Aerodynamic sleekness

S

Shipgate

Rear Admiral
Have you discussed much before why ships in so many space-flight sims are super sleek and sharp? I understand why it would be necassary for atmospheric missions. But why would the majority of them be like they are? That's why I find the Privateer 2 ships so interesting is that there's these ones that are so bulky and tank-like. Or like the rock ships in WC3. They seem like they'd be really protected due to the way they were shaped. Were the rock ships designed just to look like rocks to fool other ships, or were they literally plated with rock?

I suppose if I were an engineer designing a ship in space, I would just make it look really functional and raw. That rawness might even deceive enemies and make it look like an easy target. I think one of my favorite looking ships in science fiction would be the Scimitar from ST: Nemesis. It looks incomplete in certain areas and the bridge looks really unpolished. But I'm totally convinced it's got power and toughness to it. It looks truly designed for what its function is.

What I like about the Kilrathi fighters is they really seem to justify why they are so aerodynamic. I think it was in the WC3 manual that they discuss that many rookie pilots are easily intimidated by them because they are reminiscent of claws and teeth and that that was probably intentional in the design, to intimidate the enemy.
 
well sleekness can also be attributed to ballistics, as sharp flat surface will deflect better since whatever hits it will be at an oblique angle. One of the reasons why it is best to attack fighters from an angle (especially after turrets).

And there is something about a sleek ship that makes it look predatory...and dangerous.
 
But the terran ships in WC 3-4 looks like flying lunch boxes.
at least most of them do.
 
some are looking like ordinary areo plane, just take a look on hellcat or excal, but arrow, thunderbolt, bearcat and longbow is looking more like boxes.... Hm, in theorhy they dont need to be shaped at all, unless its to avoid radar or a more efective armor...
 
Some, but not all, fighters are able to make atmospheric maneuvers. Even the Rapier-B was able to make some very, very limited atmospheric runs against terrain bound targets.
 
my guess would be that the aerodynamic shapes make it possible for all fighters to glide-land on a planet in an emergency, like the space shuttle does regularly

also, the ships in WC4 were obviously not designed to reduce radar signature - the Hellcat's wings are huge radar reflectors
 
don't forget moment of inertia. When an object has more mass on the outer edges then balanced on the interior it is harder to rotate that object inregards to that reference frame. Or think of a straight solid beam with a solid rectangular cross section, then a beam with same length, same mass, but with a cross section of a hollow square (the thickenss of the walls being much thinner then the beams to account for = mass), the one with the hollow square would actually be much harder to twist then the solid rectangular beam.

How does this apply to ships in space? Well regardless of aerodynamics concerning drags and friction, in space you still have mass, and hence still have to account for inertia. An aerodynamic ship in space would be very sleek, not for frictions sake, but to concentate mass towards the center of the object to allow for more agility. Asymetrical ships are even worse cause they would have the center of inertia off from the center of the craft and would continually want to rotate the craft to the side with less mass.

Hence why sleekness in space is still relevent :p
 
casperXJ said:
also, the ships in WC4 were obviously not designed to reduce radar signature - the Hellcat's wings are huge radar reflectors
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Since most of the ships one encounters are mostly head-on and side-views (other then top views), I would think they did incorporate some passive stealth. Look at the Bearcat, top view is just as bad as a Hellcat, but there's so many angles and such a low profile head on that the radar signature will be minimized.

Also, the WC4 novel said that the Arrow was a small wedge-shaped design that had the smallest scanner signature of the Fleet.

The stealth bomber of today also has large ass wings when you see it on top but profile virtually nil when you see it head on. And as for radar signature, well . . . that's why they call it a stealth bomber.
 
Yeah, look at this bearcat you can see it's stealth design and aerodynamic sleekness
 

Attachments

  • bearcat.jpg
    bearcat.jpg
    27.8 KB · Views: 196
Shipgate, to answer your question about the Kilrathi asteroid-ships, they were designed that way to fool other ships into thinking they're rocks. That way, the Kilrathi can ambush ships in asteroid fields.
 
Moonsword said:
Shipgate, to answer your question about the Kilrathi asteroid-ships, they were designed that way to fool other ships into thinking they're rocks. That way, the Kilrathi can ambush ships in asteroid fields.
Click to expand...


yeah, but its covered with real rock.
 
I think either the WC3 novel or the WC3 official guide state that the K'ha'haf-Asteroid fighter is indeed covered with real rock which also explains its high armour value.
 
I wonder why the WC1 and WC2 ships are excellent aerodynamic shapes (like the Morningstar) but the WCP ones are much less so.
 
psych said:
What are you talking about? Since most of the ships one encounters are mostly head-on and side-views (other then top views), I would think they did incorporate some passive stealth. Look at the Bearcat, top view is just as bad as a Hellcat, but there's so many angles and such a low profile head on that the radar signature will be minimized.

Also, the WC4 novel said that the Arrow was a small wedge-shaped design that had the smallest scanner signature of the Fleet.

The stealth bomber of today also has large ass wings when you see it on top but profile virtually nil when you see it head on. And as for radar signature, well . . . that's why they call it a stealth bomber.
Click to expand...

(insert foot in mouth) Sorry, I was only thinking of the Hellcat, Longbow, and Thunderbolt.
 
Yes, Origin's Official Guide to Wing Commander III claims that the K'ha'haf is "covered in a few thousand tonnes of rock".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top