Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is Forgeworld. Necessary isn't the issue. It's 100% rule of cool.

DogOfWar wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Valks are pretty darn big, but with very little work, you could lose the huge Transport capacity and skeletonize it for a Valkyrie Transporter capable of airlifting a single Chimera or Hellhound.

Hmmmm.... Chimeras are still pretty hefty. I'd be hard pressed to see a Valkyrie lug one around, even a stripped down Valkyrie.

A Valk is much like a CH-53E Super Stallion, with sufficient power to air-recover a UH-60.

Convert the airframe to something lighter like a Sikorsky Skycrane and it could definitely see it airlift a Chimera.

Sucks to be those 6 guardsman that for SOME reason need to get close to the enemy and cant get a valkyrie..

JohnHwangDD wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Valks are pretty darn big, but with very little work, you could lose the huge Transport capacity and skeletonize it for a Valkyrie Transporter capable of airlifting a single Chimera or Hellhound.

Hmmmm.... Chimeras are still pretty hefty. I'd be hard pressed to see a Valkyrie lug one around, even a stripped down Valkyrie.

A Valk is much like a CH-53E Super Stallion, with sufficient power to air-recover a UH-60.

Convert the airframe to something lighter like a Sikorsky Skycrane and it could definitely see it airlift a Chimera.

I don't know about that one.

The Valk reminds me more of a Harrier than a helicopter. It obviously has some pretty hefty lateral thrust with those big turbofans but they aren't vectored and the VTOL nozzles at the wingtips look pretty teensy to me. I'd say it's got enough lift to take-off and land itself (or a modest payload) quite happily but it's real power is in forward thrust for speedy escapeyness. With helicopters it's the opposite since they have to tilt forwards to convert vertical lift into lateral thrust.

Okay sure, it's got mega supa dupa engines! But seriously, it's not designed or modeled to look like a heavy lifter. Maybe with some tweaking? I'm sure GW has a variant planned to happily take our money, no worries!

DoW

And that differs in what way from the Thawk Transporter, which can carry two Land Raiders, but has no VTOL nozzles?

Kanluwen wrote:Jesus people.

It's a vehicle that gets kicked out the back of a Valkyrie variant. It has to be relatively light-weight, while not compromising the carrier's flight characteristics.

That's why it's designed like it is. Look at the FAVs that are used by modern Special Forces of all countries, and you'll see they're designed very much like this. Doors are either mesh or canvas panels attached on site, or just left off period. They also usually have a very low ground clearance, but a ridiculous suspension system that makes up for it.

I was wondering when someone would say this. Thank you.

Kirasu wrote:Sucks to be those 6 guardsman that for SOME reason need to get close to the enemy and cant get a valkyrie..

I think you're missing the point. This thing is designed to fit in a new Valkyrie Heavy Lift variant... when everyone else gets out of a Valk, their standing in the open. Those 6 guardsmen get a tiny bit of protection, some heavy weapons, and continued mobility.

I think if I had an Elysian army at this point I'd start converting up some M577 and UD4L.

JohnHwangDD wrote:And that differs in what way from the Thawk Transporter, which can carry two Land Raiders, but has no VTOL nozzles?

The Thunderhawk Transporter is the size of multiple Valkyries, with much bigger engines?

There's also the fact that the transporter seems to be more like a STOL rather than a VTOL, which would make it more akin to a C-130 Hercules.

JohnHwangDD wrote:And that differs in what way from the Thawk Transporter, which can carry two Land Raiders, but has no VTOL nozzles?

Ugh the Thunderhawk annoys me to no end.

Described as being capable of aerial and space flight, fully VTOL, with supa dupa speed + carrying capacity... despite having no thrust vectoring, no aerofoils, no ailerons, no rudder, no elevators, no maneuvering thrusters and (from what I can tell from the model) only two air-breathing turbine engines.

For someone like me, who owes their career thanks to Bernoulli, it's a travesty. I just have to keep saying to myself: "It's not real, it's 40k. It's not real, it's 40k, it's not real..."

