[Liberator]

I was looking at some of the renders in the Art forum and a question occured to me looking at Stunaep's render of a Myrmidon shooting a Herc MK1 down a few meters above an ocean and I wondered are fighter engines powerful enough to keep such large craft aloft, assuming that they had the appropriate airfoils?

[Sesquipedalian]

Most people assume that there would be some sort of repulsor lift technology on the fighters which could be used to keep a fighter airborne.  Otherwise, the FS2 fighters are as likely to be able to fly in atmosphere as the carcass of a three day dead cow.

Personally, I have no problem saying that the FS2 fighters don't have repulsor lift technology and couldn't fly in atmosphere.  Why?  Because they obviously were never intended to fly in atmosphere.  Why would one go to all the bother of putting such complex and energy draining technology as repulsor lifts onto a deep space  fighter in order to permit atmospheric flight when one could just put wings on them?

[Knight Templar]

either repulsor lifts or something like VTOLs. Most are deffinitly not aerodynamic though.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
Personally, I have no problem saying that the FS2 fighters don't have repulsor lift technology and couldn't fly in atmosphere.  Why?  Because they obviously were never intended to fly in atmosphere.  Why would one go to all the bother of putting such complex and energy draining technology as repulsor lifts onto a deep space  fighter in order to permit atmospheric flight when one could just put wings on them?

Maybe they use some kind of gravimetric in space too. If that's the case why bother putting wings on when the drive used in space will quite happily fly you in an atmosphere?

[diamondgeezer]

If they had repulsors of some sort, bombers could be rigged to never crash in to their target - too close to a an object in their line of flight, and they'd just bounce off

[Sesquipedalian]

Originally posted by karajorma


Maybe they use some kind of gravimetric in space too.

 There is no gravity in space, so why would you need an instrument to measure it, and how would that help to make things fly in atmosphere?

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
 There is no gravity in space, so why would you need an instrument to measure it, and how would that help to make things fly in atmosphere?

Note to self. Wake up first, THEN post What I meant to say was that if they are using a gravity based drive it could work as an anti-grav in an atmosphere as well.

[Sesquipedalian]

Ah.  And what, exactly, would a gravity-based drive look like?

[Mr. Vega]

Methinks a ships with a gravity drive would be a sphere, or someother simple curved shape, so you could fit as much volume of gravity drive-thingies as possible. Or something like a Sharlin, with fins that serve as the drive.

As for the Herc, I'm not sure. It might be able to stay aloft, considering it looks like its engines are twice the size of its fuel tanks.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
Ah.  And what, exactly, would a gravity-based drive look like?

Ask the minbari to sell you the answer in return for league membership.

[diamondgeezer]

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
Ah.  And what, exactly, would a gravity-based drive look like?

Look at her, Miller. Isn't she beautiful...

[Sesquipedalian]

Originally posted by Mr. Vega
Methinks a ships with a gravity drive would be a sphere, or someother simple curved shape, so you could fit as much volume of gravity drive-thingies as possible. Or something like a Sharlin, with fins that serve as the drive.

Originally posted by karajorma
Ask the minbari to sell you the answer in return for league membership.

Originally posted by diamondgeezer

None of that looks or sounds anything like the backside of a Herc, guys.  Sorry.  

Originally posted by Mr. Vega
As for the Herc, I'm not sure. It might be able to stay aloft, considering it looks like its engines are twice the size of its fuel tanks.

No, that would mean it could fall to the ground at a rate of 9.2 m/s² (or equivalent for another planet) while also travelling sideways.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

Maybe they just use vectored nozzle engines.  We have that technology today, i am sure that they could have expanded on it.

[diamondgeezer]

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
None of that looks or sounds anything like the backside of a Herc, guys.  Sorry.  
 

Perhaps not, but that geezer stood in there in his spacesuit is about to have a very odd thing happen to him...

[kode]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer




Look at her, Miller. Isn't she beautiful...

event horizon is so great...

[diamondgeezer]

Hell, I know that. Tell it to Zylon Bane

[kode]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer
Hell, I know that. Tell it to Zylon Bane

Liberate Tutame Ix Inferis...

[Sesquipedalian]

Originally posted by ShadowWolf_IH
Maybe they just use vectored nozzle engines.  We have that technology today, i am sure that they could have expanded on it.

Maybe they could have, but look at the things: they didn't.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

considering that none of of us have seen one in atmospheric flight, we don't know.  It would seem to me though that they are also used to provide aerial support to ground troops, and it may be during this time that VNE's are actually used.  They would also help to stabilize a craft. Couple these with reaction control valves and retractable mobile canards, you may find the answer there.  Basically a combination of existing technologies.  The VNE's from the harrier and the F-35.  The canards date back to the 80's on an f-16 AFTI (they allowed the ship to rotate on its Z axis), and the reaction control valves which replace the need for the tail assembly (see switchblade).

Whether you agree or not, i see atmospheric flight in FS2 wingless craft as a combination of things, not just one technology making it happen.

[LtNarol]

2 things:

1. Everything with mass has gravity.  Physics, day 1.
2. Modern day missiles don't have wings (for the most part) and their fins are not used for lift (for the most part) but for guidance and control (again, for the most part).  Wouldn't it make sense that FS2 fighters could fly the way missiles do?  With noses angled up?  Some have fins but others could just use maneuvering thrusters to, *gasp*, maneuver just as they do in space (*gasp* again).



Sorry, feeling sarcastic this morning, off th sk00l now.