Project Here goes nothing: The Delta-StarLiner G42

[HarvesteR]

Ok, how's this idea for the whole inlets on the top vs inlets on the bottom thing?

I agree that on subsonic flight there might be advantages (other than the cool factor) to having the inlets on the top, but when you go supersonic there is the whole inlet stall problem...

So... I was thinking here... and came up with this idea... :hmm:

How about... swivelling inlets? :hotcool:

Imagine that the whole front section of the engine (aka, inlets) are articulated and go through the entire body, top to bottom. The inlets might shift to the bottom side once the craft is supersonic

Thus, no engine stall

Cheers

 

[Andy44]

The vehicle can be trimmed to fly nose-low, thus it could use top-inlet scrams as long as it's straight and level.

Or when going supersonic you go fly inverted...

 

[Dambuster]

I personally think your latest post (without the rudders) looks the coolest of them all!

Also, not to pressure you, but IMO something that looks this amazing can only be done justice with a .dll...?

But whatever, great work so far!

 

[Urwumpe]

so i guess the upper inlets stay, they´re not so unlikely after all...

They are absolutely unlikely, because their position is simply at the worst position for an inlet.

• At low subsonic speeds, the engines will stall with the wings, leaving you with no or only little thrust during a situation where you need much thrust. Since you use delta wings, you will not stall as for non-delta planes, but the thrust will drop very suddenly.
• At supersonic speeds, the engines will be effectively stalled unless you use only low or negative AOA.
  • Of course, at low or negative AOA, your windows, the weakest spot in any technology you will have around, will be exposed directly to the air flow, resulting in massive heating.
• Supersonic combustion Ramjet operation (SCRamjet) is impossible unless you use negative AOA. The air will be simply not directed at your engine at the right way, that it compresses at supersonic speed. Compression at subsonic speed means lower effectivity (but less requirements on the inlets).

Any real engineer wouldn't place them there. Just as much as you wouldn't find solar arrays on a heat shield. Or have the toilet installed upside down in a (reentering) spacecraft, since up and down doesn't matter in space...

 

[Andy44]

Or have the toilet installed upside down in a (reentering) spacecraft, since up and down doesn't matter in space...

But at least you've got lots of extra floorspace, and the toilet never clogs.

 

[Moach]

just to clarify, those are not the SCRAM inlets, those are for low-speed feeding of the turbo-rocket engines - the SCRAM inlets are below


also, in case of emergency, the internal LO2 supply would kick in and revive a stalling engine


i like dll´s they allow us to go crazy on stuff like this and know it can actually be simulated :yes: - i´m gonna start from the DG kit and build up the systems for this thing, kinda like the XR series

i´m taking a course on C++, i figured this would be a fun way to get some hands-on practice


and yeah, i´m thinking we can just as well lose the rudders... with advanced Fly-By-Wire systems, we can just as well have split rudderons, which would cause less drag... i have also changed the profile of the wings a bit, they are now more streamlined and mach-worthy... i too, think it looks a lot cooler this way

 

[Izack]

i have also changed the profile of the wings a bit, they are now more streamlined and mach-worthy... i too, think it looks a lot cooler this way

May we be graced by an image of these new wings? I really like where this is going...

 

[MeDiCS]

View attachment 4380

:thumbup:

 

[Moach]

the last pic posted is already the new version, if you compare it to the previous ones, you´ll notice how the wings are more swept back now...

thanks for the support! feel free to kick in some thoughts :thumbup:

---------- Post added at 11:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:04 AM ----------

We´re doing business!!

exporting has proven successful! using a dll, that is, not a simple config file - it was a bit of a toil at first, but it got ´er in! VC and all!


to show that i can "put my money where my mouth is":

well... there´s no money, really... but we have a ship!

i was thinking of doing the cockpit completely focused on the VC, possibly leaving out the 2d panel (don´t really see the point of having one), all in favour?


the cockpit is an overhauled version of the original DeltaGlider pit... i re-arranged a bunch of stuff so i could fit some more MFDs in there, i´m thinking 3 of them... and some more screens for specific systems and whatnot

i know... crude screenshot... you really cant see very well without textures (coming soon), but you can already make out where the MFDs are gonna sit...


well, at least stuff seems to be working... this is kinda going a bit better than i antecipated... i had heard developing for Orbiter was a tough gig... but perhaps ppl say that just because of all the C++ that goes into it...


enough for today... can´t keep my eyes open...

