Brandon replied to me:
Any mistakes so far?
None that I see.
Worth noting that the Me 163 had a higher top speed (almost 600 mph) and a
lower thrust ratio (0.52), but I don't know if you'd consider it late TL6 or
early TL7.
Also, for high top speed and low stall speed, see the proposed Vought XF5U and
the prototype V-173,
Brandon
Err, that was the top ground speed (and it was wrong, I multiplied where
I should have divided). I'm aiming for a top air speed in excess of Mach 2.
And from another reply:
So making the aircraft larger increases stall speed and top speed by the
>same factor. This can be done until stall speed reaches top ground speed.
Oh, wait. IIRC, increasing size increases surface area, which increased drag,
which reduces top speed.
For constant density and a constant engine percentage (i.e. all other
things being equal), the thrust goes up faster than the drag.
Ewt 20,000 lbs., volume 1,000 cf, area 600 cf, density 28 lbs. per cf
accounting for the radical streamlining. Drag is 15.
A 5,000-lbf. engine is 2,000 lbs. and 80 cf. Fuel for 120 minutes
nominal consumption is 1,000 gallons, 8,000 lbs., 150 cf. That leaves
168 cf and 10,000 lbs. for structure/armor and the payload.
Stall speed 190 mph.
Top ground speed 195 mph. It might be wise to invest in improved
suspension for 220 mph.
Top air speed 1,580 mph.
aMR 0.125, aDecel 0.5 mph/s. Those two stats probably kill the concept
as an interceptor, but perhaps it might make a low-tech mail plane. Call
it an 1,000-mile dash with a ton of mail in 40 minutes flight time. It
certainly beats the overnight train.
Regards,
Onno
_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
