Propose PAVLOV drone figther/bomber (andolian)
Moderator: pyramid
-
- Elite Venturer
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:01 pm
- Location: France, Paris
Propose PAVLOV drone figther/bomber (andolian)
hello i worked on PAVLOV drone
but maybe is not a good design or not your meaning about drone
i'm inspire a little bit to the SEAXBANE/DAPHNE"oblivion work" drone
but the Andolian Drone is for multirole drone then two version
i thought a same stat to a andolian fighter but:
*Fighter armement 3 missile /medium mount point
and maybe 4 light gun laser
*Bomber (less agile but same speed) and for armement:
2 heavy gun mount point and 1/2 light gun mount point
see the picture (the ENTOURAGE is here for the size chart)
say me if you think it can be a drone or is maybe so big??
but maybe is not a good design or not your meaning about drone
i'm inspire a little bit to the SEAXBANE/DAPHNE"oblivion work" drone
but the Andolian Drone is for multirole drone then two version
i thought a same stat to a andolian fighter but:
*Fighter armement 3 missile /medium mount point
and maybe 4 light gun laser
*Bomber (less agile but same speed) and for armement:
2 heavy gun mount point and 1/2 light gun mount point
see the picture (the ENTOURAGE is here for the size chart)
say me if you think it can be a drone or is maybe so big??
-
- Confed Special Operative
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:38 pm
- Location: Sweden
- Contact:
-
- Expert Mercenary
- Posts: 988
- Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 1:02 am
- Location: Somewhere in the vastness of space
- Contact:
Re: Propose PAVLOV drone figther/bomber (andolian)
A very nice shape. Hope jackS will be there sometime to comment on the size.
-
- Minister of Information
- Posts: 1895
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 9:40 pm
- Location: The land of tenure (and diaper changes)
Cute
It's not what I was looking for for the Pavlov, but if you shrink each down by a factor of about 3, I think we can happily take them as-is for Andolian security drones (to be named later)
For the Pavlov, a few things:
0) It's a bomber and an interceptor, not a bomber and a fighter
1) The size you were ending up is pretty good, but see later comments below in section 3) for I versus B variants.
2) Visually, what I'd like to see is something that's clearly the exact same chassis, with a plausibly modular re-armament. To put it another way, it should look like one basic model that, if you took it into the shop, you could pop the interceptor rig off and replace it with the bomber rig. I was originally thinking along bilateral lines, but the three-way split sort of arrangement you have could work very well too, possibly even better - just make the central portion larger (the basic chassis) and then put all of the weapons on the 3 extensions. Actually, thinking ahead to the bomber variant - 1 medium mount on the central body, and all other weapons on the detachable pods.
3) The bomber variant needs a lot more ordinance. It's not going to be gun-centric at all. The whole idea of a bomber drone is range extension. Use lots of short ranged high yield/mass weapons mounted on a semi-expendable semi-autonomous deployment platform. None of the VS "Bombers" are bombers in the sense that they're (primarily) designed to drop drive-less ordinance (there will be _some_ driveless ordinance types), but the principle is still similar. As for the interceptor, it's going to be minimizing additional mass for superior accel and maneuver, and it's going to be designed for a hard-striking limited engagement, rather than a sustained control of an area (that's why its an interceptor, and not a superiority fighter). It's going to need to look a lot less massive than the bomber drone, but that should be easy to depict - because the bomber drone will have huge racks of ordinance it's carrying, whereas the interceptor will be packing only a sparse handful of missiles and an ammo-limited heavy gun.
4) Thrusters in more places. And Radiators. Maneuvering thrusters between each of the weapon attachments would be nice - there's no person inside, so this thing should be very obviously built to spin like a top. The radiators are probably best attached to the weapon mounts.
It's not what I was looking for for the Pavlov, but if you shrink each down by a factor of about 3, I think we can happily take them as-is for Andolian security drones (to be named later)
For the Pavlov, a few things:
0) It's a bomber and an interceptor, not a bomber and a fighter
1) The size you were ending up is pretty good, but see later comments below in section 3) for I versus B variants.
