Jump to content
papabees

CAVSO True Scale

Recommended Posts

Well... yeah... but...

 

But ... but it's a flying brick. The thrust needed for the drag would... The thermal protection alone... And the structural loads between those doors ... huge cut outs make the stress in the side... and ... and... completely unrealis...

 

wait...

 

yeah...

 

Sci fi.

 

That would work.

 

But not NEAR as pretty as what I drew this morning. Nor does that Herc get me the 3d printer I need. I meant want. I mean need.

 

So THERE. :P :)

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I could buy that beast (or something close to it) as a lander*. The shape could work-ish as a lifting body. Now as a take-off-er ... not so much.  ^_^

 

* Absent the abundant stress risers you mentioned. But curve the corners of the openings a bit and posit high-tensile-strength SF materials and it's not too far out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given all the talking, head scratching, and beard pulling around the KS aircraft's eventual scale, the whole "true scale" vs not-TS, I was curious and itching to run some basic aircraft design equations on the models in the KS, just to see if they were "true" and possible. Geeky, yeah, for sure. But those will have to wait. What would a dropship look like? I was burning to drop a dropship into the middle of the discussion, as that's the model that I figure would never make the cut as a true scale. It'd be much too big, so why bother having any aircraft in True Scale?

 

Turns out, after making a few technological leaps, it's not horrible. Start with it carrying 3 max weight Super chassis CAVs (or an equivalent 18 small chassis CAVs; although I'd bet that it would bulk-out before number eight boarded). A "true scale" dropship with my assumptions and calcs, comes out to have about an 18.9in (48 cm) wingspan with an average width of 2.5in (6.4 cm). The "real" span is 284 ft (87m). The fuselage is probably as long or longer than the wing span. It's really sensitive to speed and altitude, so that can vary a lot, and there's bound to be some VTOL going on which could shrink things. So it's big, but I can see the possibility of it hitting the table and not looking stupid. Massive, gargantuan, needing a large open space, and a showcase miracle of future engineering. But not unbelievable.

 

Now this all has me wanting to pick up a 3D printer.

 

I'd love to see the results of those calculations.  I can't give you accurate sizes for the fig or 'real' sizes from the fluff, but the current 'true scale' [which was not 1/180] Tsuiseki is ~2.5" long and ~3" wingtip to wingtip.  Girot can get you more accurate measurements; I'm going off his top-down photo a few pages back. 

 

Some ugly math until someone gets us better numbers: We know that CAV previous to CAV:SO was scaled to N-gauge railroading, which is 1/148 to 1/160...N-gauge is fixed at 9mm apart, and real railroad gauges range from 1m to nearly 5', necessitating some difference in scale.  Assuming the TS in question is truly scaled, it's not hard to reverse engineer what the new measurements should be in 1/180.  I'm kind of annoyed with myself that I haven't thought to try this before now; a lot of arguing and hissing and spitting could have been saved had the idea popped up 8 pages ago.  The formulas are there too, for when numbers more accurate than an eyeballed photograph come in.

 

TS Tsuiseki (metal):

- ~2.5" Long

- ~3" Wide

 

N-descaled (1/148) [X * 148 / 12]:

- 30.83' Long

- 37' Wide

 

N-descaled (1/160) [X * 160 / 12]:

33.33' Long

40' Wide

 

1/180 Figure Measurements (1/148 base) [X * 148 / 180]:

- 2.05" Long

- 2.46" Wide

 

1/80 Figure Measurements (1/160 base) [X * 160 / 180]:

- 2.22" Long

- 2.66" Wide

 

I can live with either one of those final measurements, though for obvious reasons would prefer the current TS to be 1/160 (bigger end result!).  Neither one is as big as the current one [which is aww-worthy], and nowhere near as big as an A10 at 1/180 would be (3.55" long, 3.83" wide)...but what we now have is figure sizes based on in-scale measurements, rather than having to rely on conjecture based on the real-world inspiration.

 

so much for becoming a lurker until the KS ended...

 

 

Edited to react to the posts above:

I really, really, really, really, REALLY need to find a kit for that Herc.  Holy carp, do want, physics be ****ed.

Edited by Foxden Racing
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, don't the upward parts on the wings get in the way of the guns?

 

tlc-theygotus1.jpg

 

Yes. Building giant walking tanks and spaceships to carry them in where simple, but our engineers couldn't design a computer system to stop the guns from firing when pointing at the wings. ::P:

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously, shooting the wings is user error.  Do we have to do everything for these imbiciles?

 

--- The Engineers

 

Bah, quote codes are funny here...I can't attribute it to the engineers, it automatically gives it to Chrome.

Edited by Foxden Racing
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Building giant walking tanks and spaceships to carry them in where simple, but our engineers couldn't design a computer system to stop the guns from firing when pointing at the wings. ::P:

Oh, the engineers are quite capable of that. What they aren't capable of yet is designing a system that idiots can't break...
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removing safety features was a common trend in the JoR books.  Breeders or energy weapons too powerful and would damage themselves.  Gunships with engines so strong they would rip themselves apart.  And the first thing pilots would do is disable all the limiters intended to stop that from happening.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just take your time and you'll do fine.  Paper craft is wonderful in that you can just reprint mistakes and try again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just take your time and you'll do fine.  Paper craft is wonderful in that you can just reprint mistakes and try again.

 

Which is exactly why I want to do one on a 3D printer. I can bash and screw things up in 3D so much, and I've little patience for details. Got into the hobby for that reason alone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...