Author Topic: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool  (Read 1462 times)

Offline Treize69

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5597
      • http://grupul7vanatoare.homestead.com/Startpage.html
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #15 on: August 31, 2010, 12:59:20 PM »
FTL= Faster Than Logic
Treize (pronounced 'trays')- because 'Treisprezece' is too long and even harder to pronounce.

Moartea bolșevicilor.

Offline Pigslilspaz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3378
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #16 on: August 31, 2010, 04:24:47 PM »
(Image removed from quote.)

I want to see if this is possible, which is shorter wing span, RV-8 or 163?

Quote from: Superfly
The rules are simple: Don't be a dick.
Quote from: hitech
It was skuzzy's <----- fault.
Quote from: Pyro
We just witnessed a miracle and I want you to @#$%^& acknowledge it!

Offline StokesAk

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3665
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #17 on: August 31, 2010, 07:35:41 PM »
I want to see if this is possible, which is shorter wing span, RV-8 or 163?

A Yak9U flew through my tail booms once.
Strokes

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #18 on: August 31, 2010, 08:13:54 PM »
no, it doesnt, it has a warp drive just like the enterprise, i believe the x-wing fighters also had a warp drive.  that's how Luke travel to find Yoda.

semp

The Millennium Falcon had a hyperdrive (like the X-Wing, B-Wings and Y-Wings) that allowed it to travel .5 past lightspeed.  Yeah, I'm a Star Wars nerd.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17423
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #19 on: August 31, 2010, 08:15:56 PM »
Damn ur right.



Semp
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline Tec

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #20 on: August 31, 2010, 09:22:12 PM »
The Millennium Falcon had a hyperdrive (like the X-Wing, B-Wings and Y-Wings) that allowed it to travel .5 past lightspeed.  Yeah, I'm a Star Wars nerd.

ack-ack

How many parsecks would it take the Komet to make the kesel run?
To each their pwn.
K$22L7AoH

Offline 1701E

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1896
      • VBF-18 Bearcats
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #21 on: August 31, 2010, 09:30:43 PM »
Bah, only hyperdrives?  We've gone to plaid! :P
ID: Xcelsior
R.I.P. Fallen Friends & Family

"The only ones who should kill are those prepared to be killed"

Offline Treize69

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5597
      • http://grupul7vanatoare.homestead.com/Startpage.html
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #22 on: August 31, 2010, 10:31:54 PM »
Bah, only hyperdrives?  We've gone to plaid! :P

My brains are going into my feet!
Treize (pronounced 'trays')- because 'Treisprezece' is too long and even harder to pronounce.

Moartea bolșevicilor.

Offline Pigslilspaz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3378
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #23 on: September 01, 2010, 12:10:27 AM »
Use the emergency brake!

Quote from: Superfly
The rules are simple: Don't be a dick.
Quote from: hitech
It was skuzzy's <----- fault.
Quote from: Pyro
We just witnessed a miracle and I want you to @#$%^& acknowledge it!

Offline guncrasher

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17423
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #24 on: September 01, 2010, 12:57:31 AM »
Damn ur right.



Semp

I take it back, upon further research found this:

Hyperdrive propulsion systems (occasionally called warp drives) were vital starship components that allowed starships to enter hyperspace  to traverse the vast distances of space at faster-than-light speeds, and thus were a key technology in the foundation of intergalactic society, trade and war. The construction and working principle of hyperdrives was based on Hyperdrive Theory. The term was used to describe the engine and all components required for its use, such as the hyperdrive motivator or hyperdrive field guide.

In numbers, the hyperdrive allowed travelers to traverse a galaxy spanning over 120,000 light years in only a few hours or days, the exact travel time depending on a number of factors including destination, point of origin, route, and class of hyperdrive.

