Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Happerry]

If so, we should go revise the MRAAMs to fix the bulky and hard to maneuver issues.

[notquitethere]

Yeah I second that. My suggestion for revision: we want to achieve thrust vectoring for the Type 500, allowing greater maneuverability. This can be achieved most simply by installing a liquid injection system on the exhaust. Does that sound workable?

[Happerry]

Yeah I second that. My suggestion for revision: we want to achieve thrust vectoring for the Type 500, allowing greater maneuverability. This can be achieved most simply by installing a liquid injection system on the exhaust. Does that sound workable?

Well, nothing comes out of my vast stores of ignorance to tell me it wouldn't be workable. Next turn then? I want to fix the missiles up this turn.

[notquitethere]

We have two kinds of missiles. My suggestion was a revision for the fighter jet ones. Did you want to to revise our new Type 700s?

[Happerry]

We have two kinds of missiles. My suggestion was a revision for the fighter jet ones. Did you want to to revise our new Type 700s?

No, I just got totally confused and was under the impression you were talking about the fighter, not the missile, somehow.

If we can fit that upgrade in with the anti bulkiness and bad at maneuvering issues revision I'm all for it.

[notquitethere]

Yeah my suggestion should be a fix for maneuverability of the fighter missiles: the liquid feeds onto a given side of the missile exhaust which 'vectors' the thrust in the desired direction. That's basically thrust vectoring. This is more elegant than just sticking more fins on it. The bulkiness shouldn't matter if they can now be shot where we want them to (i.e. at enemy planes as they try and climb away).

If we can revise more than one aspect of the design at a time, then we can try and streamline the missile some more to remove some of the excess bulk. We could do this by  making the rocket longer but thinner (and adjusting the launching ports on the plane it's shot from accordingly).

[Aseaheru]

 I still think we should revise our fighter. Unless we plan on designing a new one?

[10ebbor10]

On the other hand, it seems better to first fix the weaponry, and then build a new fighter.

[notquitethere]

Our current fighters should be technically superior with the updated missile targeting. We could reinforce the chassis so that the planes are less prone to disintegrating at high speeds, then the enemies planes would have a harder time escaping.

[Parsely]

If we can revise more than one aspect of the design at a time-

I'll let you know if you're stretching things too much.

And yeah, you still have your revision.

[Hiddenleafguy]

I propose that we make it so our fighters, you know can go to full speed without ripping apart?

[Happerry]

I propose that we make it so our fighters, you know can go to full speed without ripping apart?

Our fighters are already better then theirs in the dogfight. This is basically unneeded except for maybe allowing better ground attacks, and I'm doubtful it'd help in that. The issue with ground attacks is that our ground attack missile is horribly outranged by their SAMs, and speed won't help that issue.

[10ebbor10]

Maybe we should revise our ground attack missile then. Really, it's target is beneath it, it should have no problems gliding towards it.

[notquitethere]

Oh yeah I just reread and realised we have three missiles and that's the worst of them. Revision suggestion then is:

Install a ramjet on the Type 600 ARM so it can be fired at high speed from greater distances. Redesign the radar equipment, taking advantage of our engineers latest advances in electronics to downsize and more tightly pack the components.

[10ebbor10]

I'm not sure a ramjet is a great idea. I mean, it's supposed to attack ground targets, it doesn't need to be fast to do that.

Actually, nevermind, ramjet is fine.