Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why Fighter Jets look how they do in the Halo Universe
  • Subject: Why Fighter Jets look how they do in the Halo Universe
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Why Fighter Jets look how they do in the Halo Universe
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Yes angular is another way to get the trick done. But it's harder to get the radar signal to deflect where you want it, plus any accidental 90 degree angles cause big problems. A 30 degree angle can quickly becom 90 degrees when viewed from the proper direction, I think you see what I'm getting at. Also the radar absorbing materials have low electrical conductivty, which prevents a uniform field forming at the surface of the material. A uniform electrical field is why polished metals are so shiney.

  • 06.10.2006 5:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

yup

  • 06.10.2006 5:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

1. Todays aircraft actually carry LESS ammunition (at least bombers do) then they used to. Why? Precision targerting. We can use less bombs with smaller yields to do the same job that used to take many high powered bombs to do.

2. For all the idiots yacking about Area 51, its a freakin aircraft testing base. The stealth bomber, the flying wing, and the first super sonic aircraft were tested there and in other places.

3. Spacecraft would have to be different then normal aircraft because for one, they need a lot more fuel to travel around and two, they need not be as aerodynamic. So this means that it would make sense for a ship that was meant to fly around space to end up being larger then conventional aircraft.

4. Hats off to your father, all servicemen/women deserve a salute.

  • 06.10.2006 5:59 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: DSK123
  • user homepage:

Your sure you father doesn't go to KLAS every morning? Thats where Janet Airlines takes off, well the Northwest Side of KLAS at least (Janet airlines fly from KLAS in unmarked Red Stripped Government 737s) They fly everyday to area 51. Also I think the real reason why Longswords and other craft in Halo look the way that they do is because its a video game. They don't have to be build to fly. They could be a brick with guns... (and I know they wouldn't really do that...)

[Edited on 6/10/2006]

  • 06.10.2006 6:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Gman,I emailed that one post to my dad, he says "Thanx :D"

  • 06.10.2006 6:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

You realize you didn't even mention anything wrong with my surface area theory. You could have said that since the planes would be flying so high there would be less atmosphere and thusly less heating. I do agree that velocity will be very important in the near future, due to the progression in laser weaponry. Ground based laser weapons could easily hit a target over 80 Km away, at the speed of photons. Which once again highlites the simple fact a fighter shaped like the B2 would be an easy target once spotted. The only thing which makes the B2 hard to hit is that it has the radar cross section of a swallow or a bumble bee I cannot remember. The simple thing here is that the rounder an aircraft is the harder it is to detect by radar. Not considering heat et cetra. Missiles are nice but when you can hit one with a 600 Kw beam they just simply become useless unless you're within a few Km.
Well, the B2 is American and America is the leader of laser technology. While America will give some of our laser technology we will have an off switch just like the radar we give to other nations (we prepare for war against everyone inculding our closes allies). The USA has many different plans for laser technology since it is so expessive we plan to use to intercept missiles that have nukes for warheads. Until lasers are cheaper we will only use it against air craft for our capital and major military bases.
EDIT::You're right the B2 is the size of a bumble bee on radar and just to show off our technology the new FA22 raptor is the size of a swarm of viruses in the air on radar.

[Edited on 6/10/2006]

  • 06.10.2006 6:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: spesalfred
One problem about your surface area theory, this is the year 2525, not 1940. In current day jet warfare, there is almost no dogfighting anymore. Most battles are over before they happen, like with aircraft such as the lockheed raptor. I sense that the furture will lie in larger aircraft with more firepower, capable of launching many self guiding missles. As our ability to fly higher and higher grows, Ground fire would pretty much be factored out, so surface area, has almost no bearing.


While its true that dog fighting doesnt take place as much anymore it doesnt mean that aircraft wouldnt have the cabability to dogfight. That would be a mistake to not keep fighters fast and manuverable. Also dont count ground fire out of the picture just yet. Current missile systems can fly faster and higher then lots of aircraft.

  • 06.10.2006 6:17 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: DSK123
  • user homepage:

Stealth tech is the way of the future there won't be need for dogfighting if the enemy can't see you. Also, the be hit with AA your enemy either need lots of luck or you need to be able to see you enemy.

[Edited on 6/10/2006]

  • 06.10.2006 6:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: DSK212
Stealth tech is the way of the future there won't be need for dogfighting if the enemy can't see you.


Radar is not the only was to spot an aircraft. Although I do agree that stealth technology will definetely be the main role in designing future combat vehicles.