DoW

Stormtrooper X wrote:While the model has the potential to look cool I just don't see what the real use for it is. Honestly, fast troop transport? Valk/Vend. Fast weapon platform? Valk Vend. The other Fast Attack choices the Guard have are just better than anything this can really do. Except Rough Riders which are just bad.

If 40k was just a game, I'd agree. But it's also a fictional universe, and people want to flesh out that universe. They also want to apply some "realism" to that universe. Air cover isn't always around in the real world, and an air transportable light strike vehicle might suit the needs of a covert/airborne force.

People are also forgetting that it's highly unlikely that the valk is aerodynamic enough to provide enough lift for itself. There's probably some sort of anti-grav tech to rationalize it's lift/abiliity to fly.

DogOfWar wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:And that differs in what way from the Thawk Transporter, which can carry two Land Raiders, but has no VTOL nozzles?

Ugh the Thunderhawk annoys me to no end.

Described as being capable of aerial and space flight, fully VTOL, with supa dupa speed + carrying capacity... despite having no thrust vectoring, no aerofoils, no ailerons, no rudder, no elevators, no maneuvering thrusters and (from what I can tell from the model) only two air-breathing turbine engines.

For someone like me, who owes their career thanks to Bernoulli, it's a travesty.

Bingo!

There are no lifting surfaces, no vectored thrust, so it would be impossible to take off. Yet it does so with 2 Land Raiders, which should be easily 3 times the mass of a single Chimera each.

So any arguing that a Valkyrie Transporter, which actually has VTOL thrusters, cannot take off while carrying a single Chimera or Hellhound is ridiculous within the game universe physics.

Oh yeah, claiming Thawk has STOL capability, where are the wheels allowing for a short horizontal run?

JohnHwangDD wrote:Bingo!

There are no lifting surfaces, no vectored thrust, so it would be impossible to take off. Yet it does so with 2 Land Raiders, which should be easily 3 times the mass of a single Chimera each.

So any arguing that a Valkyrie Transporter, which actually has VTOL thrusters, cannot take off while carrying a single Chimera or Hellhound is ridiculous within the game universe physics.

Oh yeah, claiming Thawk has STOL capability, where are the wheels allowing for a short horizontal run?

I'm not sure, but are you trying to prove that because one model is physically unfeasible when comparing the actual model to its capabilities, that we should make up capabilities for other models (ie Valkyrie lifting capacity) so that they become physically unfeasible as well?

I'm quite happy with the Valkyrie being a fast, agile, VTOL, troop carrier. It looks like it should be one, it is physically represented as such, and it doesn't totally pop the thin bubble of pseudo-realism that 40k manages to maintain so very well. I don't need to give it unrealistic capabilities just because another vehicle happens to have unrealistic capabilities. It's fine the way it is.

But to each his own!

(It's kinda funny that we have the same Google-fu I was curious about the STOL aspect until I read that WarSeer article too.)

DoW

Do we actually know this fits into a Valk? An air-portable light fast vehicle makes a lot of real-world sense, but maybe not so useful in a 40K game? Gamewise, it would presumably be something like a Landspeeder Storm on wheels and with armour 10 - fine, but why put it in a Valk, unless that gives some cool deployment option maybe.

DogOfWar wrote:

augustus5 wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:

Kirasu wrote:what a silly looking vehicle.. Is it only supposed to be used on paved roads?

Doors would make a vehicle FASTER not slower.. so no doors makes no sense due to aerodynamics :p

Speed != fuel efficiency.

A large box on wheels can quite comfortably travel 50mph with or without doors since the capacity of the engine plays a larger role at lower speeds (though doors could lessen drag and increase fuel efficiency). Aerodynamic designs that increase the potential maximum top speed of a vehicle only start to come into play at much greater speeds than any combat vehicle would be traveling.

But then again this is 40k - argumentum ad fireballum...

DoW

Actually drag not only effects fuel efficiency but overall speed/hp as well. So, yes, doors do make a vehicle somewhat faster, even after factoring in the extra weight added by the door. Take any two identical vehicles and take the doors off of one and the one with doors will win a drag race hands down.

I never said drag doesn't affect speed, I said it effects the top speed of a vehicle far less when that top speed is restricted by the environment. If you took the doors off a Land Rover and drove it on a drag strip I would wager you are correct and the drag would cause it to lose to a fully-enclosed Land Rover.

