sorry, can't help much with the model references, but I can't wait to see the results of your getting back to this.

I don't think I have realized this in my previous years(?) at MW, but this Yellowlightman seems to be a bit of an a-hole.

It isn't the retro-aspect that I like, it is that it is clearly designed to be more than a car. It isn't a classic Bugatti or Alfa-Romeo, but it is beautiful for beauty's sake. Too many concept cars try to look "aggressive," or "cute," or whatever. This car evinces a design philosophy that I am drawn to. It isn't the retroness that I like, but the aesthetic itself. To my eye it is very similar in many ways to the Maybach Exelero concept that came out a few months back. Both evoke the lines of earlier cars, but really succeed because they "feel" like cars that were designed by artists, not corporate committees. (although the Exelero could use different headlights)

Wow, I would love it if a car company would tackle something like that. If someone out there decided to make beautiful cars again... Not much chance of that though.

I agree that it is an over-the-top kit, but I would wager that most rear intakes you see on front engined cars are there to cool the brakes. At least, that is how I have always understood them. So, it isn't as stupid as front wheel drive cars with fat rear tires and large rear-deck spoilers.

I think a bigger problem are his "action figure" hips

Eh?