3D) ]Klyros

[ArcaneFalcon]

I think the wings should attach to niether the tail or the legs.  They should attach down the back, but should stop at the legs.  Why do they need to be attached for such a long distance?  The muscle is contained in the extra arm thing that runs the length of the wings, and all the lift/speed are being produced by the ends of the wings.  The wings look great though!

:emerald:

[Seytra]

Looks very good!

While I\'m not completely sure which version I prefer, attaching the wings to the tail seems to be better ergonomically, because they\'d be able to land more easily if the legs can be freely moved, which they could not if they\'d need to hold the wings in place. Therefore, I\'d say the wings should attach to the tail.

On another note, the tail should start approximately half of it\'s diameter higher.

Also, the tail is of about the right size I\'d say, because it needs to be strong to support the wings and balance them to allow for extended steering.
However, it needs to be flexible so that they can bend it upwards while walking so that it will not touch the ground and get damaged by obstacles. Bending it forwards (between the legs and up) would look... strange at best ). Maybe they\'d just curl up the lower part of the tail.

The upper arms look too thick IMO, the legs are OK (they can\'t be thicker for the extra weight, and not less thick, because they need to support the body and run).

I also think that the hair mesh idea would be a good idea for the spikes.

Very, very good!

[Seytra]

Originally posted by ArcaneFalcon
Why do they need to be attached for such a long distance?  The muscle is contained in the extra arm thing that runs the length of the wings, and all the lift/speed are being produced by the ends of the wings.

This isn\'t because of extra power, but because of extra area. The bigger the area, the better they\'ll be able to hover, i.e., it reduces the required flapping frequency. Increasing the area at this position (i.e., near the body) will have the same effect as will increasing it at the tips of the wings, but it\'ll require considerably less effort to flap, because the extra area will not need to be moved a great distance with each flap, it\'s weight will be at a shorter lever, the movement speed of it will also be way lower, and the friction will also have a shorter lever. It\'ll not add to lifting power (for gaining height), however, which is the only backdraw of addign extra area at this position, but since it requires so few extra power, that isn\'t a major problem (i.e., adding extra area at other places in addition to it will not be harder because of that).

[Enter_the_Xero]

I do not really have a clear reason, but the face does not look right. Maybe the wings should be a tick smaller when coming close to the back so there would not be any problem with connecting them to the legs/tail...

[leinir]

I see, yeah, down the back of the legs = bad idea, I agree Thanks for showing it Just hit me what the down-the-side-of-the-tail would be like; it would make the Klyros resemble a manta-ray with arms and legs Not a good/bad thing, just an observation *giggles* Also, I\'d say that reading Seytra\'s message regarding having the wings attached to the legs, it would indeed make it difficult for Klyros to land gracefully (though not impossible).

Your idea with the spines down the back, like having long hair as you say, seems a great idea to me. It would seem a good way to differentiate one character from another, the same way other races have hair styles. Size of the spines, maybe defined by a beginning point and an ending point, and a maximum height (so you could move it along the line defined by your spine and over the top of the head and define how large it is, during character creation) would be a very good thing Of course, if something like that gets implemented, some serious work would need doing to the character creation system, methinks, but that\'s another story

Randomly, but in key with the discussion of why the wings are so large: I remember being told by a friend (same friend I was discussing it with a couple of weeks back, see earlier messages in this thread) that if you would have a person about the same size as a human being (like the Klyros (or, which was the case with what she was telling me about, an angel), even with light bird-like bones, would need a wingspan the size of around a Boeing 737 to take flight. That would be a good reason as to why the Klyros only flies for a short while, even with the large area they have here

[XpYtZ]

Zeraph, I am not sure how easy this is, but could we have a shot of it in the standard position (the way it would look while doing a buisiness transaction) and/or sitting. Just so I can get a look at how the wings fold up while it is doing \'ground\' work as compaired to flying. It would make them really tired to have their wings fully extended all the time and I am just curious.
If not that\'s fine also.