 

[Arrowstar]

I'm personally more inclined to use a 2D panel versus the VC panels. But that's just me, and its your ship, so do whatever makes you happy.

 

[mc_]

2D or 3D... Anyway, keep going :thumbup:

 

[tgep]

THAT looks FRAKKING AWESOME all the way around. I can't wait to take her for a test spin out of my Boeing Flight Test Center.

:thumbup:

 

[Moach]

Just thought i´d let you guys know, i´m making good headway on the C++ front, we have thrusters and RCS working (with some ripoff from the delta-glider)

but anyways, being able to compile and have things going into the sim is the biggest barrier, from now on, the hard part it kinda over... (i hope)


i did some more thinking... trying to get my head around what purpose those very cool, yet unlikely upper intakes could possibly serve... then i figured... this is a semi-futuristic hybrid turbo-rocket engine, which works as air-breathing as far as it can... well, the lower inlets are highly specialized to work in hypersonic speeds... they´re not appropriate for sub-sonic or transonic flight....

so those inlets above the wings are auxiliary low-speed intakes, they close up around mach 1.5 where the lower inlets have taken over...


yay! now that i have a semi-coherent explanation for them i feel much better... if anyone thinks of something more clever, just let me know :blahblah:


Cheerz!

 

[Chub777]

Just thought i´d let you guys know, i´m making good headway on the C++ front, we have thrusters and RCS working (with some ripoff from the delta-glider)

but anyways, being able to compile and have things going into the sim is the biggest barrier, from now on, the hard part it kinda over... (i hope)


i did some more thinking... trying to get my head around what purpose those very cool, yet unlikely upper intakes could possibly serve... then i figured... this is a semi-futuristic hybrid turbo-rocket engine, which works as air-breathing as far as it can... well, the lower inlets are highly specialized to work in hypersonic speeds... they´re not appropriate for sub-sonic or transonic flight....

so those inlets above the wings are auxiliary low-speed intakes, they close up around mach 1.5 where the lower inlets have taken over...


yay! now that i have a semi-coherent explanation for them i feel much better... if anyone thinks of something more clever, just let me know :blahblah:


Cheerz!

So that means you have about 10,000 kgs of dead weight for most of the flight (especialy when getting into orbit or re-entering). You could make light-weight ones.

I also thought about having detaching rams/SCRAMs (ie:SCRAM boosters)like SRBs. It would save weight. But because you stated that you didn't want detachable parts, you could just pack the SCRAM booster and SRB scenario in one single add-on.:thumbup:

 

[Moach]

the intakes add very little extra weight... they are simply an alternative air inlet for the same turbo-rocket engines - the lower ones go through the pre-cooling system, and are more efficient at speeds above mach 1, so this redundancy makes sense, since the ship could fly in a subsonic, low-consumption, lift-based regime up to high altitude (and plane alignment), then engage disposable JATO rockets if necessary to reach scram speed...


this is possible because being a near-futuristic ship, it is viable that it could be made of composite nano-engineered fiber materials, which are very lightweight and highly heat-resistant, making the engines lighter than they would be if they were to be built today


this ship should be very versatile, in terms of possible launch configurations - this is a big necessity if we want to have a ship that can make space flight more accessible


disposable JATO engines which are much cheaper than SRBs, which must be retrieved, can be used depending on the type of mission...

