xiziz

Interesting work there mate! seems a lot has been happening even in my absence. Liked the Dominean Embassy there, and the w2w looks good Cheers

Great work on that tower, looks really nice

just found this thread now thats what you get for hanging out at uni i guess :/ You got some really great stuff going here Loving the whole Neo Stalinism Architecture(so much that im thinking of making a few for my CJ, whenever i get around to it) Keep it up and i will be back //Edit, forgot to note the RA & RA2 bats: TOTALY AWSOME!!! The Advanced Powerplant just brings me back to the age of 8 sitting up late blasting medium tanks and cruisers with my MiG's

Originally posted by: N_O_Body xiziz: Hydrogen is more powerful? I don't think so. It is certainly capable of producing energy, but breaking the bonds in a fossil fuel, mol per mol produces a lot more energy, and unfortunately a lot more waste. quote> Hydrogen is much more explosive, which is the driving force in a combustion/jet/rocket engine, im having a hard time finding the power produced by jet fuel per molecule(found it for hydrogen without a problem), but the fact that the Space shuttle uses Hydrogen instead of a Petroleum based fuel is prettey explanatory, especially since Hydrogen is a lot more dangerous to handle(Hindenburg comes to name). However i do reserv that i might be wrong, but from what i know hydrogen is more efficent. One of the biggest problems with Hydrogen is where do you plan to get it? Electrolysis of water is not practical unless you find a non-fossil energy source to do it on a large scale. quote> This is the main problem ofc, today the most practical source for Electrolysis is by Atomic Energy, and in 50 years time or so, Fusion. So essentially you will be flying on fusion power, without having the excess weight(or endurance) of having a reactor onboard. Also, how do you plan to store it. Hydrogen migrates through metals and makes them brittle if you try to store it for any length of time. I think there are some large scale engineering problems to be solved here.quote> You store it in Cryogenic Tanks, at a very low temprature, which of course have their own set of problems, but seeing as it has already been done the technology only needs to be improved on, which is a lot cheaper than developing the technology in the first place. I see that this will become a larger and larger market over the coming decades, once the public gets its head up for this sort of new technology it will sneak its way in and eventually(probably once fuel becomes more obtainable) replace the petroleum based jet-fuels. Seeing how enviromentally aware the world is growing(atleast here in Europe) i belive that companies will start looking for technology to reduce pollution further, maybe we will se more joint European and Russian projects in the furture, the soviet union left a vast ammount of knowlege to the Russian(and other member states ofc) which they no longer have the accute need for, hence its really up to us that need or could use this technology to get help from our russian friends, and seeing how this is really happening(ISS anyone) to an even larger extent means loosing less of what one huge supernation has come up with the 70 years it existed.

coming back like a year from my last post; For me the future of Aviation will be in Hydrogen as it is now, its even more powerful than petroleum(its what for instance the space shuttle burns in its rocketengines), and the Soviets/Russians flew planes with it during the cold war, although Hydrogen is extremly hard to actually store onboard, they are solving this too(Tu-155 for example). This is good because in this form it releases no greenhouse-gases, which is a major concern nowadays. @Fusion, the problem is that we dont yet have fusion, the best estimates are about 50 years away, but even when we are able to harness Fusion Power it will require a lot of time minuturizing the technology so that its light enough for aircraft/spacecraft. Seeings as we have yet to be able to do that with standard Nuclear Energy(because of the weight needed to sheild people from the radiation, again the Soviets did fly aircraft with Nuclear Reactors onboard, and the US had a reactor developed but never did fly it because of the radiation hazards).

Looks great here! I think we should do something about the repeditivness of the maxis buildings, like get you on a good ole long tour of the STEX and LEX for new Batted Buildings Keep up the good work!

Originally posted by: colton Are there any mid sized aircraft coming out soon? Kinda tired of 747 and regional jets, kinda boring with out the middle class you know? Looking for 737,757,767,&777.quote> Both the B737 and A320 are in the works by various members and constalations, i might get around to start of a Ilyshin or Tupolev over the chrismas break, though no Promises. The Trippel Seven is already in the works by the Airport Team, several 767's were released by Kumba and Filasimo i belive over at sc4d.

Originally posted by: gndrew Can someone post the links to download all of Voltaire's stuff? I couldn't find any links (at least in the first 8 pages of this thread). Thanks.quote> just search Voltare on STEX, while at it why not search for Ace_Bovenopdeberg too. Those are more or less the essentials, then theres a few more things from various other users too, just be sure to read the readme's, can save you a lot of pain and make your airports look 100 times nicer

Originally posted by: OffTopic I like the idea of football fever's airport, but there is a serious lack of a runway.quote> My guess, looking at the planes(or spaceships if you will, because they look more like interplanetary cruisers than planes), is that they would simply detach the jetways and depart using anti-gravity devices to make them float. For me a spaceport serving ships this size would have to be orbital or at the best, low-gee enviroment, i think the earths atmosphere is to much of a hinderance for ships this size. A space Elevator with a large docking ring would be more fitting, or just a large orbital using shuttles to acend to the surface. However i do like the look of the spaceport, makes me think all Armitage III, from the introduction scene.

