What the heck is that?
- Home
- Board: /vr/ - Retro Games
- Reading: What the heck is that?
If something like that is sticking out on the bottom of your spaceship, then how the hell are you supposed to land the spaceship without breaking that thing off?
>>2781706
It probably folds up.
If something like that is sticking out on the bottom of your bird, then how the hell are you supposed to land the bird without breaking that thing off?
what about this one?
i don't see any fucking joints or anything that lead me to believe that these wings/tails can fold up
Could it be a case of the ships being designed only for space docks, with no intention of ever grounding them?
>Land
>Spaceship
Why would you want to do that? Just dock them at a station or elevator and send your crew and cargo to the surface and back.
>>2781706
It's likely just some faked 3D perspective thing which can be falsely interpreted.
>>2781706
>land the spaceship
Could just dock to a spacestation and not be meant for landing at all, use your fucking head retard OP
>>2781706
>how do they expect this ship to land when it's much easier and cheaper to just send away parties instead of slogging a massive ship in and out of a planet's gravity well?
In the ocean.
Awesome game
My favorite part is the desert stage with giant worms, that goes underwater with giant octopi
>>2782913
What if its a desert planet ?
>>2781706
Landing gear brah
nice troll thread
>>2783316
>Landing gear
Where are the wheels?
>>2783343
They are in the third (Z) plane that you can't see because it's a 2D game. There are no visible wings either for other displayed spaceships, yet it seems they are flying just fine.
>>2781706
arent spaceships are build on spacedock, space bridges, spaceplatforms? at least big ones
>>2781706
what spaceship? that is a fucking pistol
omg who designs these kinds of things
>>2783567
Real life spacecraft always look like they're about to crumble.
I'm pretty sure future humans will think we were crazy/retarded to use such things.
>>2783571
Actually, it's more likely that most future spacecraft will never have to land at all, because going in and out of an atmosphere is ridiculously inefficient.
>>2783571
>I'm pretty sure future humans will think we were crazy/retarded to use such things.
I doubt it. Space stations have a pretty good safety record when you think about it, especially compared to, say, rockets. We don't think humans in the 1600s were crazy for riding wooden ships across the oceans.
>>2783567
Mir looks a lot less crazy when you realize it's modular and was assembled in space: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir#Assembly
>>2781706
>spaceship
>land
