General Discussion

[jcf]

Speaking of high-speed levitating, hover etc. "trains" the US DOT had a program
over fifty years ago to explore various
concepts, funding was rather erratic so
what was planned and what was realized
were not the same thing. In some ways
they didn't really think about what they
were trying to accomplish. In my opinion
launching a project, program or whatever
without really thinking about what it is
you're actually trying to accomplish would
qualify as a "Bad Idea".

Anyhow the three experimental vehicles, Grumman, Garret and Rohr-Aerotrain,
that resulted from the US program have
all survived and are together at the rail
museum in Pueblo, Colorado.

Pueblo Railway Museum - Rocket Cars

The Grumman was the silliest of the lot
and a kludge of bad ideas. It was a slow
slug.
You cannot view this attachment.

[kerick]

That "rail bed" definitely looks like a bad idea!    Every road crossing would have to be a bridge.

[kerick]

Between this GB and the one on BTS I need to kitbash a bad idea!

[Wardukw]

I'm very lucky with this GB ..both builds are technically useless and bloody seriously bad ideas 💡 😑
I'm so looking forward to this one 😆 🤣

[Beermonster58]

Actually, I'd have thought the Imperial AT-AT would be a prime candidate. A huge heavy, slow moving target, impossible to hide, probably incapable of covering soft ground and/or climbing any sort of slope.......!

A veritable walking coffin for its unfortunate occupants, especially as it could be tripped up by someone with a ball of string😂.

It DID look uber cool though.

[crudebuteffective]

Honest, I'm really NOT trying to be a revolting pedant, but would a really good idea, such as a VTOL fighter  (a Harrier for instance)  but appallingly badly designed and executed (a Rockwell XFV-12  for example)  be appropriate/ acceptable in this build?

Hi mate

Have consulted and  yep any of the badly Executed VTOL stuff can be included in this GB

CBE

[Weaver]

That "rail bed" definitely looks like a bad idea!    Every road crossing would have to be a bridge.

Yes, and it'd collect water and every bit of wind-blown debris too. Look at any rail lien up close and there's all kinds of crap lying in between the sleepers doing no harm at all.

[Weaver]

Honest, I'm really NOT trying to be a revolting pedant, but would a really good idea, such as a VTOL fighter  (a Harrier for instance)  but appallingly badly designed and executed (a Rockwell XFV-12  for example)  be appropriate/ acceptable in this build?

Hi mate

H ave consulted and  yep any of the bad Executed VTOL stuff can be included in this GB

CBE

Put it another way:

The vague concept "V/STOL fighter" is a good idea.
The specific proposal for "V/STOL fighter using overcomplicated, unreliable and horribly inefficient design X" is a bad idea.

[PR19_Kit]

Pueblo Railway Museum - Rocket Cars

'Small World' time.............

There's a link on that site, toward the bottom of the first page, for the Transportation Technology Centre (previously the Pueblo High Speed Ground Test Centre) which is the place where they first tested those high speed rail cars.

One of the guys in my pic about wearing ties, him on the right, Dr. Alan Bing, went over to the TTC in 1976 and was the Big Boss there for some years.

[perttime]

The XFV-12 was an interesting concept, and it looked pretty cool too ... except for the A-4 derived cockpit and nose, and the F-4 intakes. Perhaps some other airframe could be bashed with that concept

You cannot view this attachment.

https://youtu.be/ZneQVx-Zpfo?feature=shared&t=278

[scooter]

That "rail bed" definitely looks like a bad idea!    Every road crossing would have to be a bridge.

 

You cannot view this attachment.

My 2 farthings: Had this gone into production, it'd probably be elevated and/or on a separated roadbed, particularly in dense population zones- much like how the NEC (Northeast Corridor) is physically isolated between NYC and DC.

[NARSES2]

Actually, I'd have thought the Imperial AT-AT would be a prime candidate. A huge heavy, slow moving target, impossible to hide, probably incapable of covering soft ground and/or climbing any sort of slope.......!

A veritable walking coffin for its unfortunate occupants, especially as it could be tripped up by someone with a ball of string😂.

It DID look uber cool though.

