Aircraft the MP would use?

[nduffy]

Originally Posted by mmartin798

I remember suggesting that air plasma could be generated to produce thrust for a jet engine a few years ago on this forum and almost being scoffed at for the idea. Well, whose laughing now?

https://interestingengineering.com/t...ral-air-travel

Same with NASA GL-10, as some said it was only a demonstrator and scale-up would take a long time. Three years to the X-57 Maxwell is not that long. Still a ways to go, but with testing slated for next year, electric-powered flight is starting to look good.

In game, we have time travel, "light" fusion reactors in the 1MW range and more. Somehow a fusion powered jet just doesn't seem that unreasonable to me.

Would this concept work with turbo props? Seeing a turbo prop is essentially a jet engine. Would open up some interesting doors for aircraft, Like a C-130 or OV-10 or even helicopters. There is also the venerable old Otter and Aztec. Perfect aircraft for the MP.. They were designed for less than ideal run ways.

[mmartin798]

Originally Posted by nduffy

Would this concept work with turbo props? Seeing a turbo prop is essentially a jet engine. Would open up some interesting doors for aircraft, Like a C-130 or OV-10 or even helicopters. There is also the venerable old Otter and Aztec. Perfect aircraft for the MP.. They were designed for less than ideal run ways.

No reason it couldn't work. The air plasma is just used to drive the turbine just like burning fuel. Since they are just using microwaves to produce the air plasma, there is probably not much in additional shielding needed.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Not an aircraft per se, but it does involve flying.
Gravity Industries have been developing individual flying suits that are quite amazing to see in operation.
While the tech is well known, they are apparently refining it to give better fuel consumption (as flight time is limited to the amount of fuel a person can carry).
It uses quite a bit as you are quite literally strapping jet engines to your body.

The system is being touted as a useful tool for mountain rescue units to bring immediate first aid to injured people but I can imagine that Morrow Teams would use it for such things as reconnaissance as well.
There's some claims that the system can fly higher and faster than the specifications given on the webpages but it's been limited for safety reasons



https://www.yankodesign.com/2018/07/...uits-are-here/
https://www.thedrive.com/tech/23483/...series-in-2019
https://www.autofutures.tv/2020/09/2...ef-test-pilot/

The company itself
https://gravity.co/

This video is worth watching over all others because it gives a lot of insight into the development of the system rather than the usual publicity style of video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YWl...ature=emb_logo

The system uses liquid fuelled jets at the moment, but with the special knowledge that Bruce brought back with him, I can imagine Morrow Industries developing something that doesn't need an inefficient liquid fuelled engine to develop the necessary thrust.

[gamerguy]

Rather than taking a relatively inefficient design and translating it back to being used for something simple why are we reinventing the wheel and gold plating the tread?

Just use electric motors powered by the reactors. Basic, plain motors will do everything you need for any prop plane. Even with the earliest teotwawki you could make high powered brushless motors available so you get good efficiencies. The ONLY benefit provided by jets is they are small and light FOR THE VERY HIGH POWER REQUIREMENTS TO GO FAST. If you are talking OV-10s, C130s, CH-47s etc. electric motors will work fine, brushless will make them small light and efficient and you don't need handwavium to make them work. You would only need jets if you have to go near sonic or faster. No one else is doing that and I do not see any need for TMP either. Especially as high subsonic will get you there and reactors have all the range you need. If you just have to have fast look at the Tu-95.

[mmartin798]

I agree that for the most part using brushless electric motors fits the bill. I did weight and volume calculations, using the volume calculations for reactors I made before 4th ed, and the swap was volumetrically equivalent and slightly lighter.

The only reason I brought up electric jets before was for the reason you mentioned, speed. My question at the time was would there be a need for high-speed cross country air travel. At the time, most did not think so.

