Vectored Thrust, Aerodynamics, Cloaking

Eugh, I think you've got this one completely wrong. To suggest that "they aren't equipped for planetary overpressure" implies that they can be so equipped is just like suggesting that "The Sopwith Camel can't carry Tomahawk cruise missiles" implies that the Camel could carry such missiles. It simply makes no sense - you're essentially arguing that the fact that someone specifically said you're wrong actually proves that you're right .

I don't think your analogy washes properly because it's just a pair of completely dissimilar concepts that have been put together specifically because they're an impossible combination.

My point is that there must be something unique about this situation: why is Halcyon warning us we can't fly in an atmosphere... *now*? Or, more importantly, *ever* -- if I'm your Sopwith Camel pilot, I *know* what kind of ordinance it can and cannot carry... so my Wing Commander mentioning that to me in one particular briefing is quite unusual.

It's not even some new kind of ordinance - it's a universal concept, a type of combat, that he's suddenly warning us about. If Halcyon were saying "oh, and your Rapier can't mount the new Hyper-javelin Super-missile", then I'd understand what you were saying... but he's telling us, for some reason, that the Rapier can't fly in an atmosphere in this mission.

I think we have to separate two things here - atmospheric flight, and atmospheric combat flight. In the case of the Rapier II, it's clear that the ship is capable of one, and it's equally clear that the ship is incapable of the other. Whether or not the Rapier II ever could be equipped for atmospheric combat flight is a silly thing to debate - we know that it's not equipped for it, and nowhere in any WC source are we given any reason to believe that it can be equipped for it. The fact that it happens with other ships (although there's no direct evidence that it does) is absolutely irrelevant, because there's no reason to take those other examples as being representative of a general trend.

Any WC source... other than End Run?
 
Bandit LOAF said:
Are there exceptions? Yes! We are specifically told that the F-117 Rapier (the movie Rapier, wags) can't fly in the atmosphere... but that's really the only one that comes to mind.

Didn't Blair have to dive down into the atmosphere during an attack in Pilgrim Stars?
 
wouldn't it be logical for a fairly good percentage of fighters to be capable of atmospheric flight?the only fighters that dont look like they can handle it is the banshee and avenger everything else look very aerodynamic but then again i know it dont prove much but I'm also guessing some planets would need ground based fighters for defense
 
Bandit LOAF said:
I don't think your analogy washes properly because it's just a pair of completely dissimilar concepts that have been put together specifically because they're an impossible combination.
That was the intention, yes :).

My point is that there must be something unique about this situation: why is Halcyon warning us we can't fly in an atmosphere... *now*? Or, more importantly, *ever* -- if I'm your Sopwith Camel pilot, I *know* what kind of ordinance it can and cannot carry... so my Wing Commander mentioning that to me in one particular briefing is quite unusual.
I can think of all sorts of reasons, though - maybe Hunter did something stupid (which happened to be the reason we were reminded to use ACLS). Or maybe this was the first opportunity Blair had to be flying a Rapier near a planet, and Halcyon wanted to make sure that Blair didn't try to fly it like a Scimitar (especially since it seems in most cases, Blair's atmospheric Scimitar flights ended in an ejection pod :) ). On the other hand, I can't imagine a unique reason that would specifically be related to the Rapiers - either the ships were equipped from the start for atmospheric flight, or they weren't. I have a hard time imagining why the Rapiers would have suddenly stopped being capable of atmospheric flight - which is really the only Rapier-related context in which your interpretation of Halcyon's comments would apply.


It's not even some new kind of ordinance - it's a universal concept, a type of combat, that he's suddenly warning us about. If Halcyon were saying "oh, and your Rapier can't mount the new Hyper-javelin Super-missile", then I'd understand what you were saying... but he's telling us, for some reason, that the Rapier can't fly in an atmosphere in this mission.

Any WC source... other than End Run?
I'll readily admit that I forgot about Bear flying a Rapier in atmosphere in End Run... but it doesn't help your case in the least. The Rapier that Bear was flying was an F-44G - Blair was flying an F-44A. Bear's Rapier was 19 metres long and weighed 13.5 tonnes, while Blair's was 24 metres long and weighed 15 metres. It is easily conceivable that the changes made in the G version (or one of the earlier versions) added the capability for atmospheric flight to the Rapier, and it may even be that this is one of the reasons for the ship's altered dimensions... but what you were implying is that even an F-44A could be equipped to fight in the atmosphere, for which your only evidence is... the fact that we are told the F-44A is not capable of fighting in the atmosphere.
 
Interesting though that we see fighters in the WC universe that are specifically built for atmospheric combat. The Kilrathi Strahka and the Confed Gotha. This would indicate to me that the standard space combat craft were not optimized for atmospheric combat. This doesn't mean that they couldn't engage targets in an atmosphere.

