Chapter X - Blaze of Glory

Metras

Spaceman
Well, even so. Symmetrical ships were originally designed 'symmetrical' when they were aircraft, and were dependant on aerodynamics, etc. If there was a non-symmetrical aircraft, then it would not fly properly (in essence, it would always fly 'lop-sided')
 

klaus

Spaceman
Don't give them too many ideas, lest they start using flying saucers in the games. Like they did in XCOM Interceptor.


------------------
The WC Source Code Release Project needs you!

"This matter winds itself ever in new riddles.", Faramir - The Lord of The Rings

"...we follow the sun, we follow the sun, we follow the sun..."

[This message has been edited by klaus (edited June 04, 2000).]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Ah, Klaus is back. Means I'll have more comments soon
.

Earthworm: Ships in space don't really need to be symmetrical - but most Confed ships seem to have atmospheric flight capabilities too. If you take a look at the Ekapshi, you will notice that it's also very symmetrical (not 100%, but close). Clearly then, symmetrical designs still are important.
As for the pointy parts, I'm of mixed feelings about them. On one hand, they looked more dangerous (as Kilrathi fighters should). But on the other hand, the designs are too pointy, and way too simplified. Just take a look at the Sorthak. Now, the Jalkehi - that was a great design.


I don't think this is the appropriate place to invoke the Drift - we really should keep these story threads relatively uncluttered, you know
. Just so people can actually find the story
. So, why don't we just wait for my next chapter (soon... very soon), and then you can start telling me all about how... how... well, I wouldn't want to give anything away, but I'm sure you'll find something wrong. You always do
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Oh, of course! <slaps himself on the head> If the silly hydrogen scoops generate enough friction to slow you down from several thou kps down to normal speeds, then assymetrical designs will keep you flying in circles
.



[This message has been edited by Quarto (edited June 04, 2000).]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Metras

Spaceman
Oh of course!

No, symmetrical designs also look good, because present day, all aircraft are symmetrical, and the human psique can have something to relate to, making it look 'right'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Earthworm

Spaceman
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Quarto:
If you take a look at the Ekapshi, you will notice that it's also very symmetrical (not 100%, but close).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>But that could be because the Ekapshi is an atmospheric fighter.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial">quote:</font><HR> Clearly then, symmetrical designs still are important.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>If you plan to go into atmosphere, than yes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Metras

Spaceman
Let me put an interesting question on the table.

What ADVANTAGE does a non-symmetrical craft have?



------------------
Metras
Member of BlackLance HQ

"To take one step forward, you must look back three steps... and walk forward while looking back... "
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Earthworm

Spaceman
In many ocasions it looks better.
And that's the only thing that counts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Gee, I guess Earthworm didn't notice that bit where I said most Confed fighters seem to have atmospheric flight capabilities
. Well, all right. Not most. But still, you get the point, non?
Fighter designs should retain some atmospheric flight capabilities, and symmetry does that well (though is not strictly necessary).

An asymmetrical craft has several advantages. Firstly, it can look damned awesome (if done right). I don't know about the other advantages though
. I guess sometimes it just works better. The Germans had an asymmetrical craft in WWII, though I can't for the life of me remember how to spell its name...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Earthworm

Spaceman
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Quarto:
Gee, I guess Earthworm didn't notice that bit where I said most Confed fighters seem to have atmospheric flight capabilities
.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Oh, he did all right. 'cept the Ekapshi is an atmospheric only fighter.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial">quote:</font><HR>An asymmetrical craft has several advantages. Firstly, it can look damned awesome (if done right). I don't know about the other advantages though
. I guess sometimes it just works better. The Germans had an asymmetrical craft in WWII, though I can't for the life of me remember how to spell its name...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Well, if the Germans had it than it must be a good thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
I don't think it was that great a plane... certainly, I'd've ne'er heard o' it if it wasn't for my older brother who happens to like asymmetrical planes
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top