Jump to content

The GM's Hall


Rudolph

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Okay, I accept the explanation the heat would give it away at low altitude, but if you're at high altitude the atmosphere is less dense.. would you get the same heat emissions at mach 3 at say.. 90,000 feet? Nevermind, my research indicates the reason it has so much titaium in it is even at altitude the speeds heat the airframe to 800 degrees F despite an exterior temperature of -70.

Also I see ways the design could be improved on.. stretch the wings out more so the forward canards can be removed.. give a greater tail surface area to make up for the differences in control and balance the lift. But it looks like I need to use the KISS solution here.. I'm going to keep a mix of XB-70 valks and B-2s in my arsenal and then make the xb-70s optional recognition as archangels for those willing to play in my mach 6 ball game with theoretical aircraft designs and theoretical 2 mode ramjets.

Maybe in a couple years we'll actually hear about one of these out in the rl wild, then I can play with them.

The F-35's problem is a lot more than just Tech Triyun.. to many hands in the pot. To many people involved in the project.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said.. allegedly.. I'm just as suspicious as the Daily Mail as you are. But truth is.. you google mach 6 bomber.. and there's entrys all over the place about the SR 72 and the fact it's possible and skunk works already has the design, just the Defense Dept doesn't want to pay for it and has alternatives. I'd prefer you not ignore them as they are definitely plausible in 2014.. but if you don't want to recognize them and until they're formally accepted as plausible for the tech period as they are.. the in the interim they'll be modernized XB-70 Valkyries to you.. (the design is remarkably similar to the XB-70 other than the use of dual mode ramjets).
 
North_American_XB-70_in_Flight_EC68-2131
 
Kerbal%20Space%20Program-07-11-2014%204-
 
Major difference being the nose cone has been replaced by a ramjet intake and a second set of broader swept stabilizing wings.
 
I find it amazing people find it acceptable we can get to mars in the rp because of the in game wonders, but they can't believe a mach 6 high altitude bombers is possible despite the presence of the space shuttle and the HTV-2 falcon in reality. There is a remarkable sense of technological backwardness there.


Never underestimate the ability of a nerd to spend years of their life researching military designs that they still don't really understand in order to have a small edge over you in a RP.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you recognize the drastic degree to which the engines on the XB-70 make it less survivable than the SR-72 and that in point of fact it cannot be upgraded to make it anywhere near as survivable.

 

Also the F-35 engine problems have nothing to do with that.  Stop throwing out irrelevant jargon to try and show you're smart when you make dumb points people.  Inefficient factory allocation has to do with cost overruns not how well a turbofan engines built.  Its just really really hard to make a good engine.  That's why only America and maybe France can do it.

Edited by Triyun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you recognize the drastic degree to which the engines on the XB-70 make it less survivable than the SR-72 and that in point of fact it cannot be upgraded to make it anywhere near as survivable.

 

Also the F-35 engine problems have nothing to do with that.  Stop throwing out irrelevant jargon to try and show you're smart when you make dumb points people.  Inefficient factory allocation has to do with cost overruns not how well a turbofan engines built.  Its just really really hard to make a good engine.  That's why only America and maybe France can do it.

 

"To many hands in the pot" is jargon to you? That's like the simplest way of saying there's been inefficient factory allocation. Of course I realize it's less surviavble. Missiles can catch it easier..  You're sounding more like a troll than someone making a worthwhile point, the discussion had already resolved. Now how about you stop berating someone for trying to have a little fun and go have some yourself? I don't have any bone to pick wtih you Triyun, other than that you apparently need to mature a little. I don't have to prove my intellect to anyone and your assumptions about my motivations are so very errant. Now I'm concluding my discourse with you here before I slide more into the same bickering  and childish name-calling behavior you have chosen to exhibit. It'd be a fusillade that'd only serve to make us both look fools. Smart or dumb is irrelevent to fun.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with the fact Triyun has.

 

-5 Converted to Swarm Ships (Combined Strike Force of Unmanned Vehicles and Payload Haulers)

--6 F-3 Pegasus Class STOVL Strike Fighters

315 F-1 Ares Class Fighters (Stealth)

22 B-1 Thunderers (Stealth)

48 B-2 Trident

 

unless these are based off real life designs, I do not believe they should be allowed to exist, the intent of CNRP2 was to make things simpler, not to allow you to show off your OOC military expertise and what "could" be possible right now, but what is actually possible and in existence.

 

as to the F35 discussion, There are at minimum 30 corporations just in my area that create parts for the F35's engines, none of which are Pratt, too many hands is probably fairly apt.

Edited by Mogar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering my earlier ruling, any planes Triyun uses must be based off RL planes/frames. :V:

Personally, I'm thinking he's just renaming the RL designs to use Greek named. Pegasus, Ares, Trident...

 

If any specs he posts are wildly wonky, report it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of a Swarm Ship is unrealistic using modern technology, that many drones would require an exceptional amount of maintenance, far more than what a comparable amount of manned aircraft would require.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of a Swarm Ship is unrealistic using modern technology, that many drones would require an exceptional amount of maintenance, far more than what a comparable amount of manned aircraft would require.

Unmanned combat aircraft beyond RL-drone designs are right out, yes. And what precisely is a 'swarm ship'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so certain about that. I don't know if you've visited this site before.. but it's dedicated to what can be done with naval drones.. air surface and sea.