2) Visually, what I'd like to see is something that's clearly the exact same chassis, with a plausibly modular re-armament. To put it another way, it should look like one basic model that, if you took it into the shop, you could pop the interceptor rig off and replace it with the bomber rig. I was originally thinking along bilateral lines, but the three-way split sort of arrangement you have could work very well too, possibly even better - just make the central portion larger (the basic chassis) and then put all of the weapons on the 3 extensions. Actually, thinking ahead to the bomber variant - 1 medium mount on the central body, and all other weapons on the detachable pods.
3) The bomber variant needs a lot more ordinance. It's not going to be gun-centric at all. The whole idea of a bomber drone is range extension. Use lots of short ranged high yield/mass weapons mounted on a semi-expendable semi-autonomous deployment platform. None of the VS "Bombers" are bombers in the sense that they're (primarily) designed to drop drive-less ordinance (there will be _some_ driveless ordinance types), but the principle is still similar. As for the interceptor, it's going to be minimizing additional mass for superior accel and maneuver, and it's going to be designed for a hard-striking limited engagement, rather than a sustained control of an area (that's why its an interceptor, and not a superiority fighter). It's going to need to look a lot less massive than the bomber drone, but that should be easy to depict - because the bomber drone will have huge racks of ordinance it's carrying, whereas the interceptor will be packing only a sparse handful of missiles and an ammo-limited heavy gun.
4) Thrusters in more places. And Radiators. Maneuvering thrusters between each of the weapon attachments would be nice - there's no person inside, so this thing should be very obviously built to spin like a top. The radiators are probably best attached to the weapon mounts.
-
- Elite Venturer
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:01 pm
- Location: France, Paris
-
- Minister of Information
- Posts: 1895
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 9:40 pm
- Location: The land of tenure (and diaper changes)
No need to be sorryFendorin wrote:i understand 33% sorry
hmm. sorry - not sure I quite understood exactly what you were askingFendorin wrote: just for hit with bomb or heavy bean but no more gun
Drones have a couple key advantages related to not having pilots - they can perform manuevers that would make a pilot very unhappy or dead, but, more importantly, it takes less time for the Andolians to build a new drone than to train a new pilot. You can risk drones in ways you may not wish to risk piloted craft. You can park them in place for weeks on end waiting for something to happen and they won't lose concentration. Very importantly, drones won't complain when you send them on a 50/50 mission, or require them to discharge their ordinance at the enemy capital vessels at point-blank range in order to limit point-defense exposure.
-
- Elite Venturer
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:01 pm
- Location: France, Paris
-
- Minister of Information
- Posts: 1895
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 9:40 pm
- Location: The land of tenure (and diaper changes)
Well, I was thinking the specialization would be limited to the extensions - makes sense to mass-produce the same chassis for all drones. Then, if the chassis has a single, spinal mount point, then even the bomber variant has some recourse once it's dropped it's ordinance (a "persuader", if you will)
The torpedo and scout variants could also be interesting. Not so sure about what would make the armed probe different than a scout.
The torpedo and scout variants could also be interesting. Not so sure about what would make the armed probe different than a scout.
-
- The Shepherd
- Posts: 5841
- Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 8:37 pm
- Location: Ottawa
- Contact:
the scout would have more obvious sensor systems while an armed probe the sensor arrays smaller and a visible weapon that should make the differentiation easy for players getting flitting glimpse as it zips past.Not so sure about what would make the armed probe different than a scout.
Enjoy the Choice
my box::HP Envy i5-6400 @2Q70GHzx4 8 Gb ram/1 Tb(Win10 64)/3 Tb Mint 19.2/GTX745 4Gb acer S243HL K222HQL
Q8200/Asus P5QDLX/8 Gb ram/WD 2Tb 2-500 G HD/GF GT640 2Gb Mint 17.3 64 bit Win 10 32 bit acer and Lenovo ideapad 320-15ARB Win 10/Mint 19.2
Q8200/Asus P5QDLX/8 Gb ram/WD 2Tb 2-500 G HD/GF GT640 2Gb Mint 17.3 64 bit Win 10 32 bit acer and Lenovo ideapad 320-15ARB Win 10/Mint 19.2
-
- Elite
- Posts: 1363
- Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm
Personally, I would imagine the difference being that a scout has more visible hull relative to protruding sub-systems while an armed probe would be so small that it would look like alot of sub-systems stuck together, otherwise it would have no room for them all.loki1950 wrote:the scout would have more obvious sensor systems while an armed probe the sensor arrays smaller and a visible weapon that should make the differentiation easy for players getting flitting glimpse as it zips past.Not so sure about what would make the armed probe different than a scout.
