Vehicle question (spooilers?)(aftershock?)

Game Talk The Bunker
21

It is true that we have a lot of theories, but no one is willing to practice them. On paper, we can never achieve the purpose we need.

22

Is there any way to disable that ‘veh->set_flyable( false );’ outside of a custom build, or to code something with a ‘veh->set_flyable( true );’ action that I can wave over a vehicle to appease the Machine God’s mystical decree preventing my heretical garage tinkering from functioning?

If so might sit down and make one of those community service mods.

23

Use the ROTOR_SIMPLE tag instead of the ROTOR tag, and submit a patch following my advice in this comment: vehicle: improve performance by removing has_part( "ROTOR" ) calls by mlangsdorf ¡ Pull Request #44941 ¡ CleverRaven/Cataclysm-DDA ¡ GitHub

Also, there’s a misconception here that helicopters don’t work with electric engines - they definitely do, it’s just that you need a light helicopter because we only have puny electric engines in game (for now).
Electric engines are a little bugged though:

24

i’m no engineer but i’m pretty sure solar panels would be way too heavy to lift. and even if theoretically speaking the solar panels were weightless, I don’t think it would be able to consistently generate power to keep the 100 tons of steel off the ground, or at least safely without using a very large pre-charged battery, since if the clouds suddenly cover the sun you’d plummet like a rock from 50 feet up. And even if you did have said battery, then you’d reach the same weight problem of being too heavy to liftoff since lead weighs alot.

25

Interesting. It’s been awhile since I did the test flying. However, I do remember I couldn’t get the vehicle to move with different engines installed with ratings that matched the gas turbines. It’s hazy now if I also tested a electric engine with supped up settings.

26
  1. The solar panels can be at my base, charging my batteries, yes.
  2. Aircraft are usually made from aluminum, which is much lighter
  3. A personal aircraft’s weight is nowhere near 100 tonnes, lol
  4. Fortunately we have li-ion, which is nearly 10 times lighter than lead-acid for the same energy content.
27

once again, that still is a really heavy battery, since it would still be 100x larger than a small lithium battery they usually produce and just because you can store energy large amounts of energy≠able to generate a large amount of power. Even if you hooked up a toaster to nuclear reactor as a power source it would still only be able heat bagels.
Electrical engines are typically weaker than other fuel powered cars, so to generate enough lift to power an aircraft you’d have to build a bigger engine, and to build a bigger engine you’d add more mass, and more mass means its heavier. There’s a reason spacecraft don’t run on batteries.
And 100 tonnes was a hyperbole, I was simplifying for really heavy, since I don’t have the average weight of a aircraft carrier offhand.
In short I really wouldn’t recommend using electrical power for aircraft without a parachute

28

I’m sorry, but:

  1. A 100x larger battery provides 100 times the energy and 100 times the power of a small battery.
  2. There are energy-optimised, power-optimised and balanced li-ion chemistries. The power-optimised ones provide a lot of power (~4kW / kg).
  3. My toaster is hooked up to a nuclear reactor IRL and can make toast just fine.
  4. No, electric motors have a much higher power density than internal combustion engines.
  5. On the contrary, electric propulsion is very popular for deep space missions and station keeping. Look up the ion drive - electrically accelerated gas ions.
  6. There is no active spacecraft that doesen’t run on batteries. Some have chemical propulsion only, though.
  7. An aircraft carrier is a ship…
  8. The amount of electric aircraft is steadily increasing, from toy quadcopters, to paramotors, semi-personal multi-seat aircraft and now air taxis and large electric passengers planes are in heavy development. Electric is simply cheaper to operate, there are fewer parts that can break, are quieter, safer, etc…
29

you do know that an aircraft carrier is boat right? Right…?
18684_52809b4e1f7b5
And my point about your toaster is you can only use it to make toast, not anything more advanced like using the heat to melt iron ingots. Hooking it up to a reactor won’t make it run any hotter than it would a car generator. Power supply does not equal horsepower

I have no degree in engineering or aeronautics, but i’m having trouble figuring if you’re trolling…

30

Idk, that thing looks a bit big for a boat.–"A boat is a watercraft of a large range of types and sizes, but generally smaller than a ship, which is distinguished by its larger size, shape, cargo or passenger capacity, or its ability to carry boats. " – Boat - Wikipedia

I don’t understand what you wanted to say then, because a nuclear reactor is clearly powerful enough to melt iron ingots. As I said with the batteries, the more you have, the more power and energy you have available. Twice more batteries results in twice more power and twice more energy available. And, when you connect enough batteries, you can definetely melt iron with them.

I am just trying to correct you, that is all.