Drop Ship (now with added pew pew)

[Brandlin]

Might I suggest something jutting out of the chin - the second pic presents a bit of "duck face" to me.  

Nothing wrong with Duck Face!
I did try experimenting with some sort of headlights but it made it look like a bad sportscar. There are a couple of other things I want to do surface detail wise and a couple of things i need to fix too, so its not finished yet.

Meanwhile though, I have been doing this...

Now with curvier engines and details...


... and assembled to the still blank hull.


A few more pics on my blog as always...

[Vanvlak]

The pod looks fine, and the 'duck face' would not be apparent when painted. I think it's the horizontal seam which creates that appearance, and that would be diminished when finished. The whole pod looks very functional with the added rear detail, and quite Eagley too 

The new engine pods are grand; they would also be very useful as a part sold independently of the lander. The outer plate on the pods gives loads of opportunity for bold colour schemes with large numbers or emblems, company markings or ust contrasting paint colours.

[pocoloco]

As I am not an expert on aeronautical things, just wondering how that kind of engine set up would affect the flight capabilities of the vessel? If the two forward engines go at full blast, wouldn't they affect (most likely in a negative manner?) to performance of the rear pair of engines? /"realism"

Interesting to see the progress, it will be quite a build.

[Elbows]

I would imagine the engines rotate on a coupling, and in normal space flight only the rear engines fire - where the forward engines are perhaps only used to escape atmosphere or lift off from a surface?  Or perhaps during flight the front engines provide up/down attitude adjustment while the rears continue to propel the vessel.

[YPU]

I would imagine that during any flight in gravity would see all engines rotated downwards enough to clear the other engines. No part of the vehicle looks like it would create lift from air currents, so even at top forward speed it would need at least some downward thrust to keep it in the air.

That being said I think that for me the engines could do with some vector thrusters on what is the bottom in these pictures, and maybe top if you want them to be symmetrical.

To me "duck face" is now the grunts name for this thing.

[Brandlin]

The pod looks fine, and the 'duck face' would not be apparent when painted. I think it's the horizontal seam which creates that appearance, and that would be diminished when finished. The whole pod looks very functional with the added rear detail, and quite Eagley too  

The new engine pods are grand; they would also be very useful as a part sold independently of the lander. The outer plate on the pods gives loads of opportunity for bold colour schemes with large numbers or emblems, company markings or ust contrasting paint colours.

Thank you vanvlak. Glad you like. I have a little more to do to finish up the engines, but I'll keep an expanse of the outer plate clear as you suggest.

As I am not an expert on aeronautical things, just wondering how that kind of engine set up would affect the flight capabilities of the vessel? If the two forward engines go at full blast, wouldn't they affect (most likely in a negative manner?) to performance of the rear pair of engines? /"realism"

Yes. They will. Which is why I've said before that the front engines may be moved out wards slightly to help prevent this. See the very first picture on this thread to see how that looked on the physical prototype.

I would imagine that during any flight in gravity would see all engines rotated downwards enough to clear the other engines. No part of the vehicle looks like it would create lift from air currents, so even at top forward speed it would need at least some downward thrust to keep it in the air.

That being said I think that for me the engines could do with some vector thrusters on what is the bottom in these pictures, and maybe top if you want them to be symmetrical.

To me "duck face" is now the grunts name for this thing.

This flies in much the same way as a brick. It's a DROPship. Orbital deployment. Solid enough to survive atmospheric entry. With enough raw grunt to stop the ship from burying itself in the planet's crust and then reach escape velocity for the return. It doesn't really 'fly' anywhere (in the aeronautic sence of the word).

The engines ARE vectored. As discussed earlier in the thread, each of the engines is poseable and rotates in place. This allows them to provide decelerating forces, 'in flight' forward thrust, directional control as well as VTOL capability. The 'gear' you see modelled on the engine side allows 12 different placements.


Thank you all for your continued comments. Much appreciated.

[YPU]

This flies in much the same way as a brick. It's a DROPship. Orbital deployment. Solid enough to survive atmospheric entry. With enough raw grunt to stop the ship from burying itself in the planet's crust and then reach escape velocity for the return. It doesn't really 'fly' anywhere (in the aeronautic sence of the word).

Reminds me of a toy story quote. It's not flying, it crashing with style.

The engines ARE vectored. As discussed earlier in the thread, each of the engines is poseable and rotates in place. This allows them to provide decelerating forces, 'in flight' forward thrust, directional control as well as VTOL capability. The 'gear' you see modelled on the engine side allows 12 different placements.