To be honest and a tad pedantic (and it also explains why I've struggled with the premise for this GB since it won out in last years Poll) I can't see how any Sci Fi or even "Fantasy" idea can be classed as a bad one as we don't know anything about the science that that World is using. Nor do we understand even the basics with which they work. It's all based on our rather parochial concept of "good" and "bad", and even that depends on whether you are casting an opinion on an idea or concept with the benefit of hindsight or not.

There, that's me said what's been bubbling away in my brain for nearly a year 

[Weaver]

Actually, I'd have thought the Imperial AT-AT would be a prime candidate. A huge heavy, slow moving target, impossible to hide, probably incapable of covering soft ground and/or climbing any sort of slope.......!

A veritable walking coffin for its unfortunate occupants, especially as it could be tripped up by someone with a ball of string😂.

It DID look uber cool though.

Hence why I kitbashed a toy-like AT-AT into an AT-TS an age ago:

[Weaver]

Actually, I'd have thought the Imperial AT-AT would be a prime candidate. A huge heavy, slow moving target, impossible to hide, probably incapable of covering soft ground and/or climbing any sort of slope.......!

A veritable walking coffin for its unfortunate occupants, especially as it could be tripped up by someone with a ball of string😂.

It DID look uber cool though.

To be honest and a tad pedantic (and it also explains why I've struggled with the premise for this GB since it won out in last years Poll) I can't see how any Sci Fi or even "Fantasy" idea can be classed as a bad one as we don't know anything about the science that that World is using. Nor do we understand even the basics with which they work. It's all based on our rather parochial concept of "good" and "bad", and even that depends on whether you are casting an opinion on an idea or concept with the benefit of hindsight or not.

There, that's me said what's been bubbling away in my brain for nearly a year 

I'll have a crack at answering that.

We do know something about the science that sci-fi settings use, because we can see what's possible and what isn't on the screen and in the background books and materials. A sci-fi design can be considered a bad idea if it doesn't work well, and was obviously never going to work well, within the "rules" of the world in which it exists. It's been said by Star Wars designers and artists that the AT-AT is a terror weapon, not a weapon for fighting near-peer adversaries. It's designed to terrify primitive populations with it's "dinosaur monster" looks as much as it's firepower.

We can see from other Star Wars materials, that wheeled/tracked/anti-grav surface vehicles are widely available and practical (Luke's Speeder) and that strike-aircraft-like flying war machines (all the various fighters) are possible too. All of the alternative surface vehicle options are faster, more practical and more surviviable than the AT-AT. All of the "fighters" should be able to deliver enough firepower to penetrate an AT-AT or a big enough explosion to knock it over. The Snowspeeders were very small (much smaller than an X-Wing) and lacking in firepower, but even they figured out within a couple of minutes that they could bring down an AT-AT by tangling it's legs with a cable. Had they been able to engage the AT-ATs further out, they could have taken them all down before they reached the base.

It is thus possible to say that the AT-AT is a bad idea. It's a huge investment of resources in a weapon system that is only viable in a niche application, and even that can be done without it: stormtroopers with armour and blasters kicking in doors would be just as effective at terrorising a primitive population, whilst being much cheaper and more adaptable. The AT-AT is a symptom of a more general tendency within the Empire of focussing on grand-standing super-weapons (Death Star) instead of the practical grind of holding down hundreds of increasingly resentful and rebellious worlds. More boots on the ground and a better intelligence service would have done them far more good, assuming that "just being nice" was off the table.

[steelpillow]

The XFV-12 was an interesting concept, and it looked pretty cool too ... except for the A-4 derived cockpit and nose, and the F-4 intakes.

I wonder if they've figured out why it failed. The idea was to blow air down through the slots, entraining more air from above to boost the thermodynamic efficiency and hence the thrust.
The earliest attempt at this kind of induction thrust that I have found was an idea by aircraft pioneer JW Dunne, ca. 1901. It also failed for Rockwell's XFV-1, falling way below lab test predictions. But it would later work for Dyson with his airblade, that we now find everywhere.
Maybe today we could make it work for VTOL. What-if, indeed!