project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: small dropship  (Read 11327 times)

Offline Noordung

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #15 on: July 24, 2014, 10:01:56 am »
It could be good to put an hump over the craft where the fuel will be stored.
so here are some sort of external fuel tanks under wings. they are bigger now.

Offline cevaralien

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #16 on: July 24, 2014, 07:19:32 pm »
Looks fine.

If it not problem, i will give you an idea.

Put the engines at the wings, attached to the fuselage. Remove the upper air intake and transform it in a hump. Why? This is an Osprey type approach. All the fuel can be in that hump and you will have a more realistic aircraft.

Some like this, the Dornier  VSTOL



but, instead to use the vertical take off engines at the tip of the wing, you can use it in the root of the wing.

It´s only an idea.

Offline Noordung

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #17 on: July 24, 2014, 09:16:41 pm »
im sorry but that design is very old and inefficient.
1. closer to hull are engines weaker can be wings thus lighter... lighter aircraft less fuel... you know what i mean.
2. its wasteful to have more engine than you need - all engines should work all the time.

i think the best aproach (most efficient) is vectored thrust. 3 (triangle) points for stable aircraft on landing/takeoff. more points more stable but not too many engines if you dont really need them. i hope you see nozzle i made as i vectored thrust. that was my intention.

as efficient design you can see harrier. just one engine. when landing it got thrusters in 4 points and its stable. from start i wanted this to be 1 engine design. than it look a little strange. but my idea was helicopter like design with one engine at top. just faster with longer reach...

there are many other interesting experimental vtol aircrafts that i would like use as idea.

Offline cevaralien

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2014, 11:21:34 pm »
im sorry but that design is very old and inefficient.
1. closer to hull are engines weaker can be wings thus lighter... lighter aircraft less fuel... you know what i mean.
2. its wasteful to have more engine than you need - all engines should work all the time.

i think the best aproach (most efficient) is vectored thrust. 3 (triangle) points for stable aircraft on landing/takeoff. more points more stable but not too many engines if you dont really need them. i hope you see nozzle i made as i vectored thrust. that was my intention.

as efficient design you can see harrier. just one engine. when landing it got thrusters in 4 points and its stable. from start i wanted this to be 1 engine design. than it look a little strange. but my idea was helicopter like design with one engine at top. just faster with longer reach...

there are many other interesting experimental vtol aircrafts that i would like use as idea.

Harrier was not the most efficient VSTOL. The German VJ101 was better in many ways, but british design wins because the needs of the OTAN changed. But this is a little off topic.

The idea is use two wing engines that use vectorial thrust plus two engines in front. If you want put a single engine, ok, it´s your desing and it´s possible, but the craft is too little to fit a realistic fuel tank. But if you want this solution, i suggest to change the exit of the engines and put it like the Harrier but in the "roof" of the aircraft, in one line. Is something like the Harrier engine with the rest of the craft hanging on. The nozzles can be at both sides-up.



I suggest this: remove the frontal nozzles (red) and put it at the side of the intake. The rear nozzle can be the same as the frontal. It´s like the harrier engine design. By that way, the fuel can be stored behind the craft and in the wings.


Offline Sandro

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 240
  • Maintenance guy for UFO:AI 3D engine
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #19 on: July 25, 2014, 01:43:21 am »
why do you think ion engines are extremly unfiednly for enviroment? you can use oxygen from air as propellant and you than only need very powerful enegy source.

Toxicity, of course, depends on propellant used. Considering the propellants available on Earth, most effective among technically simple to use will be mercury, which is highly toxic. Especially mercury oxides created when exhaust will be mixed with air, they are much more toxic than mercury itself.
Of course, you can live with xenon, as modern ion engines do, but at cost of bigger fuel tanks, cryogenic system onboard and specially designed ionizer for the gas.

Oxygen is generaly a bad idea -- its atomic mass is way too small. You want a propellant with high atomic mass to have an effective ion jet propulsion. The heavier ejected ion is, the more specific impulse is (impulse gained by ejecting the same mass of propellant) for the same engine design.