-
- Merchant
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:25 am
- Location: Drifting through the wreckage
- Contact:
-
- Confed Special Operative
- Posts: 334
- Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:10 am
in my opinion
Scout drone == spy ship.. very very hard to detect, flat profile, sensor cloaking or some such..
maybe only one small gun (one pulse laser?) but ALOT of sensors and possible manipulation equipment (for taking specimines or large chunks of something back)
Interceptor drone == slightly larger, but just as manuverable, with ALOT of fast weapons likely on gimballs. Its purpose is to get as many shots in at as many targets as possible before being splatted or passed by. useful for very fast and small craft such as fighters.
Bomber Drone == larger still, and slower, with a heavy payload of inertia driven or rail driven payloads. Payloads that would be too powerful or too dangerous for a normal fighter to use.. such as a full nuclear warhead or fusion planetkiller (not really planetkiller, but would make a nice crater half the size of texas maybe ) Likely destroying the drone in the process. Otherwise it would be beter, tactically and material efficient to make bombers manned.
Torpedo Drone == essentially a scout drone with one or two large torpedoes. for sneaking in to enemy battle lines, and dropping their payload from unsuspecting directions, before the enemy has all their defenses primed.
Suicide Drone == just like the Bomber Drone, but one single payload thats part of the hull and primed so on destruction it goes boom.. (weather being shot down or ramming) Maybe with a bit more powerful latteral engine to get there faster though less manuverability.
Scout drone == spy ship.. very very hard to detect, flat profile, sensor cloaking or some such..
maybe only one small gun (one pulse laser?) but ALOT of sensors and possible manipulation equipment (for taking specimines or large chunks of something back)
Interceptor drone == slightly larger, but just as manuverable, with ALOT of fast weapons likely on gimballs. Its purpose is to get as many shots in at as many targets as possible before being splatted or passed by. useful for very fast and small craft such as fighters.
Bomber Drone == larger still, and slower, with a heavy payload of inertia driven or rail driven payloads. Payloads that would be too powerful or too dangerous for a normal fighter to use.. such as a full nuclear warhead or fusion planetkiller (not really planetkiller, but would make a nice crater half the size of texas maybe ) Likely destroying the drone in the process. Otherwise it would be beter, tactically and material efficient to make bombers manned.
Torpedo Drone == essentially a scout drone with one or two large torpedoes. for sneaking in to enemy battle lines, and dropping their payload from unsuspecting directions, before the enemy has all their defenses primed.
Suicide Drone == just like the Bomber Drone, but one single payload thats part of the hull and primed so on destruction it goes boom.. (weather being shot down or ramming) Maybe with a bit more powerful latteral engine to get there faster though less manuverability.
-
- Elite Venturer
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:01 pm
- Location: France, Paris
-
- The Shepherd
- Posts: 5841
- Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 8:37 pm
- Location: Ottawa
- Contact:
Nice that is just the type of modularity that jackS was asking for
Enjoy the Choice
Enjoy the Choice
my box::HP Envy i5-6400 @2Q70GHzx4 8 Gb ram/1 Tb(Win10 64)/3 Tb Mint 19.2/GTX745 4Gb acer S243HL K222HQL
Q8200/Asus P5QDLX/8 Gb ram/WD 2Tb 2-500 G HD/GF GT640 2Gb Mint 17.3 64 bit Win 10 32 bit acer and Lenovo ideapad 320-15ARB Win 10/Mint 19.2
Q8200/Asus P5QDLX/8 Gb ram/WD 2Tb 2-500 G HD/GF GT640 2Gb Mint 17.3 64 bit Win 10 32 bit acer and Lenovo ideapad 320-15ARB Win 10/Mint 19.2
-
- Elite Venturer
- Posts: 725
- Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:01 pm
- Location: France, Paris