My spin-- All fighters can enter an atmosphere. Some space combat planes through variations are optomized for air combat; so an F-44G could be primarily for Space, and an F-44I could be primed for atmospheric combat. And finally, a few fighters like the Strahka, were built specifically for air combat.
 
You mean Strakha, not Strahka... though what you really mean, I believe, is the Ekapshi :). Strakha are the stealth fighters... or is there actually some kind of "Strahka" that I'm forgetting about?

...But I don't think the presence of dedicated atmospheric fighters is any evidence one way or another in this question. I mean, Confed has many fighters that can carry torpedoes, and many more that can't carry torpedoes... and it also has dedicated bombers. The point being, you can design dedicated atmospheric fighters, and it won't mean that your other fighters can't fight in the atmosphere... but it also won't mean that they can.
 
You mean Strakha, not Strahka... though what you really mean, I believe, is the Ekapshi . Strakha are the stealth fighters... or is there actually some kind of "Strahka" that I'm forgetting about?

You are absolutely right! I am sorry, I've been at work/school since 4am.

The point being, you can design dedicated atmospheric fighters, and it won't mean that your other fighters can't fight in the atmosphere... but it also won't mean that they can.

Right. I think I answered that though. All fighters can enter/exit the atmosphere of an Earth-like planet. How many of them can be good at both atmospheric and space combat though? This is why we see specific air fighters, like the Ekapshi. The Ekapshi can probably fly in space, but it is optimized for air combat.
 
Youngblood said:
wouldn't it be logical for a fairly good percentage of fighters to be capable of atmospheric flight?the only fighters that dont look like they can handle it is the banshee and avenger everything else look very aerodynamic but then again i know it dont prove much but I'm also guessing some planets would need ground based fighters for defense

The Avenger might not look very aerodynamic, but we have seen it make planetary landings just fine.

Quarto said:
I'll readily admit that I forgot about Bear flying a Rapier in atmosphere in End Run... but it doesn't help your case in the least. The Rapier that Bear was flying was an F-44G - Blair was flying an F-44A. Bear's Rapier was 19 metres long and weighed 13.5 tonnes, while Blair's was 24 metres long and weighed 15 metres. It is easily conceivable that the changes made in the G version (or one of the earlier versions) added the capability for atmospheric flight to the Rapier, and it may even be that this is one of the reasons for the ship's altered dimensions... but what you were implying is that even an F-44A could be equipped to fight in the atmosphere, for which your only evidence is... the fact that we are told the F-44A is not capable of fighting in the atmosphere.

The Rapiers in End Run were F-44C's, not G's. Taking into account that the F-44 frame seems perfectly atmosphere capable, and most Wing Commander ships can fight in an atmosphere, including relative non-aerodynamic slugs like the Longbow or Avenger, there's not too much reason to doubt that the Rapier can too.
 
ChrisReid said:
The Rapiers in End Run were F-44C's, not G's.
Actually, the Rapiers in End Run were supposedly F-54Cs :p. Unfortunately, it seems Mr. Forstchen got the Epee and Rapier designations mixed up.

Taking into account that the F-44 frame seems perfectly atmosphere capable, and most Wing Commander ships can fight in an atmosphere, including relative non-aerodynamic slugs like the Longbow or Avenger, there's not too much reason to doubt that the Rapier can too.
Uh, at the start of this debate, LOAF posted a quote from WC1 where Halcyon specifically tells us that this ship isn't equipped for atmospheric combat - so I daresay there is a reason :). Indeed, this reason had nothing to do with aerodynamics, but rather the pressure differential (which is understandable - if you design a ship with the assumption that it will always be operating in an environment where the pressure inside is higher than outside, the hull you develop won't necessarily be able to handle the reverse situation where the forces applied onto the ship are exactly the reverse).
 
I'll readily admit that I forgot about Bear flying a Rapier in atmosphere in End Run... but it doesn't help your case in the least. The Rapier that Bear was flying was an F-44G - Blair was flying an F-44A. Bear's Rapier was 19 metres long and weighed 13.5 tonnes, while Blair's was 24 metres long and weighed 15 metres. It is easily conceivable that the changes made in the G version (or one of the earlier versions) added the capability for atmospheric flight to the Rapier, and it may even be that this is one of the reasons for the ship's altered dimensions... but what you were implying is that even an F-44A could be equipped to fight in the atmosphere, for which your only evidence is... the fact that we are told the F-44A is not capable of fighting in the atmosphere.

It's all well and good to make fun of my argument in broad terms, but you must see what I'm getting at.

A close read of the passage is as unusual as the fact that it appears at all. The word 'equipped', for instance, suggests an option rather than a universal. It's exactly how you speak of options on a car - a car that "isn't equipped" with a CD player is one that doesn't have a CD player installed, not one that absolutely must never have a CD player (and in general terms, just stating that is often a suggestion that it actually *can be* equipped with whatever the missing luxury is).

