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.

It's obvious that vehicles have some sort or anti-grav engines which lift them. If you don't agree, simply remeber SM Land Speeders.
I prefer Necron anti-grav technology: it's powerful, "simple" and minimalist. Ok, it's got something scary too, as every Necron thing, but.. who cares?

Kilkrazy wrote:It fits the Imperial VSF/WW1 Grimdark™ design aesthetic.

Actually WW1 aircraft were often graceful designs and can be replicated to very high standards using modern methods.

The Bristol Fighter was a beauty

In the far future, Imperium Aircraft will designed using Lego but they won't be able to push the idea beyond a flying brick concept.
Sorry but some of the tanks and aircraft look like toys.

Which they sort of are so maybe that is okay then

riplikash wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Helicopters work by the main rotor forming an effective circular wing. It isn't straight pull like a corkscrew.

A lot of Imperial equipment seems to work by Handwavium.

ALL future technology beyond the most immediate works by handwavium. If we understood the principles it by modern technology, not future.

I'm not saying your wrong, just that it is a disingenuous argument. Of course when illustrating technology from 38k in the future it doesn't appear to work in a fashion we can properly explain. The best we can do is speculate using principles that hopefully are a little more permanent than technology. Human nature, some foundational physics and engineering principles.

Star Trek tries and their explanations come off as silly even being only 400 years in the future. Warhammer is 40k years in the future. The engineering principles at work are guaranteed to be far beyond our comprehension.

Decomposition of motive is the best we can hope for, and is certainly more informative and entertaining than saying "Rule of COOL" and "it might as well be magic".

It isn't disingenuous. It's entirely possible for SF writers to make sensible projections about technology mixed with some fiction, and make it understandable. If it wasn't, they would not be able to articulate it in terms which make sense to the reader. Modern science understands a lot of theory which is impossible in current engineering terms.

Even magical universes need to have rules consistent with their internal logic. It is a sign of laziness when the writer depends on Handwavium to provide explanations.

A fictional universe needs to have sustainable internal logic and 40K doesn't.

The 40K universe has anti-gravity which doesn't depend on vane like structures (see Land Speeder and Devilfish.)

It has force fields which don't depend on vane like structures (see Iron Halo and Shield Drone.)

By that logic the vane like structures on a Valkyrie are not anti-grav or force field antennas, they are wings. The GW sculptors didn't make them look like real wings because of the steampunk/WW1 aesthetic.

Kilkrazy wrote:

It isn't disingenuous. It's entirely possible for SF writers to make sensible projections about technology mixed with some fiction, and make it understandable. If it wasn't, they would not be able to articulate it in terms which make sense to the reader. Modern science understands a lot of theory which is impossible in current engineering terms.

Even magical universes need to have rules consistent with their internal logic. It is a sign of laziness when the writer depends on Handwavium to provide explanations.

A fictional universe needs to have sustainable internal logic and 40K doesn't.

The 40K universe has anti-gravity which doesn't depend on vane like structures (see Land Speeder and Devilfish.)

It has force fields which don't depend on vane like structures (see Iron Halo and Shield Drone.)

By that logic the vane like structures on a Valkyrie are not anti-grav or force field antennas, they are wings. The GW sculptors didn't make them look like real wings because of the steampunk/WW1 aesthetic.

Sensible projections can only be sensible up within a certain time period. 38k is way beyond what our current understanding of physics and engineering should be able to project. It IS ok just to present the technology as is without doing much to justifying beyond the trivial mechanical workings. For super future tech this is a much better approach than trying to justify it with a 21st century understanding of physics. In fact, that is usually where the trouble comes from.

40ks internal logic is just as good as any other universe that has been developed over the course of several decades by dozens of writers. It is a natural consequence of having lots of creative minds. Star trek and star wars suffer similar problems.

I like fluff, it is why I'm in the background forum. The entire reason we talk about this stuff is to try to understand why it would be done that way, and sensible answers are not hard to come by. Yes there are anti-grav vehicles that don't use vanes and rotors in 40k. But then again, it isn't hard to see why the needs of an imperial guard vehicle differ from those of a SM or Tau vehicle. Space marine and Tau equipment typically requires a higher level of care and more specialized maintenance and does not have to deal with being deployed for decades and centuries at a time. Likely whatever system the Imperial Guard uses is more robust.

There is little point to coming onto a background forum discussion and saying "they just did it to make it look cool, and the fluff is not always consistent." Yes, of course that is true. The fluff is nearly 30 years old, what did you expect?

BUT, as long as we are all trying to have fun suspending our disbelief and discuss the workings of a fictional universe, isn't it more interesting to assume everything is not broken and working due to magic?

