WIP Discussion (Part 1!)

[GeoModder]

your free to tell her (stillstorm) that see how it go

As long as she doesn't talk back all should be fine.

[NOMAD]

your free to tell her (stillstorm) that see how it go

As long as she doesn't talk back all should be fine.

I'd be more worried if Storm kept silent, telepathic note to fire-blade to kill GeoModder. i;d be worried either way.

Actually I think it's more like the pentagonal 5 landing gear layout that we have on big passenger airplanes. A rear pair under the fuselage + a slightly forward pair wider apart at the base of the wings + the forward gear.

E: ref: 747, A380

didn't think about that , could very well be the winning arrangement ( or a modified from of a pentagon).

As for the Jack Northrop flying wings, they were ahead of their time, but the tech to get them to work effectively wasn't quiet at that level. First and Second gen turbo-jets consumed gas by the wing tank (cutting range and payload). turbo-props or piston drive props were considers too old tech and "slow" in comparison to the "newer jet propulsion". How controllable the aircraft were was up to debate with yawing problems and other small problems, but was the best control for a flying wing for its time. the structure of the wings was due to new metals alloy but their was still experimental and stressing the frame to max ( one prototype broke up in flight and crashed). On top of all these traits, the aircraft were, for their time, the largest flying wings and alot R/D and testing was needed to make them fly.

30 years later, we have the B-2 and most of the problems with the original bomber fly-wing wings is solved (3,4,5 generation turbo-fans engines, computer-driven/operational controls, composite materials for high strength and stealthy hulls, plus all the data from the original wings ( the B-2 and XB-49 have the same wing length ). It took that amount of time to develop all the need tech, but the concept was proven to work and be effective.

The last part of the wiki article has a line I love with this story

Thirty years later, in April 1980, Jack Northrop, now quite elderly and wheel chair bound, was taken back to the company he founded. There, he was ushered into a classified area and shown a scale model of the Air Force's forthcoming but still highly classified Advanced Technology Bomber, which would eventually become known as the B-2A; it was a sleek, all-black Flying Wing. Looking over its all-wing design, Northrop, unable to speak due to various illnesses, was reported to have written on a pad: "I know why God has kept me alive for the past 25 years." ( ) Jack Northrop died 10 months later, in February 1981, eight years before the first B-2A became the Air Force's most advanced bomber aircraft.

Good ideas sometime take the right combo of tech, time, experience and people behind the idea. Some work; while other don't, only to be realized ( or reborn if your emotional about it like me) later on.

[fredgiblet]

i believe the latest incarnation of the "wing bomber" is the B2-F117 might be wrong though

B-2, the F-117 it unrelated as it has a tail. There might be something newer but it's not well known if there is.

[Trantor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-49
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_G ... B-2_Spirit

These are flying wings.
"Highland" is more like a lifting body or a blended wing body.

[junk]

I think a hybrid flying wing is closer to the truth

Spectrum of aircraft design concepts from conventional airliner (1), blended wing-body (2), hybrid flying wing (3), flying wing (4). Note that the spectrum does not represent either a chronological or technical order; the YB-49 (4), representing a true flying wing, actually predates all other depicted aircraft, while the "conventional" Boeing 757 (1) is a relatively new and technologically advanced aircraft, and the X-48 (2) is the most recently developed.

[Trantor]

I think a hybrid flying wing is closer to the truth

I wouldn´t call that "wings" outside the engines.

[NOMAD]

I think you those could be flight controls ( even a blending wing/body or flying wing needs physical controls). The body produce the lift, but need outside controls ( note the hinge in the control to move the fins out of way for reentry or hanger storage ).

[Tamren]

The fins that hinge behind the engines are probably just thrust control vanes. All of the Loroi ships have them for use in orbit. Its particularly obvious when Winter Tide loses an engine and you see the ship compensating by thrusting diagonally. The shuttle already has visible control surfaces for atmospheric flight.

[NOMAD]

@Tamren: i was referring to the winglets on the outer edges ( mid -engine). but I think you got their use down ( trust vectoring). but didn't they have another purpose as well, heat sinks ?