The fact that Halcyon refers to "our fighters" instead of any specific fighter suggests that he's talking about the entire complement - which should include Scimitars that we certainly see fight in the atmosphere.

Don't we see SWC Rapier IIs in the atmosphere in the 'Vindicator' bombing scene?

The Kilrathi [Ekapshi] and the Confed Gotha. This would indicate to me that the standard space combat craft were not optimized for atmospheric combat. This doesn't mean that they couldn't engage targets in an atmosphere.

The Gotha was a "surface to space interceptor", which would be a ground-based fighter that intercepts things in space -- not an atmosphere fighter like the Ekapshi.

Right. I think I answered that though. All fighters can enter/exit the atmosphere of an Earth-like planet. How many of them can be good at both atmospheric and space combat though? This is why we see specific air fighters, like the Ekapshi. The Ekapshi can probably fly in space, but it is optimized for air combat.

I don't see anything in Wing Commander that would somehow prevent planets from having "aircraft" that could be used for defense. (The Ekapshi was probably intended to be this -- the WC3 Authorized Combat Guide calls it an 'aerospace fighter', though, which I suppose supports your claim.)

Actually, the Rapiers in End Run were supposedly F-54Cs . Unfortunately, it seems Mr. Forstchen got the Epee and Rapier designations mixed up.

That still leaves one wondering why you've decided that they're F-44Gs... in the mission in question, Bear's Rapier is armed with lasers and neutrons, not lasers and particle cannons.

(... maybe it wasn't equipped with the normal guns for that mission...)
 
Bandit LOAF said:
It's all well and good to make fun of my argument in broad terms, but you must see what I'm getting at.
Yes, I do see what you're getting at - and I agree that the idea of atmosphere-capable and non-capable ships is overblown... I just think that you're taking it too far in the opposite direction. It seems to me that to assume that any ship can be equipped for atmospheric flight does a disservice to the WC universe. It's as if we were to assume, based on the Confed Handbook description of the Krant, that any fighter can be equipped with a jump drive. Who knows - maybe that's actually true... but then jump-capable ships lose a lot of their uniqueness. And yeah, the atmospheric capabilities of fighters are largely determined by the needs of the developers, with the Hellcat suddenly developing atmospheric capability when WC4 calls for it... but if a WC source tells us that not all fighters are capable of (or at least good at) atmospheric combat, I don't think we should assume that any ship can be equipped for atmospheric combat merely because we've seen the Hellcat and Rapier II develop atmospheric combat capabilities in an unspecified manner.

In short, my argument is that not only there isn't enough evidence to prove what you're saying, but also - and more importantly - the WC universe loses a bit of its charm when we make this assumption., because all the fighters move a little towards vanilla-flavour.

The fact that Halcyon refers to "our fighters" instead of any specific fighter suggests that he's talking about the entire complement - which should include Scimitars that we certainly see fight in the atmosphere.
True... except that this is SM2, and Scimitars are no longer on the fighter compliment, because they were officially withdrawn from service at the start of the second mission. So, as far as I can tell, there's nothing preventing Halcyon's remarks to indeed applying to the entire compliment.

Don't we see SWC Rapier IIs in the atmosphere in the 'Vindicator' bombing scene?
Uh, I don't know, do we? :p Is this a scene from SWC? If it is, I'm afraid I haven't actually ever played SWC, so I wouldn't know.

That still leaves one wondering why you've decided that they're F-44Gs... in the mission in question, Bear's Rapier is armed with lasers and neutrons, not lasers and particle cannons.

(... maybe it wasn't equipped with the normal guns for that mission...)
Good point, I didn't notice that - and of course, it would make perfect sense for a variant of the Rapier intended to fight in the atmosphere to have neutrons, since particles are described as being useless in atmospheric conditions (...a detail unfortunately forgotten by the time WC4's atmospheric Hellcats appear). However, based on the fact that this is 2667, I'm willing to bet that whatever those Rapiers were, they had more in common with the F-44G than the F-44A :).
 
There is another instance of planetary flight - In WC2, Blair lands a Ferret on either Niven or Ghorah Khar, depending on whether you're on the winning or losing path out of Gwynned (the infamous "So I'm the Admiral's messenger boy?" line).
 
Here is my understanding of the situation in the mission: Blair and company will be fighting, at space-to-space speeds, near the edge of a planetary atmosphere. If they are not careful, they could unwittingly go to close to the planet while still at space-to-space speeds, resulting in a meteoric burn-up. Bear notes quite clearly that air-to-air speeds are much slower because of the aerodynamic stresses involved. Halcyon is warning the pilots to avoid trying to take the space battle into the atmosphere because he worries that their relative inexperience in transition from space-to-space to air-to-air fighting might cause them to try to go dangerously fast in atmosphere--or else simply to not pay attention and end up getting closer than they meant to.
 