The hyperdrive was generally built from a titanium-chromium compound. This compound was specially designed for hyperdrives to allow them to stand up against continual stress put on them jumping between the dimensions of realspace and hyperspace.


no way they could go at 1.5x speed of light.  the falcon had a customized Class 0.5 hyperdrive which according to the star Trek calculations it is 1.5x the speed of light, however in star wars han mentions that in 5 min the falcon can be on the other side of the galaxy, which suggests a much faster speed than 1.5x the speed of light,  even with a jump into hyperspace (which is not necessarily a straight line flight).

these were my sources:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Millennium_Falcon

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Hyperdrive

http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33157705/Warp-Drive-or-Hyper-Drive_1080870141_33157705?page=3  (read comments dated: 4/13/2004)

semp

btw heard that Star Wars might be released in 3D sometimes in the future (all episodes).


oh yeah one final thing I spent 3 hours researching this info, it cut into my ah time, so I will discuss it no further  :bolt:
« Last Edit: September 01, 2010, 01:08:03 AM by guncrasher »
you dont want me to ho, dont point your plane at me.

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #25 on: September 01, 2010, 06:49:18 AM »
han mentions that in 5 min the falcon can be on the other side of the galaxy

dont trust that solo guy, he thinks a parsec is a unit of time :rolleyes:
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #26 on: September 01, 2010, 12:51:47 PM »
How many parsecks would it take the Komet to make the kesel run?

Well, a parsec is a unit of distance and not time and 1 parsec = 3.26 light years or roughly 19 trillion miles.  When Han made the Kessel Run, he wasn't referring to the time it took him to make the Kessel Run but rather how he shaved 6 parsecs off(the Kessel Run was normally 18 parsecs) by skirting a black hole cluster along the route. 

So how long would it take a Komet to make the Kessel Run, well they would most likely take the normal route (18 parsecs). Also, being that most likely the Komet driver is a Lufthwhiner and doesn't have the skill necessary to skirt the black hole cluster to take the shorter route, would be roughly 58.8 light years.  However, using Chalenge's Theorum on Inter-Stellar Travel At High Altitude to Perserve Fuel and Increase Propulsion, it could be shortened to 16 parsecs or 52.16 light years.


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline grizz441

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7001
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #27 on: September 01, 2010, 08:40:14 PM »
Well, a parsec is a unit of distance and not time and 1 parsec = 3.26 light years or roughly 19 trillion miles.  When Han made the Kessel Run, he wasn't referring to the time it took him to make the Kessel Run but rather how he shaved 6 parsecs off(the Kessel Run was normally 18 parsecs) by skirting a black hole cluster along the route. 

So how long would it take a Komet to make the Kessel Run, well they would most likely take the normal route (18 parsecs). Also, being that most likely the Komet driver is a Lufthwhiner and doesn't have the skill necessary to skirt the black hole cluster to take the shorter route, would be roughly 58.8 light years.  However, using Chalenge's Theorum on Inter-Stellar Travel At High Altitude to Perserve Fuel and Increase Propulsion, it could be shortened to 16 parsecs or 52.16 light years.


ack-ack

 :rofl

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #28 on: September 02, 2010, 08:14:53 AM »
Well, a parsec is a unit of distance and not time and 1 parsec = 3.26 light years or roughly 19 trillion miles.  When Han made the Kessel Run, he wasn't referring to the time it took him to make the Kessel Run but rather how he shaved 6 parsecs off(the Kessel Run was normally 18 parsecs) by skirting a black hole cluster along the route. 

So how long would it take a Komet to make the Kessel Run, well they would most likely take the normal route (18 parsecs). Also, being that most likely the Komet driver is a Lufthwhiner and doesn't have the skill necessary to skirt the black hole cluster to take the shorter route, would be roughly 58.8 light years.  However, using Chalenge's Theorum on Inter-Stellar Travel At High Altitude to Perserve Fuel and Increase Propulsion, it could be shortened to 16 parsecs or 52.16 light years.


ack-ack

revisionist, not buying it :P
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Dream Child

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 256
Re: speed/climbrate charts for 163 in comparison tool
« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2010, 09:31:22 PM »
(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

For better or worse, there is no way the 163 climbs this slow or goes this slow, but I'm sure everyone knows that already. I know I've seen over 15,000 ft/min sustained climb on the ESB. Anyone else see any better than that?