Originally posted by: BlackPhoenixSim4 How do you get the new 747 planes to fly and move about in your airports?quote> See, looks a lot better and more pleasant without caps And on the question, you dont. they are static, just like whatever other bat you download. they sit in place and function just like a park. its purley for eyecandy, and since they are not automata, they will never move. Thanks for depressing caps-lock next time ^__^

Originally posted by: ccecill Wow. Thank you so much. I didn't think I'd get a response like that! I was reading the readmees last night while making the runways. Is that not accurate? (I did that first.)quote> The readmees are very accurate, so much so that there beyond beeing able to set a price on if you follow the readme, and count tiles, youll have a perfectly realistic runway(as far as sc4 allows ofc). //edit, wrong quote Im hoping it might help others aswell(and i was boored XD)

Originally posted by: ccecill 1. What's the difference between a concourse and a terminal? Which one goes on the street? quote> 1. Terminal, thats the name for an entire structure, but primarly it goes for the Entrance part, where you would have the Checkin, Luggage Collecting, Security Checks and the bulk of tax-free shopping. Basicly a Terminal is the side of the airport facing the roads & bustops. Concource is the side where you board your Aircraft from, whenever it be through walking out of a door and up a stair to the plane or through a jetway. Heres a picture of Stockholm Arlanda to Explain. Terminal 2 is in a style common for smaller airports or older terminals, it dosnt feature any peers so it only has jetways on one side of the building, in this case the terminal is the part to the right and the concource to the left. Terminal 3 would have its terminal in the bottom part, which features an entrance and such and no jetways, while its concource would be that portruding peer. Terminal 4 & 5 are built up on the same way, with all their jetways on peirs. this is because its more efficent use of space this way. Oh, and yeah, Arlanda dosnt have a Termnal 1 at all, though Bromma(another of stockholms smaller airports) is sometimes rumord to be called Terminal 1. 2. What would some of you build first? The airport itself, or the runways?quote>2. Personally, i allways start by deciding what kind of configuration i want(ie number of runways and which direction there in) and directly relevant, the size of the airport(Small domestic to large international etc). Then, next step is to draw out aproximate locations for the runways and terminals, u use the road and avenue tools for this, also mark out taxiways when that is done. First airportpices i plop would be the runways, just the ends, lighting & exits, so i know that they will fit into the intended area. from this i start adding the taxiways, i generally space my taxiways with 6-8 tiles, some people have them as close as 2 tiles from eachother. personal preferance i guess, i think its more realistic with larger distances. Then once you start getting close to the terminal you will want to start plopping the outlines and jetways, youll probably want to try a few different setups. then once all the runways, taxiways and terminals are completed, you can start filling in the gaps, grass, tarmac holes in the taxiways, id reccoment to wait untill this stage to plop the final parts of diagonal taxiways and runways, as it saves you time if you need to redo them because something you wanted didnt fit or align properly. 3. Can anyone give me a link to a cj where I can look at a good, realistic airport? (with the new Ace pack)quote>A good place to start hunting: Show us your airport @ sc4dev Show us your airport @ ST Otherwise keep in eye out for mine, which is loosly based on the above Arlanda, but scaled down to two runways and three terminals with two peers. As i didnt need a 60 gate airport. Hope this post is to some help atleast //Edit: Forgot to mention, the information in RMIP's readmees is invaluable

Actually runways are made really simple; Basicly its divided into two parts, which may be different(ie have different markings/lightingsetup) but will allways be the same lenth. Its all described in the readme to RMIP-2 SAE Vol 1 with the correct distances in tiles and all. First off we have a centre of the runway, from which both sides are equally long, this is important to know, because all lots will be facing away from this point(so that the markings on the shoulders tilt the correct direction). For the example ive made a "demo" ruwnay, just the ends and the middle. The botom right is the "start" it then runs with desired ammount of markings towards the centre. The centre looks like on the picture on most runways, there are allways exceptions, but this atleast looks the best in sc4. note how the shoulders look, and the direction of the markers, they allways point towards the centre, so a pilot knows where the centre is(i guess). The "end" is the same as the "start" except it is reversed. Sometimes this part wont have lighting or markings at all, in that case just remove those and have it run into the threshhold. there is allmost allways a taxiway or a taxiway loop at the end of a runway, and we have to have these in sc4, as we dont have pieces to do otherwise. For markings and Lighting refer to the Readme's included with the RMIP-2 downloads. Or use Google Earth to look at Airports. Distance between markings is generally 10 squares from start to start, or 6-8 from end to start(depending on piece). Remember, the placement arrow will ALLWAYS on the runway pieces point AWAY from the centre of the runway(the exception beeing taxiway exits, which point towards the centreline) Hope this is to any help

Originally posted by: CowboySean Although I already posted this, I hope yuo saw it... Could you make the airports have capacities (and maybe jobs?) Thanks!quote> Thats already in the works, to make 2x2/1x1 lots that function like airports. Jobs may be included, however i have not yet been able to succsessfully implement jobs on a lot. though i know its possible as Joerg's original pack had jobs on the functional lot(an ATCT).