Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: The pelican design sucks
  • Subject: The pelican design sucks
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: The pelican design sucks

Games I like:,
Half-Minute Hero
MBU
Portal
Halo 3 is the best Halo ever
Maps I like: Turf, Avalanche, Pylon, Sandbox, Breakpoint and many more.

Okay, we all know that lots of eplicans go down in the Halo universe, but what some DON'T know is that the design of the pelican stops any form of piloting once something is damaged. Carter and Johnson held onto their pelicans as long as they did by pure chance. Here are the reasons it sucks:

1. The pelicans main lifting system requires 4 engines, two on each wing. If one of these engines is broken, the whole thing will go down in time.

Why cant the UNSC put a small backup engine that won't keep it flying but enable it to make a smooth landing?

2. It has a major weakpoint at the front and backs

Have you ever noticed when something shoots at the front of the pelican 9Non game) and it the pilot is dead in two seconds? The glass may be strong, but every covenant plasma will do some damage to i. Its the same story at the back, but when the little hatch door is closed, the pelican becomes a target for everything, loses it pilot anyway, the marines die in a crash. The reason for this: IF say some banshees or a phantom are approaching the pelican from behind, and the door is closed, that leaves the back of the pelican open to attack on any part of the it from the back, without the fear of destruction.

Discuss below, if you agree with me thanks. If you dont, well Id like to see you in a pelican being chased by some banshees with the back door locked.


  • 03.02.2011 1:40 PM PDT

The pelican can most likely feather it's engine. This tactic was used by bombers in WWII, allowing them to fly on less engines. The glass can with stand things like plasma pistols and low energy weapons. It will eventually melt but you aren't going to have tons of time on your hands to melt it. The pelican is made of high grade titanium a, whatever that is, which allows it to withstand quite an impact. The Covenant weapons melt through and also impact with very high force. Plus, these thongs go on and our of the atmosphere, meaning they have high powered engones and enough armor that's strong enough to withstand extremely high heat and pressure.The back door open does present a slightly higher chance of pilot injury/death but look at the UH-60 It has open doors and N open -blam!- put yet the pilots are only killed by high powered rounds through the glass and RPG/AA/AAA fire. If does not "suck" in any sense other than it's big. All air craft have drawbacks but I personally don't see any that are fatal or bad enough to come to your conclusion.

[Edited on 03.02.2011 2:19 PM PST]

  • 03.02.2011 2:17 PM PDT

"It is done. By my hands. The pyrrhic solution is ignited. All I have left is the quiet of space to lull me to sleep.
I will dream of you." - The Didact

The Lockheed Martin F-35 main lifting system requires 1 engines. If this engine is broken, the whole thing will go down in time.

It has a major weakpoint at the front and backs...
same can be said about the CH-46 and -47.

EDIT: Your argument is fail. Everything has weaknesses. The pelican has no more weaknesses than one of today's most technologically advanced aircraft.

[Edited on 03.02.2011 2:19 PM PST]

  • 03.02.2011 2:17 PM PDT

Walk softly, and carry a big midget.

It's the same as any other aircraft. Any aircraft will go down after a while if one of it's Engines aren't working.

  • 03.02.2011 2:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Ben MCCrash
no body cares what you think of the pelican

  • 03.02.2011 2:36 PM PDT

Posted by: Multijirachi
Why cant the UNSC put a small backup engine that won't keep it flying but enable it to make a smooth landing?

Because the UNSC cannot think for themselves.

  • 03.02.2011 2:49 PM PDT


Posted by: Neptunne0100
Posted by: Multijirachi
Why cant the UNSC put a small backup engine that won't keep it flying but enable it to make a smooth landing?

Because the UNSC cannot think for themselves.
Or that it wouldn't be that reliable. The Pelican itelf, without a sort of "Equilibrium" of the thrusters is not aerodynamic.

