Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.
sorceress21 wrote: »
Liam, why not take this concept into the realm of superscience and abandon the engineering impossibility of jet or rotor lift for something that heavy..Two ways you could go that would bring some suspension of disbelief into the concept would be anti-gravity (It's S.H.I.E.L.D right? They have superscience technology in the comics some of it was even alien if I recall.) or convert your hull design into an airship.
There is simply no way this could ever work as is. I know it's just fiction, but why not make it believable fiction. Any type of conventional power to keep this thing aloft would burn 10 times more fuel then the thing could actually carry. And the rotor system would have to be interlinked mechanically to compensate for even one engine failing, making it heavier, meaning it would need bigger engines and more fuel. Not to mention the fact that they would be so loud and create so much vibration working conditions on board would be horrible.
Pheonix wrote: »
okay, i am just drooling over the latest version of your carrier. however, i have a couple of qualms with it. the first is with the VLS. to me, they look a bit over sized, half-hazard, and bulky. i suggest you replace them with Pheriphical VLS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zumwalt_class_destroyer#Peripheral_Vertical_Launch_System_.28PVLS.29). the second has to do with the radar saucer. while i understand where you are coming from in placing one onboard, in terms of functionality on the helicarrier it isn't all that great, especially where it is located. best replace it, along with any other radars in conformal pods scattered all over the ship. however, this is just my opinion. feel free to include or ignore my advice as you see fit.
Dr Lee wrote: »
The repulsor version looks great... much cleaner than the propeller version IMHO
Is that a F-35 fighter you're using for comparison?
I.g.(. wrote: »
the armor fits with the hi-tech design but not with the old style.. and as stonecold said..it's quite usless..
also the most stupid enemy will aim the rotors/rotors pylons instead of the aircraft itself.. without 1-2 of them the gravity will do the rest.. or I'm wrong?
colbmista wrote: »
the exposed deck on that image is a rather flawed and dangous set up imo u need a full deck hanger other wise the winds up there would be blowing off the sides like flees
liam887 wrote: »
tes it has parachutes for just this event