Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-03-2012, 05:05 AM   #11
Pomphis
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicfish View Post
Bad choice. Aircraft frames are very strong, very light, and very cheap. I would not make commercial planes less than Expensive, and combat jets are generally Advanced. And both will usually be Very Heavy.

Heavy Cheap is more appropriate to a truck.
But Advanced XH frames are seriously expensive and result in really high aMR.
Pomphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 05:08 AM   #12
Pomphis
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitestreak View Post
OK, as a former aircraft maintenance person in the USAF, I can promise that there is no access space for aircraft engines.
I suspect that what VE2 calls access space may well be for example air intakes. The question in VE2 terms is not what we call it, but whether an engine in a body takes up significantly more space than an engine in a pod. At least based on some drawings I have seen this may be the case.
Pomphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 07:23 AM   #13
Phaelen Bleux
World Traveler in Training
 
Phaelen Bleux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pomphis View Post
I suspect that what VE2 calls access space may well be for example air intakes. The question in VE2 terms is not what we call it, but whether an engine in a body takes up significantly more space than an engine in a pod. At least based on some drawings I have seen this may be the case.
Well, the only official example I can find to help us is a write up for the Harrier S/VTOL in Vehicles that does include access space.

Although I still like the argument that there is no, or very little, access space for aircraft if the engine has to come out to work on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pomphis View Post
But Advanced XH frames are seriously expensive and result in really high aMR.
1. Military jets are seriously expensive. 2. The F-111 does feature some advanced tech in wing design, so it does perhaps deserve a high aMR.

Since aMR is based on Wing HP and LWgt, and Wing HP is based on Wing Area, we can look up Area and Weight. If we take Extra Heavy Frame for jets as canon, there is little room to juggle aMR.
__________________
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." -- Kierkegaard

http://aerodrome.hamish.tripod.com

Last edited by Phaelen Bleux; 11-03-2012 at 07:27 AM.
Phaelen Bleux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 09:55 AM   #14
Pomphis
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux View Post
Although I still like the argument that there is no, or very little, access space for aircraft if the engine has to come out to work on it.
"Access" space I agree. But air intakes and the tunnels (?) between them and the engines may take space too, and maybe VE2 simply uses what it calls access space to account for them. Look at where the air intakes of the F-111 are. The F-111 has a length of 22.4 m. The TF-30 has a length of 6.139 m.
Pomphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 09:58 AM   #15
Pomphis
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux View Post
1. Military jets are seriously expensive. 2. The F-111 does feature some advanced tech in wing design, so it does perhaps deserve a high aMR.
1. Using different materials helps to account for example for the cost difference between a F-15 and a F-22.

2. I prefer to keep some difference WRT maneuverability between planes like F-111, F-14, Tornado or Lightning and planes like F-15 or F-16.
Pomphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 11:50 AM   #16
Phaelen Bleux
World Traveler in Training
 
Phaelen Bleux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pomphis View Post
1. Using different materials helps to account for example for the cost difference between a F-15 and a F-22.
Well, in that case the materials have a lot more to do with the stealth technology of the F-22.

Quote:
2. I prefer to keep some difference WRT maneuverability between planes like F-111, F-14, Tornado or Lightning and planes like F-15 or F-16.
I agree. But what real-world stat can you point to to differentiate aMRs? Being able to pull a certain amount of Gs? That would really be more of a aAccel thing. Certainly an F-16 has much better maneuverability than an F-111. . .but what spec can I use to know the difference? (I mean, it would be great if there was a real-world value that one could use validate one's design.)

And I concede that Access Space (if only to go specifically with the RAW) is required in the design.
__________________
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." -- Kierkegaard

http://aerodrome.hamish.tripod.com
Phaelen Bleux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:18 PM   #17
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux View Post
I agree. But what real-world stat can you point to to differentiate aMRs? Being able to pull a certain amount of Gs? That would really be more of a aAccel thing. .
Nope. See p.135 of Vehicles 2e. aMR is defined there as the maximum safe laod of Gs that a vehicle can withstand while maneuvering in flight. In RW vehcile write-ups this probably ends up beign described as "G-loading" with an F-16 having one of slightly more than 9.

aAccel can be found from "thrust-to-weigh ratio" or computed from takeoff weight (sometimes distinguished as light/air-to-air and heavy) and thrust. An F-16's thrust-to-weight of 1 to 1 translates to an aAccel of 20mph/second.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:59 PM   #18
Phaelen Bleux
World Traveler in Training
 
Phaelen Bleux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
In RW vehcile write-ups this probably ends up beign described as "G-loading" with an F-16 having one of slightly more than 9.
Ta-da! When I have more time to surf, it would be interesting to look up that spec for a number of jets.
__________________
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." -- Kierkegaard

http://aerodrome.hamish.tripod.com
Phaelen Bleux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 06:58 PM   #19
Whitestreak
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Elk Grove, CA
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phaelen Bleux View Post
Ta-da! When I have more time to surf, it would be interesting to look up that spec for a number of jets.
Remember, though, that while planes may be able to take 9G's, the real limiter is the *pilot's* ability to take the G's. It's a rare flight when the G-meter gets pegged out and the pilot retiurns to base safely, in that aircraft.
Whitestreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 09:31 PM   #20
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
 
DouglasCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
Default Re: [3e] F-111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
In RW vehcile write-ups this probably ends up beign described as "G-loading" with an F-16 having one of slightly more than 9.
FYI I watched a training film at the Naval Air Warfare Center, Warminster of an F-16 instructor pulling over 10g (I think it maxed at 10.5) to avoid slamming into the ground after the trainee suffered GLOC on a break turn.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC
My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify
My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon
DouglasCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
3rd edition, vehicle

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.