I agree! That would be awesome.
Yeah, a very succesful warbird that.
One of the problems is that asymmetrical ships very often look terrible.
That first image and that second one from Eve look especially bad.
That EVE ship looks horrible, ridiculous even, for all kinds of reasons.
Eve's best looking ships are mostly symmetrical and I don't think that is a coincidence.
Personally I feel the symmetrical SoE ships in EVE are the best looking ships in the game. They ooze realism and have great detail.
I wish these designs were part of Elite.
If asymmetry is a product of function and results in a good looking design then I am all for it, but in general I see no reason to design ships in an asymmetrical manner.
I like the Star Wars B-Wing design for example, although that ship could be seen as symmetrical in a certain configuration with the cockpit on top.
I also like the Millennium Falcon, but even that ship was mostly symmetrical too, with only a cockpit stuck on to one side of an otherwise symmetrical design.
I also think asymmetry would fit better with large capital ships that do not have to touch down on atmospheric planets themselves.
As a Sci Fi fan - Hell Yes!
As an Aerospace Engineer... Hell no that's just making the maths more difficult!
See Iskariot's post, lets do it to non-atmo ships, centre of mass is a valid point tho. I would like a more interesting ship designs than wedge though despite that being Elite's signature dish
As an Aerospace Engineer... Hell no that's just making the maths more difficult!
See Iskariot's post, lets do it to non-atmo ships, centre of mass is a valid point tho. I would like a more interesting ship designs than wedge though despite that being Elite's signature dish
Last edited:
NO! Let's stick with what at least theoretically usable in "real life"
Asymetrical ship isn't a bad idea only because of the inability to enter and effectively manoeuvre in atmosphere. It's a bad idea for many more reasons. Centre of mass is one thing, that can be circumvented (simply make the longer wing lighter, etc...) but that's a static centre of mass. Problems start to occur once the ship get to move.
Straight line is relatively fine. Acceleration is the first problem, because, as you know, we can accelerate into every direction (yay space) which means that in order for the sip to remain stable, it's centre of mass would have to be balanced and at the same place for every axis. (aka the ship would have to be made "symetrical")
The real fun, of course would start once you'd try to rotate such ship. No matter how good it is "balanced", different lengths of the opposite sides of ship (along whichever axis) mean different angular velocities and therefore different momentum. That means that ship would never rotate around its centre of mass, so you wouldn't be able aim weapons while moving, there would be unnecessary strain on every part of the ship, and I REALLY would not like to be that person who has to calculate where to put the thrusters.
In short, however cool-looking and all that (I'm not denying that) it's a really bad idea and should remain in sci-fi books from 70'.
Asymetrical ship isn't a bad idea only because of the inability to enter and effectively manoeuvre in atmosphere. It's a bad idea for many more reasons. Centre of mass is one thing, that can be circumvented (simply make the longer wing lighter, etc...) but that's a static centre of mass. Problems start to occur once the ship get to move.
Straight line is relatively fine. Acceleration is the first problem, because, as you know, we can accelerate into every direction (yay space) which means that in order for the sip to remain stable, it's centre of mass would have to be balanced and at the same place for every axis. (aka the ship would have to be made "symetrical")
The real fun, of course would start once you'd try to rotate such ship. No matter how good it is "balanced", different lengths of the opposite sides of ship (along whichever axis) mean different angular velocities and therefore different momentum. That means that ship would never rotate around its centre of mass, so you wouldn't be able aim weapons while moving, there would be unnecessary strain on every part of the ship, and I REALLY would not like to be that person who has to calculate where to put the thrusters.
In short, however cool-looking and all that (I'm not denying that) it's a really bad idea and should remain in sci-fi books from 70'.
Last edited:
Phooey to you, one acronym, FSD
Really, I ask FD for something and all these people have to waste their time arguing why it should not be so.
Go and play the game in your OCD symmetrical ships, I prefer to buck the trend, after all its only a game.
FSD is physically possible in real life. Flying asymmetrical ship isn't.
If the question was for FD, it should have been posted in Feedback and Suggestions Forums. Here we talk about ships, so please don't be offended that others are commenting in your thread. They are not wasting their time. They are discussing your idea.
If the question was for FD, it should have been posted in Feedback and Suggestions Forums. Here we talk about ships, so please don't be offended that others are commenting in your thread. They are not wasting their time. They are discussing your idea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
And yes, I know about Blohm and Voss. Awesome bird. (I mean it)
1) The design was proved unfeasible for mass production. The fact that nobody tried it ever again, afterwards, speaks for itself.
2) The plane itself was stable thanks to clever aerodynamics (balanced drag), something that is unreplicable in space with rocket engines.
Last edited:
Well... there's this guy called Burt Rutan who gave it a try. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutan_Boomerang
Note: "The design was intended to be a multi-engine aircraft that in the event of failure of a single engine would not become dangerously difficult to control due to asymmetric thrust."
He's using asymmetry in geometry to counter the dangers of asymmetry in thrust. Very clever. Only one was built unfortunately.
Last edited:
Burt Rutan himself is pretty eccentric.
Burt Rutan himself is pretty eccentric.
He is a genius. Back in the day me and my fellow students called him 'the holy Burt'. A friend of me had a chat with him at Oshkosh and almost fainted.
as a game player a big yes
as a sim player no
but this is a game so HELL YEH
as a sim player no
but this is a game so HELL YEH