IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Popular Vehicles and group assets, How does your groups dead with this?
sunnyside
post Feb 23 2013, 06:44 PM
Post #51


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,345
Joined: 31-December 06
Member No.: 10,502



QUOTE (Falconer @ Feb 22 2013, 11:49 PM) *
Autogyro's don't fly like a helicopter... they don't hover.



QUOTE (Mantis @ Feb 22 2013, 11:57 PM) *
Yeah they also don't take off like a helicopter. They need a runway. I find them to be a silly vehicle. All the drawbacks of a plane and helicopter with few of the advantages (needs runway, can't hover, etc). One advantage they seem to have IRL is they are cheaper to operate but since that isn't actually a factor in SR it is irrelevant. Why they made the Wasp an Autogyro when its big brother the Yellowjacket is a helicopter and in past editions they are both helicopters, I don't know. Seems a weird change to make.


A number of designs exist under the "autogyro" umbrella. There were huge ones and tiny ones. Ones with a rotor that just sits there until you start going down a runway, and ones where you can divert power to the rotor in order to take off vertically, though when going forward they rely on autogyration.

In Rigger3 they imagined them as the little hobby pilot ones with a powered rotor. So you can't make 'em big, and they seriously limit the weight you can lift, but they have a straight up VTOL profile by default. So while I think the models in real life aren't good hoverers (I think they build up inertia in the rotor to allow a vertical take off), for simplicity and a bit of credit for the future I let my players just use them as a VTOL per RAW.


If they changed autogyros to a VSTOL profile in 4th I guess I didn't notice and just injected what I remembered from Rigger3. Their stats do make them seem "bigger" in 4th.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Falconer
post Feb 23 2013, 07:20 PM
Post #52


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Validating
Posts: 2,283
Joined: 12-October 07
Member No.: 13,662



Actually the powered rotor doesn't allow them to take off vertically it only shortens their takeoff runway distance.

The problem with a powered rotor is as soon as your wheels leave the ground it torques the vehicle into an uncontrollable spin (newton's 3rd). The technical problem for helicopters wasn't a big enough engine to lift itself... it was the controls needed to handle the torqueing and gyroscopic effects.

An unpowered rotor works by the autogyro starts moving forward... this causes air to move up through the rotor... this causes the rotor to spin... as the rotor spins it develops lift. So the first part of your takeoff roll is simply to get the rotor spinning fast enough to lift you.. with a powered rotor this simply starts the rotor spinning before you're moving... but you need to turn off the power assist when you leave the ground and rely on forward motion to keep air flowing through the rotor. It's not VTOL... by design it's VSTOL. (very short take off and landing).

The low speed handling bonus comes because the 'airfoil' of the rotor is always moving into the air faster than the plane itself to generate lift unlike a fixed wing plane... There's another aerodynamic problem which comes up at higher speeds... one side of the rotor is moving into the oncoming wind... while the other is moving backwards relative to the wind... at this point only one side of the rotor generates lift and the other doesn't... it limits their upper speed of operation.


But I stand by my view... I don't see the autogyro as being a problem in game... I think they make a lot of sense... very short takeoff runs mean you can takeoff and land in the space of a football field... as opposed to needing an airport. If you need a small 'cheap' flying machine suitable for a runner... they're not a bad pick. The ultra-light types would easily fit in the back of truck or trailer as well for covert transportation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Feb 23 2013, 07:57 PM
Post #53


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



QUOTE (Falconer @ Feb 23 2013, 12:20 PM) *
There's another aerodynamic problem which comes up at higher speeds... one side of the rotor is moving into the oncoming wind... while the other is moving backwards relative to the wind... at this point only one side of the rotor generates lift and the other doesn't... it limits their upper speed of operation.

Yup. Retreating blade stall.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sunnyside
post Feb 23 2013, 07:57 PM
Post #54


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,345
Joined: 31-December 06
Member No.: 10,502



QUOTE (Falconer @ Feb 23 2013, 02:20 PM) *
Actually the powered rotor doesn't allow them to take off vertically it only shortens their takeoff runway distance.

The problem with a powered rotor is as soon as your wheels leave the ground it torques the vehicle into an uncontrollable spin (newton's 3rd). The technical problem for helicopters wasn't a big enough engine to lift itself... it was the controls needed to handle the torqueing and gyroscopic effects.

An unpowered rotor works by the autogyro starts moving forward... this causes air to move up through the rotor... this causes the rotor to spin... as the rotor spins it develops lift. So the first part of your takeoff roll is simply to get the rotor spinning fast enough to lift you.. with a powered rotor this simply starts the rotor spinning before you're moving... but you need to turn off the power assist when you leave the ground and rely on forward motion to keep air flowing through the rotor. It's not VTOL... by design it's VSTOL. (very short take off and landing).

The low speed handling bonus comes because the 'airfoil' of the rotor is always moving into the air faster than the plane itself to generate lift unlike a fixed wing plane... There's another aerodynamic problem which comes up at higher speeds... one side of the rotor is moving into the oncoming wind... while the other is moving backwards relative to the wind... at this point only one side of the rotor generates lift and the other doesn't... it limits their upper speed of operation.


But I stand by my view... I don't see the autogyro as being a problem in game... I think they make a lot of sense... very short takeoff runs mean you can takeoff and land in the space of a football field... as opposed to needing an airport. If you need a small 'cheap' flying machine suitable for a runner... they're not a bad pick. The ultra-light types would easily fit in the back of truck or trailer as well for covert transportation.