[gamerguy]

I also thought about high speed cross country transport. In either case you have trade offs, speed vs load capacity. That is why I suggested looking at the Tu-95. The speed vs load is obvious with that one. Personally I would compare with planes with partial or full pressurization like DC-7s or Lockheed Constellations. One day to cross the continent seems quite livable. Unless you are going to look at Concord or similar an electric Connie works well.

The other "issue" with too fast a plane becomes the issue where players may start just sitting an waiting for support. This is supposed to be a game of you are on your own. Even teams who have been out for years are still intended to be isolated. If you know big brother can be here with a war load in X hours, why do the hard work. Or the players or project director becomes the general always looking over your shoulder syndrome.

Just my $0.02.

[mmartin798]

All this discussion about aircraft got me taking a longer look at the Airscout in both the 3rd and 4th editions. It really seems to be something that looked good, but really doesn't work.

Forgetting the fact that it is a gyrocopter and can't do VTOL or hover in most circumstances, the load outs on both make little sense. Fully loaded with guns, ammo, and missiles, it really can't handle a 2-man crew, unless they are really small or children. The average weight of each would have to be 57kg for 4th ed and 53kg for 3rd edition. The 4th edition version gets really bad if you add the reserve fuel tank for additional range, bringing the ave weight per person to 35kg. You really have to leave off the missiles to get a per-person weight of around 70kg.

There are VTOL fixed-wing drones that can operate at higher altitudes, can loiter for up to 24 hours, and operates at ranges of 250km from the base station. These can do a much better job of mapping and surveillance work in a much smaller and lighter package. The only thing you don't get is the flying weapons platform.

Given all this, I really cannot think of a good use case for the Airscout.

[nduffy]

Originally Posted by gamerguy

I also thought about high speed cross country transport. In either case you have trade offs, speed vs load capacity. That is why I suggested looking at the Tu-95. The speed vs load is obvious with that one. Personally I would compare with planes with partial or full pressurization like DC-7s or Lockheed Constellations. One day to cross the continent seems quite livable. Unless you are going to look at Concord or similar an electric Connie works well.

The other "issue" with too fast a plane becomes the issue where players may start just sitting an waiting for support. This is supposed to be a game of you are on your own. Even teams who have been out for years are still intended to be isolated. If you know big brother can be here with a war load in X hours, why do the hard work. Or the players or project director becomes the general always looking over your shoulder syndrome.

Just my $0.02.

I try to avoid jets over all and go with older tech for aircraft. An eccentric collector can "buy" older aircraft and have them restored, rebuilt or even manufactured. I try not to put the MP as a heavy military power, but we all know the truth, you have to maintain some order and even potentially take on the local established benevolent dictator. Aircraft require large places to be stored in and also a runway to launch from. the logistics of that are pretty monumental. Not to mention it takes a large crew of men and materials to build, repair or restore a runway. (another bonus for VTOL and helicopters). I always waited a while before any really good asset teams could be woke. Gotta make them earn their cookies. Also its always fun to deny them the asset (weather/mechanical) or delay it to make the team think more out of the box or think twice before the engage a larger force or go poking the bear.

[nduffy]

Originally Posted by mmartin798

I agree that for the most part using brushless electric motors fits the bill. I did weight and volume calculations, using the volume calculations for reactors I made before 4th ed, and the swap was volumetrically equivalent and slightly lighter.

The only reason I brought up electric jets before was for the reason you mentioned, speed. My question at the time was would there be a need for high-speed cross country air travel. At the time, most did not think so.

Slow is smooth, smooth is fast.

[Gelrir]

In our "Classic era" campaign, the only aircraft player-characters have seen usefully employed are Project conversions of the Helio Super Courier (more specifically, the U-10D military version).

The Project in our campaign wanted an un-threatening aircraft that didn't need much in the way of runways, and less maintenance than a big cargo helicopter.

The engine on a Super Courier weighs 226 kg dry ...

Our stats: http://asmrb.pbworks.com/w/page/1296...nsport%20Plane

--
Michael B.