Author Topic: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion  (Read 9152 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 34798
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #90 on: March 18, 2019, 06:42:36 am »
I reckon that'd be OK, after all the wings are only JUST there, and most of the 'lift' comes from that MONSTER rocket engine.

I'll confer with Chris and come back.
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 42231
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #91 on: March 18, 2019, 07:38:57 am »
Kit has conferred and we are ok with that Nick.

I'll be honest I'm having some real problems with what's in and what's out in this GB. What's out is not to difficult, but what's in ........  :unsure: :unsure: whence the leniency.

I'm not even certain about my entry  :unsure: It's the Vought XF5U-1 "Flying Pancake", however after reading that it was theoretically capable of both V/STOL and of hovering I think it's ok ?
Decals my @r$e!

Online joncarrfarrelly

  • Bertie Bassett
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 7688
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #92 on: March 18, 2019, 08:35:02 am »
STOL, yes. VTOL, maybe. Hover, nope.

The proposed VS-341 turbo-prop powered version would have theoretically had the
power for a vertical take-off, however hover would still have been out of the question.

“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 34798
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #93 on: March 18, 2019, 09:06:32 am »

......however hover would still have been out of the question.


Not even if it was pointing vertically upwards at full throttle?  ;D
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline JayBee

  • Won't go back to Hull again
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4499
  • "Aquilla non captat muskas"
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #94 on: March 18, 2019, 10:28:03 am »
Gentlemen, please, What If?
Alle kunst ist umsunst wenn ein engel auf das zundloch brunzt!!

Sic biscuitus disintegratum!

Cats are not real. 
They are just physical manifestations of collisions between enigma & conundrum particles.

Any aircraft can be improved by giving it a SHARKMOUTH!

Offline Tophe

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 17711
    • my what-if models
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #95 on: March 18, 2019, 10:42:33 am »
Gentlemen, please, What If?
I agree, thanks JayBee :thumbsup: ;D
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Online joncarrfarrelly

  • Bertie Bassett
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 7688
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #96 on: March 18, 2019, 12:40:13 pm »
Gentlemen, please, What If?

How about don't define 'What If?' for other people, please.

Thanks
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Online joncarrfarrelly

  • Bertie Bassett
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 7688
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #97 on: March 18, 2019, 12:41:04 pm »

......however hover would still have been out of the question.


Not even if it was pointing vertically upwards at full throttle?  ;D

It could be an amusing tail-sitter.  ;D

“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline JayBee

  • Won't go back to Hull again
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4499
  • "Aquilla non captat muskas"
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #98 on: March 18, 2019, 01:34:31 pm »
Gentlemen, please, What If?

How about don't define 'What If?' for other people, please.

Thanks
Jon,
Do you realy mean that we have to define what is not "What If" so that others who do not understand can then understand what is?
Alle kunst ist umsunst wenn ein engel auf das zundloch brunzt!!

Sic biscuitus disintegratum!

Cats are not real. 
They are just physical manifestations of collisions between enigma & conundrum particles.

Any aircraft can be improved by giving it a SHARKMOUTH!

Online joncarrfarrelly

  • Bertie Bassett
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 7688
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #99 on: March 18, 2019, 03:35:36 pm »
Gentlemen, please, What If?

How about don't define 'What If?' for other people, please.

Thanks
Jon,
Do you realy mean that we have to define what is not "What If" so that others who do not understand can then understand what is?

What I'm saying is that you can't define it for me.
If I, or anyone else, likes to discuss things within the
realm of technical reality, rather than anything goes
hand-wavium, who are you to discount that view?
Which is what your post does.
 :rolleyes:
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 34798
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #100 on: March 18, 2019, 04:13:47 pm »
Other opinions are, of course, available..................
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 42231
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #101 on: March 19, 2019, 07:01:14 am »
STOL, yes. VTOL, maybe. Hover, nope.


Must admit I did wonder. Perhaps it could vaguely dangle, or they thought it might be able to vaguely dangle on a good day ?  ;)

Decals my @r$e!

Offline kitnut617

  • That's got his tum rumbling already just by the sound of it.
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 12645
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #102 on: March 19, 2019, 08:35:33 am »
STOL, yes. VTOL, maybe. Hover, nope.


Must admit I did wonder. Perhaps it could vaguely dangle, or they thought it might be able to vaguely dangle on a good day ?  ;)

I've read that when testing the V-173 it would ""appear"" to hover over the flight deck, but in reality the ship was moving at full steam and into a wind at the same time. The combined speed was the same as the minimum speed the V-173 needed to stay airborne.
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 42231
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #103 on: March 20, 2019, 07:06:43 am »

I've read that when testing the V-173 it would ""appear"" to hover over the flight deck, but in reality the ship was moving at full steam and into a wind at the same time. The combined speed was the same as the minimum speed the V-173 needed to stay airborne.

Wouldn't that mean that in practice it was hovering ?

Rather like a Swordfish story my dad told of the days when he was on a merchant carrier doing convoy duty. Apparently one came in to land during rather rough weather and into a force x gale. The deck/gun crew were ordered to run out and help it land by grabbing anything they could and hauling it down  :rolleyes: Same ship the observer of said Swordfish once told the story in the mess of the aircraft being overtaken by a seagull whilst flying into one rather strong headwind.
Decals my @r$e!

Offline zenrat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 19040
  • Currently on double secret probation.
Re: The Flying Machines of Unconventional Means GB - Discussion
« Reply #104 on: March 21, 2019, 03:20:30 am »
It all depends on one's frame of reference I suppose.

Dave's journey into the world of Flettner wings (in his build thread elsewhere) reminded me of Magnus effect spherical airships.



Spinning the sphere backwards while the airship moves forwards generates lift.  Varying the speed varies the amount of lift.
Fred

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

My name is Commander William Riker.  Take me to your women.