[Mikk]

I don't think any sort of fantastical physics facilitate putting radiators practiclaly into a spacecraft's hyper energetic exhaust plume.

From where I am looking it seems like the engines are the end of the whole body-wing-engine structural-aerodynamic functional unit. The closest real counterpart to this configuration that comes to mind is the SR-71 Blackbird. Whether the outboard wingtips are foldable for storage or not isn't visibly very clear, however assuming that would be a safe bet considering it's one of many dinghys in a spacecrafts internal hangar. What is safe to say, is that the wingtip doesn't have to carry the bulk of the craft on the two engine's huge amounts of thrust (enought for a vertical lift-off from the "surface" of an average star).

[anticarrot]

All wrong.
Technically it's a Delta wing (triangle shape with rudder) Lifting body (no conventional wings). Closest matches in shape would be the Mirage series (Delta conventional) or the cancelled A-12 Avenger II (Delta flying wing).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_configuration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage_III
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_ ... Avenger_II

I assume it has a functional fleet-level command centre inside? Like air force one does.

Delta wings have terrible handling at low speed, and cheap fusion/shielding means a small reactor and water tanks for reaction mass makes far more sense than turbojets. I'd be surprised if it isn't designed to be VTOL by default. Any kind of high-performance RCS would throw that in for free.

[Trantor]

All wrong.

Long time, no see. Welcome back!

Technically it's a Delta wing (triangle shape with rudder)

Never. Main vortex would be above engine nacelles -> doesn´t work.
It´s more a trapezoidal shape, with full-moving rudders outside for supersonic high-performance manouvering.
Lifting body is correct, though.

Closest matches in shape would be the Mirage series

Uhrgs. No. Really. NO.

[Arioch]

All the Loroi ships have engines with thrust attenuation vanes sticking out the back (which is part of the inertial amplifier / "semi-reactionless" drive system, and can also be used to vector thrust), and cooling vanes sticking out the side. In the Highland, both of these types of vanes fold up for atmospheric operation, because you don't want to use the main drive in atmosphere, though in some cases you can leave the cooling vanes out because they do have aerodymanic properties. But I think most attitude control on a shuttle like this would be done with the RCS thrusters rather than control surfaces, even in the atmosphere.

[Count Casimir]

Where's the bridge? Forward hull?

EDIT: Reading through Insider is informative as always (It's a Vanguard Battlecruiser!), but I suppose now is as good a time as any to ask some of the questions I have--like how big is a security unit? And how efficiently can a fighter craft operate with 4 crew members?

[discord]

cas: all crew areas are in the central part of the hull, like any sensible space ship designer would do it.

[Count Casimir]

cas: all crew areas are in the central part of the hull, like any sensible space ship designer would do it.

But bridges with a view of space are so cool!

(I know, I know)

[discord]

cas: a civilian design might get away with it, any designer of military vessels that try this should be shot for treason.

<edit>
a 'viewing deck' as a recreational facility could probably work though, assuming it is a peacetime navy which the loroi are not.
just slap on something that is structural sound enough to handle accelerations on top of a airlock and you got it...would actually double as a huge airlock in a emergency...only one way though.
</edit>

[Arioch]

Where's the bridge? Forward hull? EDIT: Reading through Insider is informative as always (It's a Vanguard Battlecruiser!), but I suppose now is as good a time as any to ask some of the questions I have--like how big is a security unit? And how efficiently can a fighter craft operate with 4 crew members?

The bridge is located as deep inside the center of the primary hull as they can get it. Loroi command decks have holographic views like that seen on Tempest, so there's no need for windows on the bridge. There are observation ports in other areas of the ship.

A Loroi security unit is 6 individuals. The heavy fighter is a large craft that would be analogous to a modern strategic bomber, and it has a commander, copilot, and two weapons officers (similar to a B-1B).

[fredgiblet]

1 Teidar and 5 Soroin? Or are Teidar less common than that?

[Arioch]

1 Teidar and 5 Soroin? Or are Teidar less common than that?

Much less common. Under normal circumstances a Teidar would lead a platoon of 20-50 Soroin.

The "security unit" granularity is a holdover from Starfleet Battles' "boarding party" unit. I haven't been bothered to change it yet.