The one thing I don't understand is this "pressure differential". Aren't they flying in pressurised cabins anyway? It seems so in the movie, their helmets are not sealed like in the other flight suits.
 
DyNaMiX said:
The one thing I don't understand is this "pressure differential". Aren't they flying in pressurised cabins anyway? It seems so in the movie, their helmets are not sealed like in the other flight suits.
Yes, they are... and that's probably the point - these ships normally fly in an environment where the pressure inside is much higher than the pressure outside. In atmospheric flight, this is no longer the case - although at high altitudes you'll still have higher pressure inside than outside, you nonetheless have different forces being applied. I'm not an engineer, so I can't explain anything more than that... but you can imagine, if you build a ship specifically to withstand a constant force pushing from the inside towards the outside of the ship, this design might have some features which prevent it from functioning well in a situation where the force from the inside is diminished or outright replaced by a force pushing from the outside into the ship.
 
Quarto said:
Yes, they are... and that's probably the point - these ships normally fly in an environment where the pressure inside is much higher than the pressure outside. In atmospheric flight, this is no longer the case - although at high altitudes you'll still have higher pressure inside than outside, you nonetheless have different forces being applied. I'm not an engineer, so I can't explain anything more than that... but you can imagine, if you build a ship specifically to withstand a constant force pushing from the inside towards the outside of the ship, this design might have some features which prevent it from functioning well in a situation where the force from the inside is diminished or outright replaced by a force pushing from the outside into the ship.


But see that's the thing. Aircraft face the same problem in the clouds as well. We face it. Always getting blocked ears etc. I'm assuming the pressure is set at a similar level on earth. If anything it'd make more sense that the closer you get inside an atmosphere, the easier it is on the ship. Because the planet's pressure and atmosphere would be similar to the ships, hence the force trying to cause the pressure to "explode" would dissappear the closer you get to sea level.
 
It would be my suggestion that when Halcyon mentions atmospheric overpressure, he is talking about "overpressure created by an explosion in an atmosphere," which is why he says how a close call with a missile (a missile exploding nearby) could cause your fighter to explode.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-23-25/gloss.htm

"increased atmospheric pressure (positive overpressure), followed by a wave of decreased atmospheric pressure (negative overpressure), produced around the origin of an explosive or violent detonation"

I would suggest that what Halycon means is not that the fighter cannot handle the transition into an atmosphere, or that the fighter even cannot engage in combat within an atmosphere, but that the fighter could not handle violent waves of pressure difference caused by a nearby missile explosion. This would severely limit pilot survivability due to the fact that a missile exploding close by could still spell their doom.
 
I'd assume that all ships can FLY in atmosphere, but only a few can FIGHT in atmosphere. I can't see why would they be unable to slowly cruise and land. But sure, combat maneuvers are another thing entirely.

Actually, this is also true for real, current aircraft. No 767's can pull the same combat maneuvers that a F-16 does. It would simply fall apart.

BTW, there is a CANON mention of cloaks in WCP: The manual. The retelling of the Kilrah incident includes a stealth scouting done by a guy in a cloaked Excalibur.

And not only can Confed fighters hover in midair, but they can do it upside down or sideways!
 
Edfilho said:
I'd assume that all ships can FLY in atmosphere, but only a few can FIGHT in atmosphere. I can't see why would they be unable to slowly cruise and land. But sure, combat maneuvers are another thing entirely.

Actually, this is also true for real, current aircraft. No 767's can pull the same combat maneuvers that a F-16 does. It would simply fall apart.

BTW, there is a CANON mention of cloaks in WCP: The manual. The retelling of the Kilrah incident includes a stealth scouting done by a guy in a cloaked Excalibur.

And not only can Confed fighters hover in midair, but they can do it upside down or sideways!

That makes sense. That'd explain why the movie rapier is mentioned as not being atmospheric fighter. I'd say it'd a bit like the orbiter of today. It can "fly" through an atmosphere, but can't operate.

The rapier might be able to sustain straight level flying, but those wings don't look very aerodynamic. The biggest give away is they are straight. There is no angle in them.
 
Quarto said:
I have a hard time imagining why the Rapiers would have suddenly stopped being capable of atmospheric flight - which is really the only Rapier-related context in which your interpretation of Halcyon's comments would apply.

Could be that the latest shipment to replace all the ones lost in the Sivar chase are produced without the capability, to save on resources/speed up production. Could also be that because Halcyon likes to shuffle pilots regularly, that some (Blair included) are used to fighters capable of atmospheric dogfighting.
 
Back
Top