“I really wanted to do the perspective of someone who had kind of seen through that and was done with this bullshit,” he says. The films depict TIE fighters as incredibly reckless, frequently diving into narrow spaces and colliding with asteroids, cruisers, and each other, which makes Wexler think that TIE fighter pilots must be subject to intense propaganda. “So when they told me to do one from Empire Strikes Back, this is what I came up with as a TIE fighter pilot story.” TIE fighters game you play on a tabletop-and that had expanded on the lore a little bit, so I wanted to dive into that in a short story,” Wexler says. “I had gotten really into the X-Wing Miniatures Game-which is just an X-wings vs. I think there would've been merits in that but then again current A-model has plenty of range and very good low speed handling already.Wexler’s story focuses on the lives of TIE fighter pilots, who are generally treated as faceless cannon fodder in the Star Wars films. I think A- and C-models could've had more commonality (wing mostly) which would've given A-model longer range and even better low speed handling but at the expense of some acceleration time and T/W. Of course designing a new variant now would likely be too expensive for the benefits and would add complexity and cost to the whole program. Those requirements were set about 20 years ago and I think they might do it differently now. Because Naval Fighters operate regularly under far more stressful conditions. It to extent the aircraft's service life. As the main reason, the F-35B/C has a lower G Rating. Honestly, I don't see that as a real issue. Especially if they flew Hornets or Double Uglies. Many new F-35C folks will like the range, trust me. Without stores, the wing flexes more and doing this a lot has cumulative stresses and then cracks develop and then.
You can design for that, but you lose some high mach and accel there.Īnother thing that I feel John Will can confirm is that a simple symmetrical pull and resulting gee is easier on the wing root and even along the span if you have stores loaded. But a slower corner velocity seems to me to be better in most furballs and a break. Think the Eagle and F-4 and F-14 and various adversaries. Where our 9 gees were helpful was above corner velocity and the other plane was limited to 7 gees or less - see the equation. My simplistic equation is useful in a spreadsheet to see how this works: r=v^2/a r and v in feet or ft/sec and a is gee*33.17 in ft/sec^2 What the extra gee does is reduce turn radius and thereby rate. Would be awesome at slower speed, like the straight wing jets could do. So the Viper could pull 9 gees at about the same corner velocity as others. Perhaps the F-35 will become a case study on why future aircraft do not "have to be" 9g airframes?Īctchally, the 9 gees only helps when you can compare to the other plane at about the same speed. I could also see where a C-sized wing simply was not possible if you really had to attain 9g capability: add more structure to handle load. If the 9g was a requirement set in stone, that probably would have ruled out the C-wing owing to structural weight required to make it work.
And still the air arms opted for the Aye design. But I would be quite surprised to read if numerous trade studies had not been performed. The USAF and other militaries involved in JSF were privy to all those technical facts. Pilots seem to really like C-model flight qualities and A-model with C-wing would be lighter and have better acceleration etc than actual F-35C as it would not need the heavy carrier stuff.
It'd have slightly lower acceleration etc but longer range than current A-model. That has been mentioned earlier here but Billie Flynn comments made it seem actually a good idea. Hornetfinn wrote:I started really thinking about making F-35A with C-model wing and fuel tanks.
0 kommentar(er)