Over rough terrain (when your max speed would be closer to 50-60kph) however, I don't think the lack of aerodynamics on a doorless Land Rover would have as much of an effect. In fact, I would wager the reduced weight would be a bigger factor in who would potentially win the 'race'.

Then again, it's been a long time since I took physics so I could be wrong.

DoW

Until someone shoots you through your missing door.

ShumaGorath wrote:Until someone shoots you through your missing door.

3+ Extra Lightweight, Flat Out, Door-less cover save! Huzzah!

DoW

Well, for all we know the heavy lift Valkyrie variant could be like the one seen in Winter Assault, the one that supplies the motor pool and Baneblade depot with those oversized crates of parts.

Anyway, as an Elysian (D-99) player I'm liking this design a lot and I'm pretty sure I'll pick up a bunch when they are up for order.

Clang wrote:Do we actually know this fits into a Valk? An air-portable light fast vehicle makes a lot of real-world sense, but maybe not so useful in a 40K game? Gamewise, it would presumably be something like a Landspeeder Storm on wheels and with armour 10 - fine, but why put it in a Valk, unless that gives some cool deployment option maybe.

I would expect a Valk could deploy it via Deepstrike but even then I'm not sure it would be that useful, except for Planetstrike.

JohnHwangDD wrote:And that differs in what way from the Thawk Transporter, which can carry two Land Raiders, but has no VTOL nozzles?

Reality-wise, the major differences are in dimaensions, weight, and some styling cues

DogOfWar wrote:... "It's not real, it's 40k. It's not real, it's 40k, it's not real..."

DoW

I think this is where the focus needs to be.

The model fills a role. Maybe well, maybe for gak, but it fills a role. It looks cool. It is over-priced. These are the hallmarks of Forge World. I mean come on, like the brass scorpion is some kind of efficient fighting machine? Oh, and while we are at it, lets look at the realistic summoning characteristics of that Greater Daemon; I think that the rituals FW implies are not quite rite.

DogOfWar wrote:I just have to keep saying to myself: "It's not real, it's 40k. It's not real, it's 40k, it's not real..."

Isn't that the point though?

It really is amusing to hear people going on about how unrealistic 40K vehicles are. It's too low. It wouldn't be able to fly. How could it walk with legs built like that:

Guys, honestly, this game has fething psychic daemons from outer space! Bio-ships filled with creatures that harvest entire worlds of biomass. Metal skeletons with imprinted souls of a long-dead race teleporting at will around the galaxy. None of these things are realistic, so why do people continue to try and say how much they wouldn't work when it's quite clearly not the aim of the designers to make tanks that could possibly work.

JohnHwangDD wrote:And that differs in what way from the Thawk Transporter, which can carry two Land Raiders, but has no VTOL nozzles?

Thawk Transporter can carry two Rhinos or one Land Raider, not two.

I think it looks good. For a space buggy made 38,000 years into our imaginary future and not as a realistic representation of modern warfare, which is not made to combat giant green fungus men, killer robots from the galaxy's prehistory or the fleets of biomechanical insect-lizards. Also, has anyone else noticed how the wings on every single model ever made by GW or FW would not allow flight.

It's a nice model.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:I just have to keep saying to myself: "It's not real, it's 40k. It's not real, it's 40k, it's not real..."

Isn't that the point though?

It really is amusing to hear people going on about how unrealistic 40K vehicles are. It's too low. It wouldn't be able to fly. How could it walk with legs built like that:

Guys, honestly, this game has fething psychic daemons from outer space! Bio-ships filled with creatures that harvest entire worlds of biomass. Metal skeletons with imprinted souls of a long-dead race teleporting at will around the galaxy. None of these things are realistic, so why do people continue to try and say how much they wouldn't work when it's quite clearly not the aim of the designers to make tanks that could possibly work.

40k and especially FW use the rule of cool. Judging from the comments of the people decrying it for not working, it would appear that they are not cool enough.

The model is a 40K re-imagining of modern light vehicles like the WW2 Dodge Weapons Carrier, the Toyota Technical used by African militias, and the up-gunned dune buggy.