or, launching from the cape to the ISS, with 4 passengers and little cargo, could be achieved by fitting extra fuel tanks in most of the cargo bay, leaving just enough room for a wee bit of cargo

in the other hand, to lift heavy stuff or launching satellites, disposable JATO rockets could be used, and insted of the auxiliary air inlets, the side pods could be filled up with fuel tanks

now, for flights to the moon, since there are no hover engines, like those on the DG, the cargo bay could carry a small lander vessel, and then the launch would be done "shuttle-style", or even perhaps, riding piggyback on another aircraft up to high altitude, and shooting up to orbit with an external tank and JATOs...


i feel i have to write an extense operations manual for this thing... flexibility is the name of the game here, so this ship can be configured for a myriad of possible tasks, so you can get a little creative on how it would be best to get it up

:hmm:

 

[Izack]

the intakes add very little extra weight... they are simply an alternative air inlet for the same turbo-rocket engines - the lower ones go through the pre-cooling system, and are more efficient at speeds above mach 1, so this redundancy makes sense, since the ship could fly in a subsonic, low-consumption, lift-based regime up to high altitude (and plane alignment), then engage disposable JATO rockets if necessary to reach scram speed...


this is possible because being a near-futuristic ship, it is viable that it could be made of composite nano-engineered fiber materials, which are very lightweight and highly heat-resistant, making the engines lighter than they would be if they were to be built today


this ship should be very versatile, in terms of possible launch configurations - this is a big necessity if we want to have a ship that can make space flight more accessible


disposable JATO engines which are much cheaper than SRBs, which must be retrieved, can be used depending on the type of mission...

or, launching from the cape to the ISS, with 4 passengers and little cargo, could be achieved by fitting extra fuel tanks in most of the cargo bay, leaving just enough room for a wee bit of cargo

in the other hand, to lift heavy stuff or launching satellites, disposable JATO rockets could be used, and insted of the auxiliary air inlets, the side pods could be filled up with fuel tanks

now, for flights to the moon, since there are no hover engines, like those on the DG, the cargo bay could carry a small lander vessel, and then the launch would be done "shuttle-style", or even perhaps, riding piggyback on another aircraft up to high altitude, and shooting up to orbit with an external tank and JATOs...


i feel i have to write an extense operations manual for this thing... flexibility is the name of the game here, so this ship can be configured for a myriad of possible tasks, so you can get a little creative on how it would be best to get it up

:hmm:

If you really must, you could make two versions with and without the secondary intakes, same as the DG/DG-S. Maybe the one without intakes could instead have attachment points for the fuel tanks or JATO engines you mentioned, leaving some space in the cargo bay for, well...cargo. I agree with you about not using SRBs on this machine (although it would look hilarious to have them strapped to the top, especially if they were as enormous as the Shuttle's. :lol This way, you could please the realists AND keep those great inlets.

Also, we are talking one BIG plane to lift that thing off the ground with a lunar lander and external tank on board...

 

[Moach]

probably not two versions... i would find it better to make a configuration utility in which you can toggle in and out the different features in-game... this way you don´t need many different scenarios and you get the opportunity to try different methods to get to orbit

the panel that makes the lower part of the intake, is actually a moving door, with it closed, the subsonic intake module can be removed and give way to something else, like more fuel or a hover engine assembly


that´s the only way to have a reallistic "one size fits all" spacecraft for all sorts of near-earth (or mars, if you ferry a ship there strapped to something larger, like a Descartes craft) - the ship needs a modular design

 

[Andy44]

People are going to keep arguing with you about the inlet configuration until the cows come home. At some point you've just got to settle on it and press on with the development.

 

[dbeachy1]

People are going to keep arguing with you about the inlet configuration until the cows come home. At soem pointyou've just got to settle on it and press on with the development.

+1 to that! It's your ship, and no matter what you do someone's not gonna like it. So it's best to just pull rank and build it the way you want it.

 

[Ghostrider]

Motion seconded. Damn the torpedoes!