 

http://www.navaldrones.com/

 

And there's a pretty broad array of capability. The Navy is in reality already considering the conversion of ships to drone motherships. Subs carrying subs.. carriers carrying submarines.. whole mess of fun stuff in the pipe. Some of it is currently practical but it requires a change of existing naval doctrine to get deployed. Given most of our nations start out with an undefined doctrine.. slipping into one that has drones shouldn't be hard. What I would object to is the instant substantiation of these ships. I think that even if you have the equipent in game we should start requiring nations build, design, develop, and deploy their forces.. it might prevent abrupt, sudden.. unrealistic geopolitical power shifts.

 

I started RP intnetionally without a navy, though I could have had one.. and without a port.. though I could have claimed one.. purely for the sake of keepin it real and being fair with my peers. Besides, makes it more challenging.

 

PS. Navy stole my idea.. they're building sea-crawlers. (Monsun 2)

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of that list, less than 10 are beyond experimental stage. with the Predator C and X47B being the only models that would provide much more than surveillance besides a few of the Israeli designs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have a point.. if I can't have my SR-72s, I guess he can't have his drones.. nor can I deploy my drone fleet.... meh.. bummer. CVs with F-35s it is. When I bother with a navy. I think I'll just deploy a gigantic mine field. Nah, missiles.. when all else fails with guarding your coast, pull a china.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to watch the wild assumptions about me using stuff and making allegations without basing it on posts I actually made go on here for a while before I clarify if that's cool with everyone.

5 Converted to Swarm Ships (Combined Strike Force of Unmanned Vehicles and Payload Haulers)

X-47B UCAS-D

300px-X-47B_110204-F-1162D-119.jpg

The X-47B's first takeoff at Edwards AFB, California, in February 2011

Role Unmanned combat air vehicle

Manufacturer Northrop Grumman

First flight 4 February 2011

Primary user United States Navy

Number built 2

 

Unless you plan on putting roughly one per "swarm ship", you're delving off into not reality.

 

On 10 April 2014, the X-47B performed its first night flight. Night flights are part developing operations for routine UAV activity, and the Navy will continue to develop procedures for it to act co-operatively with manned aircraft.

 

So we just barely have begun using them at night and you intend on having half your naval airforce be devoted to them.

Edited by Mogar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to watch the wild assumptions about me using stuff and making allegations without basing it on posts I actually made go on here for a while before I clarify if that's cool with everyone.

 

Or you could do the mature thing and actually define your weapons systems a bit more clearly so people can posts their objections and/or have them accepted. Not that I'd see that as a course of action a Triyun would take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would assume common sense because they're not really weapons platforms, just observation platforms. If you don't use more than like the 1-2 you might see with a group or a ship and keep it in reason, I personally would count them as the intelligence gathering apparatus of the macro unit in question, such as the capitol ship or the ground unit it was deployed with. If you're saying you have like.. a dozen or more operational drones fielded with a unit.. I'd like some accounting for how they're being operated.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all Mael if you read the whole post you'd notice this tidbit:

 

 

 

(Non-IG based stuff will be filled in soon)

 

I.E.  Maybe wait before you complain about lack of detail on a ship since drones are based on common sense.

 

Onto Lynneth's point.

 

Based off of, does not necessarily mean carbon copy no?  I asked the other day and I was told it had to be existing technology, which I've followed.  For example, if I assume the F-23 was selected instead of the raptor but that the F-23 has sensors and weapons on it that are equippable to the F-35 and F-22 that is fine.  I was told that I was allowed a degree of customization.  

 

The X-47-B unlike Mael's design which is in the very far stages of the drawing board has a system that's flying right now, I was told existing technology, not that it needed to be in operational combat use, and is a carrier attack drone that can be armed with weapons and sensors that are ready right now.   There are many other smaller sea and easily adaptable sea launchable vehicles that could be used on a swarm ship.  Swarm ships despite all this hoopla people seem to be generating without giving me a chance to respond are not like this godly at sea death star.  Its a force augmenter.  Capable of deploying large amounts of smaller low capability units (even a UCLASS is not going to have the payload or air to air capabilities of a JSF).  It does have tremendous ISR potential and utility in long loitering missions such as ISR or ASW. 

 

Putting it up against squadrons of advanced fighters alone is suicide.  

Edited by Triyun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is annoying. I joined CNRP 2 to run from the hegemonic "OMG MAH TECH IS BETTER THAN YOURS CAUSE I SIT IN CLASS ALL DAY READING" type jargon. That's what ruins RP, in my opinion. So, I really do think we should stick to RL designs or equivalents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second Malatose's opinion. I simply thought my designs were within acceptable range, but accepted the restraint when people objected. I will play the mach 6 bomber only with people who want to play with an extended tech scale.. Otherwise, they're just the same as the valkyrie XB-70 with a few modernizations to keep them in line with 2014 tech. I plan on fielding them with YF-12 interceptors and jammers to make it an effective weapons platform and have formulated an air doctrine which I will be making clear later today when I do the post for the airshow DYSA will have. I'll also be fielding stealth aircraft in conjunction with the high speed fighters and bombers to round out my air force. I fully intend on working within tech constraints and if people have objections will welcome and heed them to keep me constrained within desired boundaries of communal play. The designations will be changed to reflect Druk Yul nomenclature, but I will note the base plane along side their rp designations so people know how to treat them.. and their appearance and video content will clearly show the nature of their design.

 

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my aggressive pursuit over archangel, I just built something nice in a simulator and wanted to use it because I was proud of what I'd made. It had very little to do with "one-upping" anyone.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...