Home Forums Modern Air Combat Rule Progress Posted on my Blog

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #46012
    irishserb
    Participant

    Hi, I posted a blog update with progress of my effort at 6mm modern air combat rules.

    http://irishserb.blogspot.com/2016/08/more-tinkering-with-6mm-air-combat-rules.html

    Not on the tabletop yet, but moving forward at a snail’s pace.

    Thanks for looking,

    irishserb

    #46017
    Darryl Smith
    Participant

    I am still a fan of Check Your 6! but am looking forward to more on this project!

    Buckeye Six Actual
    https://ambushedinthealley.blogspot.com/
    http://foragecaps.blogspot.com/
    http://germancolonialgaming.blogspot.com/

    #46033
    John D Salt
    Participant

    One of the things to bear in mind with aircraft capable of supersonic speeds is the absurd amount of sky required to turn them round when they are barelling along at full chat. It is for this reason that most air combat, regardless of the theoretical top end of the combatants, occurs at subsonic speeds.

    Some years ago it occurred to me that ‘g’ must be a more severe limitation on aircraft manoeuvre than most WW2-era rules allow for; there is no doubt that it is for jet fighters, although since 1945 g-suits have become commonplace.

    The following is a snippet of Python written to calculate either the ‘g’ force pulled for a given speed and turn radius, or the turn radius required for a given speed and ‘g’ of turn. The arithmetic is surely sufficiently trivial as to be accessible to all but the most extreme levels of numerical numptitude, and it is easy to see how you could construct a g-force calculator with a common or garden spreadsheet.

    def g(v, r):
        ''' v is speed in m/sec, r is turn radius in metres
            returns g-force pulled '''
        return v * v / r / 9.8
    
    def r(v, g):
        ''' v is speed in m/sec, g is g-force pulled
            returns turn radius in metres '''
        return v * v / 9.8 / g
    

    The following table gives the turn radii, in metres, for different ‘g’ forces and speeds. Depending on the altitude and temperature, 333 m/s is about Mach 1.0, so you can treat the speed columns as going from Mach 0.5 to Mach 2.5 in chunks of 0.5 Mach.

    As can be seen, if you insist on zooshing about at Mach 2.0, a 180-degree turn at 3g will cover a diameter (the figures given are for radius) of over 30 kilometres.

      g:     166 m/s :    333 m/s :    500 m/s :    666 m/s :    833 m/s :
      1    :    2812    :   11315    :   25510    :   45261    :   70805
      2    :    1406    :    5658    :   12755    :   22630    :   35403
      3    :     937    :    3772    :    8503    :   15087    :   23602
      4    :     703    :    2829    :    6378    :   11315    :   17701
      5    :     562    :    2263    :    5102    :    9052    :   14161
      6    :     469    :    1886    :    4252    :    7543    :   11801
      7    :     402    :    1616    :    3644    :    6466    :   10115
      8    :     351    :    1414    :    3189    :    5658    :    8851
    

    All the best,

    John.

    #46035
    irishserb
    Participant

    Yes, one of my concerns is that I won’t be able to keep the game on the table.  My table will only measure about 2.5 by 3.5 miles in scale.  And though I expect that most of my battles will start at more economical cruising speeds, turns can get real dang big.  You can always crunch down the scale, but given the short period of time represented by the turn, movement distances could become absurdly short.  I have a couple of ideas about managing speed, and motivating players to stay away from trying Mach 2 dogfights, but will have to actually run through some battles to get a feel for what might be needed.  There will no doubt be compromises and errors, I’m just hoping to limit them enough to give the rules some integrity.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.