[Edited on 03.02.2011 2:53 PM PST]

  • 03.02.2011 2:51 PM PDT

(\.(\
(='.' )
(,(")(")

it is a poorly designed aircraft, that thing shouldn't even be rated for out of atmosphere use, i mean all of its engines are making upward thrust. kind of a bad thing in space.

not to mention all the engines are mounted on a relatively small swindle attached the the main airframe.

  • 03.02.2011 2:57 PM PDT

(\.(\
(='.' )
(,(")(")


Posted by: Jayster 94
It's the same as any other aircraft. Any aircraft will go down after a while if one of it's Engines aren't working.
many of todays modern twin engine aircraft are fully capable of stable flight with a damaged engine.

  • 03.02.2011 2:58 PM PDT

The pelican has thrust vectoring and nozzles that are used to pilot it in space.

  • 03.02.2011 3:01 PM PDT


Posted by: hal0 slay3r661
it is a poorly designed aircraft, that thing shouldn't even be rated for out of atmosphere use, i mean all of its engines are making upward thrust. kind of a bad thing in space.
Incorrect. The engines are capable of adjusting to fire in almost any direction within a 180 degree arc.

In fact, this system actually makes it more ideal for exoatmospheric travel.

  • 03.02.2011 3:04 PM PDT

(\.(\
(='.' )
(,(")(")


Posted by: Badseed_666
The pelican has thrust vectoring and nozzles that are used to pilot it in space.
nvm i stand corrected,

an another note,

is the pelican powerful enough to launch vertically into space?

[Edited on 03.02.2011 3:07 PM PST]

  • 03.02.2011 3:05 PM PDT


Posted by: hal0 slay3r661

Posted by: Badseed_666
The pelican has thrust vectoring and nozzles that are used to pilot it in space.
nvm i stand corrected,

an another note,

is the pelican powerful enough to launch vertically into space?
No. Even the Saber required assistance.

  • 03.02.2011 3:08 PM PDT

The one time I remember a pilot dying from a hit to the glass would be when a Seraph's projectile directly impacted the cockpit...

And if you hadn't noticed about the engines, there are engines on the rear of the 'wings' which is how it moves forward. Not all engines are pushing it upward.

  • 03.02.2011 3:13 PM PDT

Don't worry, you're still your mom's favorite Bnet member.

But it's SO COOL.

  • 03.02.2011 8:08 PM PDT


Posted by: Plasma3150

Posted by: hal0 slay3r661

Posted by: Badseed_666
The pelican has thrust vectoring and nozzles that are used to pilot it in space.
nvm i stand corrected,

an another note,

is the pelican powerful enough to launch vertically into space?
No. Even the Saber required assistance.

Doesn't really mean much. Getting into space is less an issue of power and more an issue of when that power can be exerted. If modern air-breathing aircraft didn't need to breath air, they could get into space no problem. The reason we currently use rockets to get things into space is that rocket fuel is either self-oxidizing or rockets are equipped with oxygen tanks.

Since a pelican's engines can function both in-space and in-atmosphere, I would assume that they do not require air intake, and that they would thus be entirely capable of thrusting their way into space.


Actually, I thought the whole idea of the Saber needing to be launched like that was a tad ridiculous. Perhaps it actually has a horrible thrust-to-weight ratio? Doesn't work well in pressurized atmospheric conditions? Rule of cool? I dunno.

  • 03.02.2011 9:31 PM PDT


Posted by: Tupolev

Posted by: Plasma3150

Posted by: hal0 slay3r661

Posted by: Badseed_666
The pelican has thrust vectoring and nozzles that are used to pilot it in space.
nvm i stand corrected,

an another note,

is the pelican powerful enough to launch vertically into space?
No. Even the Saber required assistance.

Doesn't really mean much. Getting into space is less an issue of power and more an issue of when that power can be exerted. If modern air-breathing aircraft didn't need to breath air, they could get into space no problem. The reason we currently use rockets to get things into space is that rocket fuel is either self-oxidizing or rockets are equipped with oxygen tanks.

