SpaceX’s N1 Starship went away with the folding mechanism for the grid fins and just flies with them fully extended now. If we go back to the argument that these are airbrakes and nothing else… then their argument is less and less supported as of late.
Even more - with the grid fins extended on the booster stage, the rocket becomes somewhat unstable and requires a lot of engine gimbal if the drag is so high. The drag center being in front of the center of mass should cause the missile to lose control… but it doesn’t. This is because the grid fins do not cause nearly as much drag as people assume. Who would have thought that a porous object is less draggy than a completely solid one.
I was just saying this because previously people claimed the Falcon solely used the grid fins for airbrakes and not for steering… which was somewhat absurd. If that was the case the new Starship would have kept the foldable fins and not left them deployed from launch until landing.
Will be nice to see what you find when you’re complete with the CFD.
I assume then you use Ansys also for the mesh then… How will you do the inflation for the grind fins? Because sharp close edges can be annoying. Or do you just not do the inflation entirely and just use triangular on the edge?
oh ok that makes sense, what cell size did you use though? Cause without inflation it can get very heavy to calculate if the grids is too thin. Although for warthunder modelling purpose even if not super precise it would be fine
ahh, still, doing a good job. i do hope it could be used for bug reports but i somehow feel like gaijin will still try to fight it despite it probably being more accurate than any (legal) source available
I suggest a realistic buff is possible: If we have its loft removed while keeping its range intact by either thrust increase or drag reduction, we’ll get a more capable missile in short to mid ranges while long range shots would remain mostly intact. At low and medium alitudes/distances the missile will reach its targets faster and will have a larger NEZ
There is no proof that R-77 has loft (but no disproof either). But some guestimations can be done:
So, we know that R-77 flies up to 80km
We know that R-77-1 is claimed to fly up to 110km. It has its tweaks for sure, but its shape is generally the same as of the first R-77. I suggest that loft addition is the main contributor of such range increase
