Unit Pictures

[The_Blade]

What about belly engines for atmosphere navigation? Maybe those large disks on the wings are part of the Belly engine system (or anti gravity system).

[Visions of Khas]

Not a bad idea, Blade. But I'ver never been able to find any really good pictures of the underside of a battlecruiser. :\

- - - Updated - - -

Not a bad idea, Blade. But I'ver never been able to find any really good pictures of the underside of a battlecruiser. :\

[Robear]

There are no corresponding wing dishes on the underside of the wings, nor exhaust ports.



However, there are several circular structures, also present on the underside of the hammerhead, which don't seem to exist on the upper surface of the ship. I'd guess those have something to do with the antigravity/hovering bit.

- - - Updated - - -

There are no corresponding wing dishes on the underside of the wings, nor exhaust ports.



However, there are several circular structures, also present on the underside of the hammerhead, which don't seem to exist on the upper surface of the ship. I'd guess those have something to do with the antigravity/hovering bit.

[Visions of Khas]

However, there are several circular structures, also present on the underside of the hammerhead, which don't seem to exist on the upper surface of the ship. I'd guess those have something to do with the antigravity/hovering bit.

I saw those some time ago, and at that time figured they were Droppod launch sites and hard points for future armament. Seeing as how drop pods are launched from the neck, however, takes that possibility out of consideration. It's also weird these discs are exclusively found on the bottom of the ship, discounting the eight seen on the dorsum of the neck. An interesting possibility.

[Einharjar]

Well, after a moment of thought, Einharjar, I realized we'll need more than just five engines. Allow me to visually demonstrate.

Sorry, I got really bored and decided to go all FX crazy with this. Anyways, ignoring the glowy bits at the end of the wings; it looks as though there area a minimum of ten major exhaust ports (main engine block of four; brake thrusters of two, and four additional wing-mounted thrusters), 5 minor ports in the aft engine block, and a possible two additional "brake" thrusters on the upper superstructure. Not only that, but would having a Colossus reactor be redundant, seeing as how each engine has its own self-contained nuclear reactor?

Are there any examples, in aviation or otherwise, where thrust engines have more than one exhaust port that they can use interchangeably?

Haha, no appologies needed. You and Robear have no limits imposed on how fancy any of your art work should be.

I'm searching for one when I can; been real busy lately with interviews. (trying to end this two month unemployment phase... ugh)
There was an article that I read that explains the usefulness of magnetic traps. The traps themselves can direct thrust, imitating rocket "Gimbal" controls.

The wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission-fragment_rocket explains at the bottom that a new designed proposed by Rodney L. Clark and Robert B. Sheldon can not only theoretically increase the effectiveness of the fuel by 1 to 2% more (I think standard designs only have the exhaust exiting at 1.7% the speed of light, this design theorizes that 3% to 5% is possible). What caught my eye re-reading this was the HOW this is done. It's done via keeping fissure-able particles within a vacuum chamber using magnetic traps and electric fields thus acting much like this design http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Du...ed_reactor.svg. What this implies is that you simply need a core storing the fuel to jet the fuel into the specific thruster. Imagine that last image being the thrusters in the image you provided. In Segment Block A, note how the fuel is shown being jetted into the vacuum and mengetically sealed chamber. All you need is the storage of that fuel to be your "directional" system. It simply opens and closes meg-traps, letting a beam of nano-particles flow to the chosen thruster fission chambers.

http://coldwardecoded.blogspot.com/2...y-harrier.html

Through using the magnetic fields to guide your "particle beams" to their fission chambers, VTOL designs like this Harrier engine can be used. The Harrier is using Vectored Thrust. It not changing the engine's angle itself but the exhaust. That is the same concept we would be applying to the Battle Cruiser.

[Visions of Khas]

I hadn't thought of VTOL aircraft. That is very interesting; I thought the whole engine assembly was rotated (kinda like we see in Terran dropships :P ). THank you very much. I'll work this into the system.

[Einharjar]

No problem VoK. I'm eagerly awaiting your designs with massive amounts of Nerd Joy XD

True Edit:-----------------------------

Ya'know, while we're at it - one of the objects I would've loved to seen a cross section of is actually the C-14 GR. There was so much speculation, both good and bad; about how the thing actually fired. Since SC1, it releases muzzle gasses. In SC2, we see it ejecting .50 Cal stamped casings.

While I don't want to get into another downer war about how Blizzard has no sense of consistency with their universe or is generally lacking in talent for writing Sci-Fi, I would be curious as to how we could make all of these observations STILL work-I definitely have a few thoughts. As work on the BC nears, let me know if you're interested.

Also, as another bullet point, would it be prudent to have another thread dedicated to VoKs cross section? I feel horrible like I'm ignoring Robear's thread altogether.

[Visions of Khas]

Also, as another bullet point, would it be prudent to have another thread dedicated to VoKs cross section? I feel horrible like I'm ignoring Robear's thread altogether.

Well, we could I guess, but it won't have nearly the amount of traffic or attention paid to it as this one. I work at least 45 hours a week and have a lot of other things going on in my life, so my progress on this project is slow going. I've found it helpful to talk about my own stuff in conjunction with Robear's. Buuut, if he wants me to stop sharing his thread, all he has to do is say so.



But back to a question I posted earlier. Considering the battlecruiser will have a total of at least ten fission reactors from which to pull energy, plus the reaction chamber for the Yamato cannon, does that make an independent Colossus reactor redundant? Should the "Colossus Reactor" instead refer to a supped-up Yamato Reaction Chamber, rather than an independent power source? (It's meant to contain the fission of a spray of antimatter and Uranium-238, which will in turn lead to the fusion of a pellet of Tritium-Deuterium.)

Yeah, this is what I'm leaning towards, now...

[Robear]

Hah, don't feel horrible, Einharjar, especially while I'm in this period of only posting ~1 new drawing per month. I'd love to be doing more, but, like VoK, real life is time consuming. It's not like I've been posting anything for you guys to bury. :P
Plus, this is a good thread for discussing reference images, and all that.

Should the "Colossus Reactor" instead refer to a supped-up Yamato Reaction Chamber, rather than an independent power source?

I'd vote yes. I mean, in my head, I would imagine that the colossus reactor would be something that was installed at the same time as the rest of the yamato gun refit, but since in the game you can have a yamato cannon without needing the colossus upgrade, yes.

For my part, though I haven't had time to draw, I have been messing around with 3D a bit more. I made a very accurate new wraith model, and found out that the old wraith drawing wasn't long enough. But, honestly, not a huge difference.

[Nolanstar]

I noticed you updated your above post, sorry I haven't been on in a while, forgot my password and an update cleared the remember me cookie

- - - Updated - - -

I noticed you updated your above post, sorry I haven't been on in a while, forgot my password and an update cleared the remember me cookie