Subject:
|
Re: Theoretical Question: Missile Design
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Sat, 7 Jun 2003 01:47:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
474 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Andrew Lillie wrote:
| |
In lugnet.space, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
i ask because on my fighters i often use “wings” which i call stabilizers.
The idea is that having engines farther away from the central axis would
make the fighter more maneuverable and stable. “wings” also work well in
mounting guns on the wings with that they create an ‘X’ with their gunfire,
which makes aiming and hitting enemies easier.
|
Hmm, well, having the engines farther away from the central axis might make
it more manoeuverable (as you could steer in certain directions merely by
applying differential thrust), I’m pretty sure it would also cause the ship
to be less stable in straight flight. Unless your engines all had idential
efficiencies and output, the tiny variances in thrust would necessitate
constant minor corrections to remain straight. OK, so perhaps that’s not
exactly less stable, but certainly it would be less efficient.
|
The most effecient way to do that is to have 1 engine and a bunch of rotational
thrusters that let you turn to put the engine where you want it.
James
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Theoretical Question: Missile Design
|
| (...) Hmm, well, having the engines farther away from the central axis might make it more manoeuverable (as you could steer in certain directions merely by applying differential thrust), I'm pretty sure it would also cause the ship to be less stable (...) (21 years ago, 6-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
