[Spaceships] Ornithopter Wings no longer TL5+2!

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Vehicles the size of birds (and pterosaurs ) are pretty damn useful (and getting moreso). Especially if you want to put something in the air and have it not burn gas all the time to stay up there (but you want something more controllable than a gasbag).

Of course, but the thread title is about much much larger spaceships' wings.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Of course, but the thread title is about much much larger spaceships' wings.

SM+4 can be 8 metres across, depending on shape/proportions, right? The higher SMs get more dubious, depending on materials and drivetrains TL.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Of course, but the thread title is about much much larger spaceships' wings.

Yeah but the subject is more about whether ornithopters are practical at TL9.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

SM+4 can be 8 metres across, depending on shape/proportions, right? The higher SMs get more dubious, depending on materials and drivetrains TL.

Spaceship's SMs are actually about mass not size.

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

SM+4 can be 8 metres across, depending on shape/proportions, right? The higher SMs get more dubious, depending on materials and drivetrains TL.

A SM+4 spaceship masses 30 tons, far heavier than any flying animal that has ever existed.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Spaceship's SMs are actually about mass not size.

Yes they are. Which is kinda inconvenient when one tries to think about large but light craft. But of course, SS weren't originally intended for such ideas.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

A SM+4 spaceship masses 30 tons, far heavier than any flying animal that has ever existed.

Yeah, I agree that ornithopters for Spacecraft is purely "clockpunk" (and really only makes sense with luminferous ether or something anyway). Is vicky arguing that ornithopter powered spacecraft are TL9 or merely that practical (non-novelty) ornithopters are?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Vehicles the size of birds (and pterosaurs ) are pretty damn useful (and getting moreso). Especially if you want to put something in the air and have it not burn gas all the time to stay up there (but you want something more controllable than a gasbag).

The benefits of an ornithopter over a conventional airplane is that it has a better loiter mode than a helicopter and a better stall speed than a conventional airplane. The benefit of a conventional airplane is that it's much much cheaper and easier to build, and the advantages just aren't that big, the stall speed just isn't all that valuable.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The benefits of an ornithopter over a conventional airplane is that it has a better loiter mode than a helicopter and a better stall speed than a conventional airplane. The benefit of a conventional airplane is that it's much much cheaper and easier to build, and the advantages just aren't that big, the stall speed just isn't all that valuable.

Real gyrocopters can get some impressively slow stall speeds.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The benefits of an ornithopter over a conventional airplane is that it has a better loiter mode than a helicopter and a better stall speed than a conventional airplane. The benefit of a conventional airplane is that it's much much cheaper and easier to build, and the advantages just aren't that big, the stall speed just isn't all that valuable.

It is in certain applications, tactical recon for example, where you might want something that can hover and has long loiter times (or is cheaper to fuel). Also ornithopters scale to pretty small platforms, which jet engines don't.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Real gyrocopters can get some impressively slow stall speeds.

They typically have worse drag performance than fixed wings; it's the same as a helicopter, really.