 Max flight ceiling on a Roto-drone?, reference or something? |
  |
 Nov 17 2004, 06:32 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Shooting Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465  |
In the other post I mentioned about creating a micro-roto-drone for some spotting/recon work. I get the idea that Flux determines Remote-Deck distance, which would control how far I can managed my drone(s), but I can't seem to find the max flight ceiling on what a micro-roto-drone would be. Albeit Flux 0 only yields 250m sphere of control, the closest I can find is listed as a helecopter at 6000m.
Is this my number or am I missing something? |
 |
 
|
|
Nov 17 2004, 06:41 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
That's probably it.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Nov 17 2004, 06:55 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
I could've sworn Rigger3 had a table of flight ceilings for different types of vehicles. Books aren't with me, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 17 2004, 06:58 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
It does moon, my problem is it specifically lists "helecopter" which is a rotocraft and I was looking for something more general I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 17 2004, 07:31 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
Grinder, if I were the GM I would say a rotor drone can go as high as a full sized helicopter.
There is an actual physical limit to how high choppers can go, it has to do with how they operate. Assuming fo course a rigger could control his dron from that far away. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 17 2004, 07:36 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
Great, you've all confirmed my suspicions. Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 05:07 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 424 Joined: 11-May 02 From: Marauding the mighty North Saskatchewan Member No.: 2,720 |
The altitude a helicopter can achieve is directly proportional to the amount of excess power it has, not to mention the size of its main rotor. Consequently the larger the helo generally the higher it can operate. Smaller drones will probably have a hard time getting out of ground effect with any sort of a load.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 05:53 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
It also has to do with the aerodynamics of the helicopter body itself. One of the reasons that the Hind can operate at higher altitudes than most choppers is due to its stubby 'wings' that generate some lift and allow the chopper to be controlable (as long as it is moving) at higher altitudes.
Most choppers will have a 'comfortable' operating ceiling of 10-12 thousand feet with a maximum ceiling of around 15-20 thousand feet. Helicopters will smaller rotors and less engine power (i.e. rotordrones) will probably be limited to something like 46/10 thousand feet. Notice that this makes helicopters hard to operate in mountainous regions like Afganistan... Notice also that the blimp like drones are altitude limited too (probabyl much worse that rotordrones). Operating condors in Denver might be quite difficult... |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 10:38 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
basicly as you go higher you have to move more air to get same amount of lift. the reason for this is thinner air. and blimps have in fact a easyer time then rotodrones, reason for that is that the baloon part makes them 0 weight crafts (the lift of the baloon equals the weight of the craft). then they just use engines to push it around. now if you pack some helium tanks or similar into the craft you have in theory a unlimited flight altitude (inside the atmosphere). remember that nasa (or was it the us airforce?) sendt a man into the upper regions, wearing a "space" suit. he then skydived back to earth.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 19 2004, 12:51 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
The max altitude of lighter than air vehicles is limited by their weight vs volume. Because the presented blimp drones seem to have high weight to volume ratios, this means that they will be altitude limited.
As you go you, the list you can gain from a specific volume of hydrogen or helium becomes more and more limited. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 19 2004, 01:02 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
and therefor i suggest to add helium tanks to the craft and pump more into the system as needed ;) as for volume, that just depends on the bag. how about the bag is made in a way that allow it to strech?
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 19 2004, 01:04 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 556 Joined: 28-May 04 From: Moorhead, MN, USA Member No.: 6,367 |
Yep. Those high altitude balloons are freaking huge ballons that are only partially filled with helium. As the craft rises, the helium expands to fill the ballon. They actually increase buoyancy as they rise (as a natural result of decreasing pressure and a efficient compensation for decreasing density).
This post has been edited by Da9iel: Nov 19 2004, 01:06 AM |
|
|
|
|
Nov 19 2004, 04:42 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
but then again, why would a rigger want to send a drone into the outer atmospehere? and would he be able to keep control of it up there?
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 21 2004, 12:40 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 556 Joined: 28-May 04 From: Moorhead, MN, USA Member No.: 6,367 |
No, he wouldn't be able to control it very well, but he'd get to take lots of really pretty pictures, and just think of the cows man! :wobble:
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 21 2004, 01:14 PM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 82 Joined: 6-August 04 Member No.: 6,544 |
The only advantage I can see is it would let you have a poor man's spy sat. You're closer to the ground, so you wouldn't need the huge @$$ mirrors, but you're out of the range of everything except the antisat weapons. A high pressure balloon (not what we use now) or a second envelope filled with air (and a fan to control pressurization) would give you a lifespan of months. Add an electic engine and some suncells, and you have a unique high altitude recon platform (or a very tall cell tower). [EDIT] Or when combinded with skydiving, it could be a very interesting way to insert into AzzieLand. [/EDIT] This post has been edited by Starfurie: Nov 21 2004, 01:18 PM |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 18th April 2025 - 01:09 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.