[Magerranger]

For that he would need to finish it by adding the biped.. its very anoying to add a biped (need to get evey bone just right) and you\'d prolly have to use more pleases in your request to get him to go through that :p

[Zeraph]

Well, I usually do not use BIPED because the skeleton structure of most of the stuff I model is not humanoid, however I\'ll have to add bones to the BIPED for the wings etc.

Of course I\'m going to fold the wings with bones, but before I do that, I need to finish the model, I\'m going to make the arms look better & then finish the face. after that I need to join & tweak the model & then I can add bones then animations such as walking attacking & all, they will mostly be with the wings folded I personally want the face to look like it does in the MB splash:

I think this way makes it look more oval-like:
\"They have an oval head\" as it says in the description on the website...

That\'s just how I see the Klyros anyway, it makes it look more natural, the face on the website almost looks like it doesn\'t belong on the Klyros imo.

\"Nutrition:
Being great fish hunters they tend to eat a lot of fishes and shellfishes. They are famous for cooking crabs in thousands of ways.\" -website

Wouldn\'t this effect the facial structure?

[Seytra]

Originally posted by Zeraph
I think this way makes it look more oval-like:
\"They have an oval head\" as it says in the description on the website...

That\'s just how I see the Klyros anyway, it makes it look more natural, the face on the website almost looks like it doesn\'t belong on the Klyros imo.

Well, it looks very much liek a human face to me, too. However, the Enki faces are very much like human faces, as well. I think the reason for this is that, of course, a human-looking face is more pleasing to the human eye (natrurally), and therefore it just tends to happen if you\'re going to model something that you consider \"human\".

Originally posted by Zeraph
\"Nutrition:
Being great fish hunters they tend to eat a lot of fishes and shellfishes. They are famous for cooking crabs in thousands of ways.\" -website

Wouldn\'t this effect the facial structure?

\"You are what you eat\"?
Seriously, I don\'t think so, because they don\'t catch the fish with their mouths, but with their hands IMO.What influences the look isn\'t the diet, but the environment. This, of course, can mean that a streamlined face is preferrable (aero- and hydrodynamically). Considering that the face will be looking in the direction of swimming, the head from the splashscreen seems reasonable. However, the head from the 2d image might still be feasible, but probably not be that optimal.

Another thing is that you have mounted the head in a forward angle, which is, IMO, not realistic, since they\'ll, when swimming, need to \"look up\" most of the time. Therefore, it should be mounted vertically.
Also, to ease this, the eyes should not be overshadowed by the eyebrows and the forehead, to better facilitate this and to reduce the need to bend the head backwards when swimming.

[Seytra]

Originally posted by leinir
I see, yeah, down the back of the legs = bad idea, I agree Thanks for showing it Just hit me what the down-the-side-of-the-tail would be like; it would make the Klyros resemble a manta-ray with arms and legs Not a good/bad thing, just an observation *giggles*

You\'re right.

Originally posted by leinir
Also, I\'d say that reading Seytra\'s message regarding having the wings attached to the legs, it would indeed make it difficult for Klyros to land gracefully (though not impossible).

No, but it would make it nearly impossible to land on small or vertical surfaces like mountains or building walls (although I suppose they could just hang on by their hands). I wouldn\'t mind if they had to land sort of lying on the floor, though, but that\'s most likely not the case anyway, seeing that birds seem to land \"nose up\" as well (probably due to the same reason why aeroplanes need to land with the tip up).

Originally posted by leinir
Randomly, but in key with the discussion of why the wings are so large: I remember being told by a friend (same friend I was discussing it with a couple of weeks back, see earlier messages in this thread) that if you would have a person about the same size as a human being (like the Klyros (or, which was the case with what she was telling me about, an angel), even with light bird-like bones, would need a wingspan the size of around a Boeing 737 to take flight. That would be a good reason as to why the Klyros only flies for a short while, even with the large area they have here

I have been thinking about this, as well, but it might not have to be this way. This image

seems to indicate that the wingspan of this pterosaur is not as giant as one might expect, only about three times it\'s body length. While of course the legs can be counted as \"missing\", the extra-large head with the tip on it\'s top would IMO compensate for it. I, however, must admit that I don\'t know the size of it, so it might be tiny, although from what I seem to remember, they were about the size of a small human, so it would fit.
Also, the area of it\'s wings looks like it is about the same size or even smaller than the one we have for the Klyros.