While I see that you get the concept, I don't think you're giving the hobby models enough credit. Here lemmi see what pops up on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RPYWmdv174

That said, true hover would be hard for the reasons you say without either sufficient forward motion or a headwind. However it doesn't take much of either.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Falconer
post Feb 24 2013, 08:08 AM
Post #55


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Validating
Posts: 2,283
Joined: 12-October 07
Member No.: 13,662



Sunnyside:
Exactly my point... notice how he didn't go straight up and down... he must develop forward airspeed as fast as he can after leaving the ground... or he'll come right back down as fast as he went up.

If you're more interested in that topic...
http://www.cartercopters.com/faq
look at the jump takeoff...


It's not a true hover if it needs a headwind!!!! Airspeed != groundspeed !!!!
A true hover is performed with no airspeed whatsoever... Though I have seen sailplanes perform 'vtol' landings into a heavy headwind... (about 35 knots with gusts to 45)... I have no doubt any plane with a sufficiently low stall speed can pull it off provided the wind and wind alone can maintain enough airspeed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sage2000
post Feb 25 2013, 01:33 PM
Post #56


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 14-January 13
Member No.: 68,602



All valid points about the autogyros.

I am impressed at those videos above, becuse the need for space for those ultralights to take of and land is soooooo small, that (given skill) they could use rooftops helipads, ships helipads and so on.

But, from a game balance perspective, I wonder why the writers decided that some aircraft were specifically autogyros, without giving any specific rules for them.

Example: If I say aircraft "X" is a helicopper, we all know it can hover, it's common sense, and can be used to deploy rappeling SWAT squads. On the other hand, if the aircraft in question were a plane (without any special stuff, like VTOL...), we know that thing can't be used that way. Now, how about autogyros? How the game rules and scenario defines them?

I personally interpret "autogyro" either as an intented in-game limitation to the aircraft, or as a silly writer mistake.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Feb 25 2013, 01:51 PM
Post #57


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445



Sage2000: You want to know why the writers decided that some aircraft were specifically autogyros?

Because they remembered that they worked for one of the bastard-children of FASA and remembered playing Crimson Skies back in the day and were all "Ooooh, autogyros are awesome!"

That's the thought process that went into it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mantis
post Feb 25 2013, 02:07 PM
Post #58


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,102
Joined: 23-August 09
From: Vancouver, Canada
Member No.: 17,538



ShadowDragon, I hope you are kidding. That would explain the silly things showing up though, and certain vehicles that have traditionally been helicopters deciding to suddenly become the much smaller non-hovering auto-gyro. In my own games those same aircraft have magically transformed back into helicopters again, especially with so little price and stat difference between its bigger brother.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CanRay
post Feb 25 2013, 02:57 PM
Post #59


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 14,358
Joined: 2-December 07
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Member No.: 14,465



So... Character Creation last night.

Troll Ninja.

"Ooooooooooooooo, Wing Suit!" "Yes, they come in Troll Sizes." "All I need is a cape and I'm Batman!" "Early non-detective Batman who uses firearms, maybe..."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Feb 25 2013, 05:23 PM
Post #60


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445



QUOTE (CanRay @ Feb 25 2013, 09:57 AM) *
So... Character Creation last night.

Troll Ninja.

"Ooooooooooooooo, Wing Suit!" "Yes, they come in Troll Sizes." "All I need is a cape and I'm Batman!" "Early non-detective Batman who uses firearms, maybe..."


For some reason this puts an image in my head of a huge troll in a three-piece suit with a fedora who bombs around town in a troll-sized replica 1947 Nash 600.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sage2000
post Feb 25 2013, 05:39 PM
Post #61


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 14-January 13
Member No.: 68,602



QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685 @ Feb 25 2013, 01:51 PM) *
Sage2000: You want to know why the writers decided that some aircraft were specifically autogyros?

Because they remembered that they worked for one of the bastard-children of FASA and remembered playing Crimson Skies back in the day and were all "Ooooh, autogyros are awesome!"

That's the thought process that went into it.


Well, that explains a lot. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/eek.gif)

And we lose time discussing it... trying to "resolve the issues".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
KarmaInferno
post Feb 26 2013, 01:51 AM
Post #62


Old Man Jones
********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 4,415
Joined: 26-February 02
From: New York
Member No.: 1,699



It's not just aircraft. Ask any gun nut how frustrating it is that a number of the SR guns are apparently designed by someone who got their education on firearms from movies and comic books.



-k
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CanRay
post Feb 26 2013, 02:13 AM
Post #63


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 14,358
Joined: 2-December 07
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Member No.: 14,465



*Cough*Clips*Cough*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Feb 26 2013, 02:35 AM
Post #64


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Feb 25 2013, 06:51 PM) *
It's not just aircraft. Ask any gun nut how frustrating it is that a number of the SR guns are apparently designed by someone who got their education on firearms from movies and comic books.

The entire combat section was designed by that guy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tymeaus Jalynsfe...
post Feb 26 2013, 01:51 PM
Post #65


Prime Runner Ascendant
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 17,568
Joined: 26-March 09
From: Aurora, Colorado
Member No.: 17,022



QUOTE (kzt @ Feb 25 2013, 07:35 PM) *
The entire combat section was designed by that guy.


Yeah, but it works... *shrug*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Feb 26 2013, 05:56 PM
Post #66


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 26 2013, 06:51 AM) *
Yeah, but it works... *shrug*

A Yugo works, for that value of "works".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th June 2025 - 05:57 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.