  • 06.10.2006 6:22 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT


Posted by: spesalfred
One problem about your surface area theory, this is the year 2525, not 1940. In current day jet warfare, there is almost no dogfighting anymore. Most battles are over before they happen, like with aircraft such as the lockheed raptor. I sense that the furture will lie in larger aircraft with more firepower, capable of launching many self guiding missles. As our ability to fly higher and higher grows, Ground fire would pretty much be factored out, so surface area, has almost no bearing.

While its true that dog fighting doesnt take place as much anymore it doesnt mean that aircraft wouldnt have the cabability to dogfight. That would be a mistake to not keep fighters fast and manuverable. Also dont count ground fire out of the picture just yet. Current missile systems can fly faster and higher then lots of aircraft.

Yes, we need air craft capable of dogfighting because not every enemy Europe and America fight will be third world(third world nations don't have air forces to speak of). Non third world nations will have air forces that can intercept bombers so fighter are needed.


[Edited on 6/10/2006]

  • 06.10.2006 6:26 PM PDT

. . . . . . . . .___________
. . . . . ,,,---'..__________`````~~,,,,
. . .,,~`..,-~```,,------------__``~~,,,....``-,,
__/....~'. . . . l,,,"""""""/...,~. . . . `-......\
|___/. . . . . . . . . . . ./_..'~,. . . . . .\.....'===
. . . . . . . .,-,,_. . . . . .)....\. . . . . . /...../
. . . . . . . _'~--.```````````--~'. . . __-''....,-'
. . . . . . .'-_````~~~----~~~~`````..._-~'
By Twin. . .````~~-------~~~~``````
شون

Well, the longsword isn't a fighter jet though. It's a spaceship, not an atmospheric airplane. In space, anything from a rock to a satellite is moving at roughly 18,000 miles per hour. Shape or weight or size make relatively no difference in outer space. Also, the whole "surface area" thing that someone mentioned wasn't relevant at all, considering that in space there is no air or friction from ultrasonic speed.

[Edited on 6/10/2006]

  • 06.10.2006 6:28 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I guess I didn't allude clearly enough, we were speaking of aircraft, not spacecraft. In realistic sense design in outerspace is more critical than in the atmosphere. You'd be surprised how much damage a little bit of dust can do when your traveling at 50 000 Km/s.

  • 06.10.2006 7:07 PM PDT

meh........

It the risk of sounding corny. Have you considered force fields? I know, I know. Too sci-fi. But you should google it. I read on CNN the other day that Isreal has sucessfully made a device that deflect bullets, RPG's, and antitank fire. It has been mounted on planes boats, and ground vehic's. They do not say how it works; but there are lot's of field vids on it. I'll see if I can provide a linky. Just a thought. Btw, I like your sig. My entire fam is in differnet branches of the military.

Here ya go. http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/22881/Israeli_Made_Forcef ield.html

[Edited on 6/10/2006]

  • 06.10.2006 7:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Since were on the topic of new technologies... has anyone heard of scientists trying to develop teleportation (Also very Sci-fi, but I heard scientists have been experimenting with teleporting light waves)

  • 06.10.2006 7:23 PM PDT

meh........

Haven't read that one. Sounds sweet though.

  • 06.10.2006 7:31 PM PDT

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME GROUP INVITATIONS

The Halo REACH Script (post thoughts in thread)

Writing Lead of Whisper Studios. Check out Heron!

Look... I'm on bungiepedia!

Posted by: Foton
The B2 is possibly the stupidest design for a fast attach air craft. There is so much surface area the craft would more than likely not work due to the amount of heat transfered from the atmosphere. The shock wave would rip the plane to pieces at the velocities you mentioned. Fast fighter aircraft will most likely get larger if more weapons payload is wanted, but the bigger you are, the easier you're to hit unless you factor in speed of course. In reality fighter aircraft will more than likely look more like the Boeing version for the Joint Strike Fighter program, versus the picked Lockheed and Martin F-22A, F-34A. If you're being very optomistic on fighter design, atmospheric thrusters will eventually be the choice of propulsion. That is when you cause a fusion event in the atmosphere to push your craft along. This would be done using inertial confinement. The thrust ratio far exceeds anything previously envisioned by the US armed forces.

When I make my video game and novel (currently working on the back story, and character design..and campaign maps..), my Jet will look more like the Jet from Stealth than the Jets you mentioned...

