VF/X-36

[Temjin]

X-36 with legs

Edited December 5, 2009 by Temjin

[Mr March]

That is really damn cool. I hope you do more pictures. This looks great.

[hobbes221]

That looks very good.

And yes, we need more please!

[Temjin]

ah thanks guys, more may be later.

[Seto Kaiba]

Hmmm... that's actually a really cool concept. Nicely done.

[joseph]

Good design Temjin.

[Ignacio Ocamica]

Wow!!!

What can I say that hasn't said before?

That concept is awesome, fighter mode is where it absolutely shines!!!!

[SchizophrenicMC]

X-36 with legs

You, sir, win the day.

[edwin3060]

Sweet--- right in the spirit of the YF-21(YF-23)!

[macross1979]

That bird looks AMAZING! Cannot wait to see the finished product.

[Temjin]

Thanks guys, an update.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Temjin

[edwin3060]

Nice... I would buy it if it were made into a toy (and had the blue on white colour scheme)

[sketchley]

Try the underside with the knees turned outwards - it'll provide more seperation between the thrusters; ergo more manuverability.

[Temjin]

Nice... I would buy it if it were made into a toy (and had the blue on white colour scheme)

Thanks, the toy will come with build in pencil sharpener.

sketchley, playing around with your idea.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Temjin

[Mr March]

This looks great. Each new picture is better than before. You're definitely onto something with this design. It's great.

Personally, I'd stick with the legs inverted so the feet close to a point in fighter mode. Makes your craft very unique among the valkyries. It would also make the transformation more interesting.

[jenius]

No genius aircraft designer but I always thought separating the boosters provided stability, not maneuverability. If you want something maneuverable you push all the the thrust into one point (uh, in a non-space environment) and pray to God you can develop sufficient enough controls every where else to keep it stable. Speaking of stability, how about a vertical stabilizer?

Edited May 1, 2009 by jenius

[Temjin]

Thanks Mr March

Speaking of stability, how about a vertical stabilizer?

and Possible an retractable tail.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Temjin

[SchizophrenicMC]

Try the underside with the knees turned outwards - it'll provide more seperation between the thrusters; ergo more manuverability.

Perhaps, but in a situation where maneuverability is controlled by vernier thrusters in a vacuum and 0G environment, this is not necessary, although possibly useful in atmospheric conditions.

Instead, keep the nozzles as close as possible to the midpoint. Keeping thrust in the middle allows for improved acceleration capabilities.

[anime52k8]

Thanks Mr March

and Possible an retractable tail.

I say go with a the knees in and the toes together; regardless of what's more stable/improves maneuverability the toes together provides a cleaner look and is overall more visually appealing. I think you should leave off the vertical tail as well. The whole beauty of the X-36 was it's tailless design, throwing a tail on their just spoils the look.

for a plane that transforms into a Giant Robot, I think realistic aerodynamic considerations should take a back seat to visual appeal. but that's just me

[Chronocidal]

The main reason for separating the nozzles is to get roll control via thrust vectoring, which might not even be possible with the way the feet are right now. The further apart they get, the more rotational moment they'll make when deflected, giving better roll control.

However, the further apart they get, the worse yaw instabilities due to thrust variations get. The reason the F-14 was so prone to flat spins was because of how far apart the engines were, combined with the tendency of the engines to stall. You lose thrust on one side, and it'll do nasty things.. think drifting, but in an aircraft.. planes don't like to fly that way.

[edwin3060]

I'd say, keep it true to the design of the X-36-- which had only a single engine, therefore thrust in the middle.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Consensus weighs in:

Thrust needs to be centralized.

And, in space, you lose thrust in one engine when they're that separate, you die.

[Vostok 7]

No genius aircraft designer but I always thought separating the boosters provided stability, not maneuverability. If you want something maneuverable you push all the the thrust into one point (uh, in a non-space environment) and pray to God you can develop sufficient enough controls every where else to keep it stable. Speaking of stability, how about a vertical stabilizer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-36

Vostok 7

[jenius]

Darn, Wiki kills my work browser. If the point is that the original didn't have a v-stab then yeah, I know, but I just think it'd look cool. Having seen the one straight up though I'm not feeling it.

[Temjin]

Don't worry about minor details

[Temjin]

Mecha and plane mode update.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Temjin

[Mr March]

So damn cool. Absolutely loving it

[SchizophrenicMC]

Bada ba ba ba!

I'm lovin' it!

Looks awesome, keep it up!

[Knight26]

very yf-21 style transformation, nice. now cad up the pieces and get them to a cnc mill

[Temjin]

Thanks guys

Bada ba ba ba!

You doing it wrong.

1) stick your tongue out

2) blow air.

Knight26,

Ah, that's a possibility for later.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Thanks guys

You doing it wrong.

1) stick your tongue out

2) blow air.

Knight26,

Ah, that's a possibility for later.

McDonalds commercial = Raspberry?

[Temjin]

McDonalds commercial = Raspberry?

Oh I got it wrong, totally unrelated sound.

[SchizophrenicMC]

Oh I got it wrong, totally unrelated sound.

Ah.

Well, never mind then.

[Ganbare]

Great hand drawing!! Awesome!!. Make me wonder to make it up into 3d model...

[Star Dragon]

Don't get why in the 3 mode pic the Gerwalk shape of the hull is different than FTR mode?

Anyway, just wanted to say Gerwalk Hull shape is cool!