Isn't it more interesting to assume that the people there are rational beings and try to comprehend why they do the things the way they do than to just hand-wave everything that does not fit with our understanding as fiction? Obviously it is, or you would not have so many starwars guidebooks, star trek technical manuels, and xmen physics pamphlets. It is interesting to think about the why, the how.

Otherwise, why would you be here?

IronChaos wrote:It's obvious that vehicles have some sort or anti-grav engines which lift them. If you don't agree, simply remeber SM Land Speeders.
I prefer Necron anti-grav technology: it's powerful, "simple" and minimalist. Ok, it's got something scary too, as every Necron thing, but.. who cares?

I'd be inclined to believe that aside from the fact that Imperial anti-grav tech falls under the borrowed-from-Dune term Suspensors, and those have been described as being extremely AdMech rare technology, limited outside of the AdMech to Space Marine vehicles and equipment. I'm not aware of any (current) fluff supporting suspensors being used by the Imperial Army or Navy. Not to say it doesn't exist, it's just not been explained as such.

riplikash wrote:

Commisar Wallacej5 wrote:Imperial Guard= enough firepower will solve anything
Imperial Navy=enough thrust will solve impossible flight physics?

Well, yes, but again, it isn't impossible flight physics. Airfoils are just ONE way of getting something into the air. There are numerous other methods. Helecopterrs use pull, bees use some kind of crazy vacuum effect I think, blimps rely on being lighter than air, rockets use thrust, and there are certainly numerous other methods that we haven't even discovered yet.

All we know is that imperial craft do not use airfoils to create a low pressure zones above the plain to create lift. We don't know what method they do use. Thrust? Perhaps. Some sort of exotic effect? Could be. Maybe those massive rotors just suck in air, or perhaps they are rotating some sot of exotic material, or perhaps like an electromagnet rotating them produces some sort of effect. Perhaps the ship has some kind of energy envolope. Perhaps they only act as stabilizers while some other mechanism provides lift.

All we know is they don't use airfoils and aerodynamic designs do not provide any kind of significant benefit in flight. Often Imperial tech LOOKS low tech on the surface to allow for ease of maintenance, but the actual principles involved in their operation are millennia ahead of our current understandings of physics.

That's precisely the explanation I lean toward. Sort of like using a language from our "primitive" past (Latin) to provide an analog to a future language (High Gothic) that's equally foreign yet somewhat understandable to us.

There's also the fact that true scale aircraft would be much larger than is practical to use, especially the wings and so they are scaled down to fit the table top.

The figures themselves are not to scale, many of the vehicles are too small, so why assume a model of a thunderbolt is what the thing actually looks like? It's a representation is all. Or do people in the future all have hands twice the size of ours along with their other odd proportions?

38K years can change a species a little...

The inside of a Rhino must be like Tardis!
How else could you fit 10 troops. their kit and (4?) engines?

Strangely enough, that came up at our FLGS. A (female) GW staffer mentioned that space marines have 2 hearts. EXACTLY LIKE TIME LORDS! I then postulated what, then would be any given space marine's TARDIS, and it was put forth that that explanes how they do that.

riplikash wrote:
I would guess they have just reached the point where advances in computer control, engine power, and various kinds of shield technology have made aerodynamics a rather trivial concern. Like a helecopter or a rocket, they don't fly because of airfoil lift, but through other methods. These methods are apparently powerful enough that there is little benefit in designing for aerodynamics.

Apparently the greater concern is ease of repair and weapon load out, and the designs reflect that. Most imperial vehicles seem to be designed to use some fairly standardized parts and armor.

Actually, helicopters do fly because of airfoil lift. The rotors or a helicopter are rotating airfoils that have all the usual forces acting upon them (lift, drag, relative wind, induced flow) in order to create the total aerodynamic force. The airfoil is subject to a phenomenon know as retreating blade stall if the helicopter attempt heavy maneuvers while at a high gross weight, high density altitude, large angles of bank, or high temps. In this situation, the retreating blade (left side for American made helicopters in forward flight) cannot produce enough lift and reaches a stall speed. This causes the aircraft to pitch up, then roll left and dive. It is corrected by lowering collective, reducing severity of manuever, increasing rpms, slowing airspeed, and good pre-mission planning.




Granted, automated flight control systems, stability augmentation systems, and various digital electronic control units in modern rotorcraft means a good pilot is less likely to find himself in a retreating blade stall situation, but poor pre-flight planning can easily put you into something like that. Especially in adverse meteorlogical conditions where manuevers requiring OGE power are to be preformed.

In short, Unless there is some sort of suspensor or magic, Imperial craft are not flying.

Stop trying to take the fiction out of science fiction will you?

fiction without the science it ain't science fiction?

but that is a whole different topic.
the OP asks if

In the grim darkness of the far future, we forgot all about airfoils.