=P

Those Talons look flippin sweet

  • 06.10.2006 7:41 PM PDT

Posted by: MAC 720
Stealth is developed two ways. An aircraft is made of radar absorbing material or it is radar reflecting.


No, if an Aircraft was "Radar Reflecting" then it would make a big ass blip on Muhammed's cheap ass russian radar.

  • 06.10.2006 7:44 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well on the subject of teleportation, scientists often leave out information so that things sound better than they are. What has been done is that photons as well as electrons have been set to have the same quantum information that their counter parts had a certain distance away. Basically take an electron and make it similar to the electron on the opposite side of the room. As for the force fields, it is possible to make somthing like them. But it resembles nothing like the Star Trek or Halo equivalents. Well actually more like the Halo ones. I haven't seen the movie 'Stealth' is it any good?

  • 06.10.2006 8:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

wow tha forcefield thing was really cool!!

  • 06.10.2006 9:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

yeah man i <3 longsword

hey guys just here to inform of a site to make money legitly no soy ware or virusus will kill ur comp u get a check everymonth for wat u make. i made 142$ last month u basically fill out surveys and get like 50cents but it adds up some offers r 1$-125$ but on the higher ones require u to pay like 3$ but u can make like 12 the link is here http://www.treasuretrooper.com/108342 if u sign up through that link u will get a bonus if u have any questions u can e-mail me and gishzni@hotmail.com or my aim shadow3oo(those r lowercase o's) i highly urge u use my aim u may need help once u start

  • 06.10.2006 9:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Scientists in the US and UK have also found some promising new tech in light-bending materials that could make future planes, etc truly invisible to the naked eye.

  • 06.10.2006 9:59 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: MAC 720
Posted by: Matched Player 2
1) nice sig
2) i cant imagine flying a jet at mach 9.5, youd have to have another pump like the heart to avoid blacking out, assuming you can take 1.7-2 pressing on your chest. its a cool idea tho


I asked the exact same question, my dad clarified. The next day when we got in the car my dad pulled out of the drive way and floored it! When he first stepped on the gas pedal i felt my stomach lurched. He had accelerated from 15 to 65 MPH but as soon as we had setteld at 65 i felt nothing. The only time pilots feel like blacking out is either when they acclerate or when the pull a G-manuever like a sudden plunge. Once the sudden accelation stops you'd feel normal. So 9.5 is very plausible

yea but how gradually will you be getting to 9.5 times the speed of sound (3183 m/s). if you did it at the speed of a car accelerating, you mightve just orbited the earth twice lol. at higher speeds, the acceleration is greater (correct me if im wrong, im quoteing my old physics teacher) so if you were at 3000m/s and started accelerating at 3m/s to 3183 m/s the forces on you would be so great that it would be like going from 0 to the speed of sound in a second

for this m = meters, not miles

[Edited on 6/10/2006]

  • 06.10.2006 10:03 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: GAMER4EVER
Posted by: Foton
The B2 is possibly the stupidest design for a fast attach air craft. There is so much surface area the craft would more than likely not work due to the amount of heat transfered from the atmosphere. The shock wave would rip the plane to pieces at the velocities you mentioned. Fast fighter aircraft will most likely get larger if more weapons payload is wanted, but the bigger you are, the easier you're to hit unless you factor in speed of course. In reality fighter aircraft will more than likely look more like the Boeing version for the Joint Strike Fighter program, versus the picked Lockheed and Martin F-22A, F-34A. If you're being very optomistic on fighter design, atmospheric thrusters will eventually be the choice of propulsion. That is when you cause a fusion event in the atmosphere to push your craft along. This would be done using inertial confinement. The thrust ratio far exceeds anything previously envisioned by the US armed forces.

Yet the B-2 just HAPPENS to be the msot advanced aircraft around... What a coincidence.


No it isn't the most advanced aircraft in this universe. Why don't you stick a mockup of a B2 in a mach 3 wind tunnel and tell me why the thing shatters before it reaches mach 3?

  • 06.10.2006 10:19 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: KoLaZ
  • user homepage:

Who Dares, Plays.

Longswords in the game are so big due to the fact they're fighting Covenant Corvettes, Destroyers, Frigates, and Carriers. Fighter jets today wouldn't leave a scratch on even a UNSC hull. Two to Siz missiles is nothing, it takes hundreds, possibly thousands to take down a Covenant ship's shield.

  • 06.10.2006 10:27 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3