Offline Noordung

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #20 on: July 25, 2014, 02:16:34 pm »
@sandro oxygen is good becouse it is in atmosphere. so you dont need to have it on aircraft. you also have to consider how easy it is to ionize it. mass of particle its not the only thing. nitrogen might be even better since it 78% of atmosphere.

@cevaralien my first design it was very much like harrier (if you check older pictures) but with engine at top of aircraft it looks a little weird. maybe nozzle could be inside wing (some expertimental VTOLs had it in wing. cut for now this is finished. also changing like you suggested its a lot of work. it would be better tu jsut make another one.
you always have to take in consideration where is exit for soliders, aircraft should be as small as possible (smaller aircraft - more map), it should look nice, and well it should look advanced. so it may not look like aircrafts of our age.
i will cartainly make more different aircrats they somehow become my hobby.

Offline Noordung

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #21 on: July 27, 2014, 07:26:05 pm »
md2 files and uv maps of small dropsip. if it well be ever used in game. + bad textures showing may idea of how could it be painted.

Offline Seerorin

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #22 on: August 19, 2014, 12:20:06 pm »
You should make it run off of fusion power and extreme speed vacuum engines. They work like a turbine. But this time they make high pressure inside a chamber even heating the air a little bit and sending out on the other end of the engines. They can use high effecienty linear electric motors wich can be made as loops. Those things simply can rock! They need miniscule place, miinimal repairs virtually every single row in the turbine can have it's own engine(high resilience against ordinary damage). This technology is something on what they also as a high effeciency electric enginge for planes. Only problem it is indeed effective in the atmosphere but neither it is cheap neither powering it is easy. This is more like a jet engine based on electronics. Only effective on higher energy levels. Fusion reactors also could be used in the games. In this year we did the first fusion reactor work. So in 70 years we could easily make them accesible to military crafts. Building more advenced craft is always a have to. So they would never stop producing weaponry. 50 years of peace is nothing, compared to more than 4 thousand years of war. Every country should be still researching into military tech. Maybe not fielding it fast cause it's not so cheap. But they should keep a ready stock in need.

Offline Noordung

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2014, 12:44:57 pm »
good idea. i think we could make new desctriptions for existing aircraft so their technology would be more like 2080s...

Offline Seerorin

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2014, 01:14:48 pm »
Forgot to tell. Only problem with this turbine based system it's can't be used on really high altitudes. Just like helicopters. They have to be under about 6000 metres. Cause if you move higher engine effeciency goes down exponentially. But they are working and will go into civilian crafts someday if they don't invent any better. That means planes will go lower but cheaper(if electricity will be easily stored.). Also any landing craft with weaponry should have rotary turrets and two pilot cockpit. If you go with high pressure turbines you should simply rise model height a little bit. Say there is a fusion reactor in the back of the fuselage. Put a large intake on the top. Heighten the cockpit a bit for two pilots. Also with this you can forget large wings. It should travel need supersonic with these engines small retractable wings should be easily enough for them. They can easily hover. Only problem would be they don't carry UGVs but the plane itsilf could be function as one after soldiers leave it maybe? Otherwise you have to make it a lot bigger. Even tough I don't see any real reason behind an UGV probably will be no use... A wheeled machinegun, meh... But the dropship fliing over the place firing 20mm shiiva rounds would make the aliens think twice about getting into open ground. :D

Offline Noordung

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2014, 02:41:32 pm »
well we cant make all dropships faster than alien ships ;D
and flying so low... its hard to go supersonic on lower altitudes.

baisicly having this vacuum engine with some super batteries would be good idea. onboard AI could work with weapons and asisting pilot. so one pilot is enough. about UGVs... not sure if light dropship is intended to cary ony of those anyway. but heavier (raptor/herakles) should carry some of them.

and we could say weapons (one light) is in internal bay. this way we can have different light weapons and we dont need to show them.

Offline Seerorin

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: small dropship
« Reply #26 on: August 20, 2014, 02:01:04 pm »
Yeah. I don't think an UGV is some light thing either. It should be freakingly heavy, considering how much armor it carries. Also weapon display or not is up to you. :) Anyways nice work!