Should have edited the other post. Ah, well.

[Keknehv]

Certainly, but relatively the size and weight of the pterosaur is very different.

The size of the wings is squared, but the size of the body is cubed (this is why 300 foot ants aren\'t possible--Cross section strength of their legs.

TECHNICALLY, to support a large humanoid creature such as the Klyros, wings many times bigger would be needed. They would have to be maybe at least 20 feet long.

(Pictures of \'Pegasus\' are an example of a problem; to support a horse much more than that wingspan is needed)

But heck, this is Planeshift. It\'s a magical world. Who cares if it\'s all technically correct. But the bigger the wings you have, the better.

Do you know why in real life we don\'t have any humanoid sized FLYING birds? Because it\'s unpractical given earth gravity and air pressure.

Look at the ostrich. Maybe at one time it could fly, but then it got too big to support its own weight.

That\'s my $1.43.

[Seytra]

According to the website the image comes from, there are finds of pterosaurs that suggest a wingspan of 15 to 20m.

Originally posted by webpage
What is the largest known pterosaur?

Until the 1970\'s, the largest known pterosaur was the North American Pteranodon, a genus with a 8-meter (25 feet) wingspan. Then along came a pterosaur with a wingspan that may have been twice as wide. Discovered by a team headed by Wann Langston, this behemoth was named Quetzalcoatlus, after the Aztec feathered-serpent god. Based on extrapolations from smaller pterosaurs, the partial skeleton would have fleshed out a creature with an estimated wingspan of (hold your breath) 20 meters (65 feet)! This is actually the upper range of the estimates, and most paleontologists accept a more modest spread of 15 meters (50 feet). Biomechanists wondered how a creature with such a wingspan could possibly flap its wings without placing enormous stress on its wing bones, but the general consensus is that it could have flown, albeit with slow, deliberate flappings of the wings, as many large sea birds do today. By the way, Quetzalcoatlus is not only the largest known pterosaur, it is also the last.

Could even larger pterosaurs be lying in the ground waiting to be discovered?

Paleontologists and biomechanists believed that Quetzalcoatlus had approached the size limit for the largest flying creature. Anything larger than that would, theoretically, have faced so many difficulties in trying to fly that it simply would not have survived long enough to propagate itself. But then again, that\'s what they said about Pteranodon before the discovery of Quetzalcoatlus.

These would then theoretically have been able to support a human?

Also, there are two questions that I have:

1) this formula, does it indeed relate this way? I mean, of course area is squared and volume is cubic, but how does supportable weight equate to required wing area? I don\'t have that formula (not to insult you, just to state that I don\'t have it, or any other formula that might deal with this subject.).

2) the usual bird takes it\'s prey away, to some other place. Pterosaurs of this size would require prey of considerable size, thus they\'d need to also support it\'s weight. Therefore, the relation might not be that bad.

Furthermore, I have said on another thread:

Originally posted by Seytra
As one can see from the images of these, the wings weren\'t disproportionally large compared to their bodies. This means that a Klyros could achieve full flight given that (as already stated in the description) their body weight is quite small compared to their size. This is possible, because if the average bird did have the same bone structure as a human, it wouldn\'t be able to fly, either. Also, the description clearly states that the Klyros are physically less durable because of this fact, so it\'s more than just some minor decrease in weight (as you recall, elves usually weigh considerably less than a human of the same size, but are not considered to be much less durable). A Klyros of, say, 1.8m height would, IMO, weigh about 25 - 30 kg. This even _is_ possible for humans, as people who have eating disorders are reported to weigh around 40 kg with a size that would require ~ 80. If we now give them birdlike bones, they will weigh around 25 kg even without further modification. Therefore, assuming an optimised skeleton (fewer and thinner bones), birdlike bones, less flesh (just muscles and some fat to keep them warm), could easily bring them down, even accounting for the additional weight of the wings.