They've 40K-ified it by giving it collossal wheels and a low ground clearance. No real off-road vehicle would survive with such a low ground clearance, no matter what its suspension, because you would rip out the floor. No matter, it is a 40K vehicle built for looks rather than practicality.

If people want a more realistic alternative there are many 1/35th scale models available which could be used with greater or less modification depending what you want.

Looks a bit like one of these Jackals;

JohnHwangDD wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:And that differs in what way from the Thawk Transporter, which can carry two Land Raiders, but has no VTOL nozzles?

Ugh the Thunderhawk annoys me to no end.

Described as being capable of aerial and space flight, fully VTOL, with supa dupa speed + carrying capacity... despite having no thrust vectoring, no aerofoils, no ailerons, no rudder, no elevators, no maneuvering thrusters and (from what I can tell from the model) only two air-breathing turbine engines.

For someone like me, who owes their career thanks to Bernoulli, it's a travesty.

Bingo!

There are no lifting surfaces, no vectored thrust, so it would be impossible to take off. Yet it does so with 2 Land Raiders, which should be easily 3 times the mass of a single Chimera each.

So any arguing that a Valkyrie Transporter, which actually has VTOL thrusters, cannot take off while carrying a single Chimera or Hellhound is ridiculous within the game universe physics.

Oh yeah, claiming Thawk has STOL capability, where are the wheels allowing for a short horizontal run?

Thunderhawks like landspeeders use antigravity plating to generate lift, thus wings and other surfaces do not need to be lifting surfaces in the aerodynamic sense, but just mounting features for the antigravity field generators.

If you can assume that marines do infact possess anti-gravity technology, one must then ask what happens when you direct a field forward the vehicle... well it could be used to create an envelope, that seemingly invisible field could be bent to produce an aerodynamic profile, alleviating the need for the physical object to be aerodynamic. This brute force ability to manipulate the aerodynamic profile could also be used for maneuvering the craft.

This would leave only two components neccesary to the design thrust to more rapidly move the vehicle and generators. The Thunderhawk supposedly has two large reactors in the back. Thrust is obviously generated by the two large engines. The complaint that the engines are "air breathing" is faulty, there is no way to judge that by the exterior alone; even today NASA has developed air breathing engines that can fly up and into the high atmosphere by carrying liquid oxygen that can be injected into the engine when there is an absents of atmosphere.

All that sure sounds better than calling it a brick. Thus it is Sci-Fi a stretch of our understanding of technology must be applied to suspend disbelief.

I quite like the vehicle, it is rather nifty.

I have a valk sitting waiting to be assembled that I was going to convert into more of a heavy lifter than the current valk model, so I might think about getting something simmilar to this FAV to go inside it, as the concept is pretty cool.

yes because every vehicle needs full armour

@aka: aside from the Thawk actually being a brick, sure.

Anyhow, I've got a Valk hull out and that passenger compartment next to a Chimera:
- Valk hull is taller(excepting Chimera turret)
- Valk hull is longer (though somewhat more beveled)
- Valk hull is wider (excepting the Chimera tracks)

On net, there is definitely room for converting the Valk to a Transporter capable of moving a Chimera - it's certainly no less plausible than anything else in the 40k universe.


As an aside, all this means that special project #3 is confirmed as feasible, and moves onto the schedule, replacing Valk #3.

It can go as fast as it wants with or without doors. Or is the little buggy zooming past all the aliens and super-enhanced metahumans, with their hover tanks and guns that melt steel, really going to be the only thing that sticks out as unrealistic?

It could be like an imperial guard version of a Warthog from halo, used for transport/recon/light support ?

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:It can go as fast as it wants with or without doors. Or is the little buggy zooming past all the aliens and super-enhanced metahumans, with their hover tanks and guns that melt steel, really going to be the only thing that sticks out as unrealistic?

They might be too busy trying to shoot down the valk that just dropped it off to care too much about a metal frame with an engine and some wheels driving round... until they realise there are now 4 special weapons and whatever the vehicle mounts pointed right at the rear armour of all their tanks which can melt through steel...