Yea, vectoring isn't the word I was looking for. I was suggesting some smaller sub outlets on the sides of the thruster. I'm sure I have seen it before but can't find any pictures of what I'm talking about. 

[Brandlin]

Reminds me of a toy story quote. It's not flying, it crashing with style.

Yea, vectoring isn't the word I was looking for. I was suggesting some smaller sub outlets on the sides of the thruster. I'm sure I have seen it before but can't find any pictures of what I'm talking about. 

I prefer Douglas Adam's approach. "Hurling yourself at the ground but being distracted at the point of impact and forgetting to hit the ground." :-)

I see what you mean about "side thrusters". I may play with the idea, but it's not top of my list.

[Brandlin]

Tailfins ... as far as the eye can see...



... and assembled.

[SBRPearce]

Does anyone else think that it looks like a platypus?

"In FedYear 83, the MarineCorp released specifications for a multi-use LOAB (Low-Orbit And Back) interface craft capable of putting 6 light squads, 3 mobile squads or 1 light armored vehicle on the ground. After a 3-year design competition, the Corps provisionally accepted the Sequoia Aerospace "MUDSX211", designating the first models in service the UDS-211B. The troops took one look at the 211 and re-dubbed it the Platypus."
   excerpted from A Brief History of the Rim Wars

[Froggy the Great]

How much will you be selling these for?

[Brandlin]

How much will you be selling these for?

No idea yet. The price of 3D printing the cockpit and engines has really scared me. The good news behind that is that the only way I'm going to be able to afford to make this is to sell some of them to recoup some of the costs. Expect it to be in the £60 plus bracket. And I'm not being held to that if it turns out to be a lot more.

Just to show the engines do rotate to provide vectored thrust...




... and if you see it from this angle, then you know you're about to be flattened...

Does anyone else think that it looks like a platypus?

"In FedYear 83, the MarineCorp released specifications for a multi-use LOAB (Low-Orbit And Back) interface craft capable of putting 6 light squads, 3 mobile squads or 1 light armored vehicle on the ground. After a 3-year design competition, the Corps provisionally accepted the Sequoia Aerospace "MUDSX211", designating the first models in service the UDS-211B. The troops took one look at the 211 and re-dubbed it the Platypus."
   excerpted from A Brief History of the Rim Wars

Call it what ya like if ya buy it ;-)

Thank you all for the continuing comments...

Next steps -

Figure out why my modelling of the engine intake rotors doesn't work.
Redesign the hull to accommodate the new ramp and simplify the number of pieces.
At that point we might have a prototype design - then comes all the work of converting this into a physical prototype. (gulp!)

[Emir of Askaristan]

It's looking really good.

My tiniest niggle would be that the feet look a little small to spread it's weight whilst on the ground. A cracking ship tho and somehow more "realistic" (if that's the right term - perhaps plausible??) than some of the scifi ships out there and I like that.

[Brandlin]

Nice! What CAD program are you running?

For the nose design what about adding elements of the apache longbow chin sensor bubble thingie. Its a nightmare to cad up accurately due to the complex curves but its very easy to make a looks like.

I am going to have to read the entire topic to get up to speed but it looks amazing from a quick glance. Beautiful cad work too.

SolidWorks. Am a newbie. Thank you for the positivity.

Sorry, but no to shin weaponry. It would get ripped and burnt off in the harsh re-entry. Also this isn't a gun shi it's a DropShip for Mechanised Infantry. "The Express Elevator to Hell"

It's looking really good.

My tiniest niggle would be that the feet look a little small to spread it's weight whilst on the ground. A cracking ship tho and somehow more "realistic" (if that's the right term - perhaps plausible??) than some of the scifi ships out there and I like that.

Thank you.

Feet? hmmm I kinda agree. I may fiddle with them when I re-do the hull to accomodate the underfloor ramp. I can make them a fe mm Wider, but longer is going to be problematic given the hull spars.

In reality this version of the RESILIENT Class dropship was under engined and eventually withdrawn from service. Rather than being known as the DuckFace or the Platypus as early troops had called it, its lack of engine retardation meant it quickly became known as the Mole for its habit of 'heavier than survivable' landings. As a consequence no real data or evidence exists as to whether the landing gear was sufficient or not.

;-)

[Brandlin]

A final picture for today