Since a pelican's engines can function both in-space and in-atmosphere, I would assume that they do not require air intake, and that they would thus be entirely capable of thrusting their way into space.


Actually, I thought the whole idea of the Saber needing to be launched like that was a tad ridiculous. Perhaps it actually has a horrible thrust-to-weight ratio? Doesn't work well in pressurized atmospheric conditions? Rule of cool? I dunno.


I'd say a Pelican, using vertical thrust only, would take forever to get into atmosphere.(aka, engines facing down only.)

As for the saber, simple reason for the booster rockets. Quicker time for launch-to-orbit deployment. While we don't know if it could be used effectively in atmosphere, I'd wager the above is why they have the rockets in place.

  • 03.02.2011 9:36 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member
  • gamertag: Rylite
  • user homepage:

You Shall Not Pass!!!

I don't know if this helps or hurts your argument, but have you flown one of those things in Halo: Reach? It's way too damn difficult to! I had an easier time elevating if I pointed the nose towards the ground and reversed my up!

  • 03.03.2011 1:01 AM PDT

Didn't someone work out is must have a more than 4:1 thrust ratio to carry a Scorpion? So in all honesty I dont see why it couldn't drag itself along on only two engines... Drag rather than fly being the word of choice here.

  • 03.03.2011 2:09 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

UWG

My jokes, so I don't lose them (ignore this):
ZedFish's Opinion on Sgt. Foley.
ZedFish's Forerunner Rickroll.

Posted by: RotaryCookie
Didn't someone work out is must have a more than 4:1 thrust ratio to carry a Scorpion? So in all honesty I dont see why it couldn't drag itself along on only two engines... Drag rather than fly being the word of choice here.
It would be able to fly on 1/2 power of the engines, but not 1/2 the amount of engines.

If the two front engines fail, there's too much power at the back and the nose will drop.
Vise versa for rear engines, and similar effects for any other combo of two engines.

If it has any less than 4 engines working, it will become unstable in some way.

On that note, it's also poorly designed, aerodynamically. A real-life Pelican would not fly, I'd bet.
I suppose it is just meant to look awesome without us questioning the mechanics.

  • 03.03.2011 2:34 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

ITS A GAME!!!!! STOP BEING A C**T

  • 03.03.2011 2:45 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

UWG

My jokes, so I don't lose them (ignore this):
ZedFish's Opinion on Sgt. Foley.
ZedFish's Forerunner Rickroll.

Posted by: U Phat NoOb
ITS A GAME!!!!! STOP BEING A C**T
This's a forum. Language is avoided and caps are frowned upon.

  • 03.03.2011 2:49 AM PDT


Posted by: ZedFish
Posted by: RotaryCookie
Didn't someone work out is must have a more than 4:1 thrust ratio to carry a Scorpion? So in all honesty I dont see why it couldn't drag itself along on only two engines... Drag rather than fly being the word of choice here.
It would be able to fly on 1/2 power of the engines, but not 1/2 the amount of engines.

If the two front engines fail, there's too much power at the back and the nose will drop.
Vise versa for rear engines, and similar effects for any other combo of two engines.

If it has any less than 4 engines working, it will become unstable in some way.

On that note, it's also poorly designed, aerodynamically. A real-life Pelican would not fly, I'd bet.
I suppose it is just meant to look awesome without us questioning the mechanics.


Yes, both front engines being destroyed would put in out of action. However, the front engines are it's "main" engines, and I still believe it could safely land on only one front engine, and safely (although permenantly) vtol land on two main, or one main and two rear engines.

  • 03.03.2011 4:20 AM PDT

Am I supposed to write something funny here?


Posted by: ZedFish
On that note, it's also poorly designed, aerodynamically. A real-life Pelican would not fly, I'd bet.
I suppose it is just meant to look awesome without us questioning the mechanics.

Maybe it's a lifting body?

And I accept looking awesome over real-life usefulness.

  • 03.03.2011 5:09 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2