So it might be at least somewhat reasonable to have them fly.

Also, a note on the wings and damage:

Originally posted by webpage
Weren\'t their wings fragile and susceptible to injury?

Much of the earlier thinking that pterosaurs were weak flyers stemmed from the perception that their wings were fragile structures, easily susceptible to injury. After all, bird wings consist of several feathers that can be replaced one at a time without an appreciable loss of support; and bat wings are supported by four elongated digits that prevent a tear from running down its entire length. A pterosaur wing, with only a single finger to support it and no internal reinforcements, was thought to be inferior. But recent studies have disproved it. Closer examinations of several beautifully preserved specimens showed that the wings were reinforced by closely-spaced fibers called actinofibrillae. These stiffened the wing and would have prevented a tear from running down the entire length.

And something on bone structure which might be important:

Originally posted by webpage
What other adaptations did they evolve?

The pterosaur body was highly adapted to enduring the rigors of flight. Many bones are fused together, providing a sturdy framework for the muscles and other organs. The pelvic vertebrae had in fact fused with the pelvic bones, providing a shock-absorbing structure (the synsacrum) that braced the animal when it landed. In larger pterosaurs, the pectoral vertebrae were similarly fused in a structure called the notarium. The sternum, or breastbone, had a keel that provided an attachment for large pectoral muscles, and a forward projection, the cristospine, may have functioned much like the furcula (\"wishbone\") in birds. Many rhamphorhynchoid fossils show the outline of a flap of skin at the tip of the tail that may have acted as a rudder, and the neural spines were likewise elongated in some. In order to reduce weight, pterosaur bones were hollow; indeed, they were even thinner than many avian bones.

Uh, long post again...

[Keknehv]

A few lift equations:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0015b.shtml
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/lifteq.html


They show that WING AREA is important.


And sure, if you had Klyros with 60 foot wings, I would be happy. But who wants to play a game with things walking around with HUMONGOUS wings?

Eh, I guess I\'ll drop accuracy in the favor of game graphics.

[ArcaneFalcon]

Those don\'t prove anything.  First, if you look at the equations they need coefficient Cl which is all the complex dependencies determined by experiments.  Every wing is different, so each wing has a different lift coefficient.  Who knows, maybe the Klyros have incredibly efficiently designed wings.  Second, the Klyros have a relatively light frame, meaning they require less lift:

Just under the shoulders they have two big wings that appear to be weak and non-functional. The skeleton is thin and flexible to flight easier, but is easily damaged. Thanks to their body structure, the Klyros are fast in all three elements: air, water and earth.  (Setting section on PS website)

Third, the lift calculations on a gliding wing and on a flapping wing are 100% completely different.  You\'re right, if Klyros needed to be able to take off gliding from as fast as they can run then their wings would need to be huge.  However, their wings flap, which means that on the downstroke their wings create much more lift than a gliding wing would.  On the upstroke the wings would fold in a bit and tilt forward (maybe it was backward, can\'t remember) so as to create less drag as they set up for another downstroke.  Fourth, the rules section on the Klyros part of the setting guide on the PS website says, \"Fly for short time.\"  I take this to mean that they can\'t fly indefinitley, which also means their wing simply only need to be large enough to carry them in short bursts.

In conclusion, smaller wings are fine.

:emerald:

edit: fixed some grammar

:emerald:

[Adeli]

Even if it not 100% accurate, which would be nice but impossible for a game...
You do not know what a klyros\' body structure would be like you don\'t know what its muscles or bones are like, so this is a difficult argument either way.
Most of all, this is a game! It\'s not appropriate to have 20m wingspans on a model, so you just have to go with the artists thoughts on it, despite the technicalities.