HOME | DD
jollyjack — Abrams Engineering
#abrams #awakens #force #star #wars #xwing
Published: 2015-04-17 16:22:00 +0000 UTC; Views: 87564; Favourites: 1888; Downloads: 743
Redirect to original
Description
I generally don't mind redesigns when there is a clear reason for it (example: ED209 in the new Robocop was developed as a military machine, rather than for domestic policing, so it was made to look more like a tank) but when stuff is overhauled just for the sake of it, throwing logic out the window along the way, it becomes irritating. Like when something that is clearly meant to be a turbine splits down the middle.I'm going to reinforce that last bit for people leaping to the design's defence: film is a VISUAL MEDIUM. If something LOOKS like a turbine, IT'S A F**KING TURBINE.
Related content
Comments: 844
ah, well, Planetes is even more hard sci-fi than Star Trek
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i'm SOOOO glad i'm not the only one who a. noticed that and
b. thought it was a dumb move!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
when was the last time star wars tried to be realistic? It wasn't cool because it was realistic...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That's a good point, actually. What even are those cylinder things supposed to be? I looked it up; from what I gather, it's supposed to be a retro-thrust nozzle.
...it does look like a turbine.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The split turbine was one of Joe Johnston's original concept designs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
just an explanation quickly its not a turbine, if it was a turbine it wouldn't work in space, turbines work by compressing air and mixing that air with fuel before an electrical spark ignites it, the burning gases are sent out of the back of the engine and push the engine and thus the aircraft forward. This process is not possible in space as there is no air for the turbine to compress, also there aren't any turbines in the onset version of the x wing. Unless of course this is a planetary model of the x wing designed only for ground assault rather than space battles, which still breaks the purpose of the x wing and the turbine.
BTW I still liked this it made me laugh, keep up the awesome stuff
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
THANK YOU!
This bunch of literal-minded utreekov'ay have been getting on my nerves...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ikr
in the end who cares, the new design looks kick ass (with a steel boot covered in spikes) as does the rest of the film (best Christmas present ever).
But I do agree taking it literally is kinda dumb.
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
never trust a Trekkie with Star Wars mechanics...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
There are 2 kind of engineer:
- the ones that solve problems
- the ones that create problems.
The last kind represents 95% of the species
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Remember: This was made by the guy who turned a spacecraft into a submarine for the sole reason because it would look cool when it would surface.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
One of the major things people don't use when creating fiction: their brains. Although there's also "artistic license" to justify that, so... eh, it's a double-edged sword really.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I guess someone did already point out that this "new" design seems in fact highly influenced by Ralph McQuarrie's original concept art from 1975: a.dilcdn.com/bl/wp-content/upl…
Great comic nevertheless... and yes, Abrams engines do look like split turbines.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I agree with you this split design is stupid and I have been trying to think of how it could work but cant but there are some good art around it
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I thought they were originally air intakes, turbines wouldn't serve much purpose in space, despite the fact that this is shown when they are planetside. I mean based upon some images shown of the new x-wings, it doesn't show that these intakes have any rotary devices inside it. They're mainly drawing inspirations from designs from the first movie possibly. The way I see it, they're more likely air intakes rather than turbines. I'm not arguing about design defense, i'm just saying that if you see it as another piece of tech rather than this piece of tech, questions start to be answered.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
THANK YOU!
This bunch of literal-minded utreekov'ay have been getting on my nerves...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
it wouldn't be better if they made holes for the turbines right?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The Real X-Wing doesn't have 2 Turbines it has 4
lookie here:
fav.me/d6urf4d
But still the Jay Abrams Star Wars X-Wing has stupid design, so i am totally agreed with you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
The old X-Wing didn't have any turbines at all.
img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20…
It had what looked like 4 ram-air intakes.
And the new J.J. Abrams still has what looks like 4 ram-air intakes (just a different shape).
Here's a proper turbine btw.
hdwallpapers.cat/wallpaper/air…
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
It doesn't have any ram air intakes as well. The X-Wing has fusial thrust engines (probably fusion engines). They have to work in space, after all, and turbines wouldn't. In an atmosphere, it probably uses an antigrav system because the wings have no aerodynamic profile.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I only discounted the notion that they were turbines, and I also only said that they looked like (not were) ram-air intakes.
As for working in space. You can still have functioning ram-air intakes in space. You just need to be very frugal with the very few hydrogen-atoms that you collect, or use a magnetic intake (like a Bussard Ramjet). And regarding atmospheric flight, you do don't need a proper aerofoil shape to keep airborne, as long as you go sufficiently fast (look at the X-15 whose wings were incredibly short, and had a wedge like profile).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The X15's wings still had an aerodynamic profile (not counting the vertical fins). The X-Wing's wings have a rectanguar profile.
A bussard collector would be mounted at the ship's front, not somewhere at the sides. Also wouldn't be very practical in space fights. And the technical information available about the X-Wing (T-65 as well as T-70) doesn't say anything about bussard. It just says they're fusial engines (whatever that is exactly)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, considering the vagueness that has been exhibited about Star Wars tech, I still reckon that those "intakes" could be Bussard Ramjets, and that "Fusial Engines" only means that the way the engines achieve thrust is by nuclear fusion of collected hydrogen nuclei.
As for the X-15. The principle still stands. Aerodynamic lift isn't necessarily a requirement for flight, if the craft has enough thrust.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd say that in the atmosphere, the X-Wing (like most starfighters) mainly relies on its anti gravity systems for lift. They are, after all, capable of VTOL. Also, we know that X-Wings have to be refueled. There's no real point in arguing though. Considering it is indeed scifi, it's well possible that the fuel is only required for hyperspace flight and it does use bussard ramjets for sublight flight. In a universe where you can use sound as a spaceborn weapon, everything is possible.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
it is entirely possible they are heat sinks/radiators at the front.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i read you, and you have a point
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Well, it may be a ramjet or some sort of cooling system, but, yeah, it DOES look like a turbine split in half. Though, in the same trailer there is a crashed oldschool x-wing
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Plenty of real life aircraft have air-intakes that are not shaped like the turbine behind them and that fly just fine. Same goes for this. Plus the original X-Wing design has the rest of the turbine offset from the intake, they're not aligned down the center. Nobody complained about that. But hey, if you don't like the design, that's fine. It's just a bit of a flawed argument here. Anyway, had a good chuckle at the comic itself. ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's not the location, it's the fact that the damn things SPLIT when the S-foils are engaged! The turbines in the original trilogy didn't do that!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I see no spinning hub, nor any turbine blades.
Ergo, that's no turbine, and therefore, it being split will not trash any engines.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Except the part that splits is not part of the actual turbine, neither on the new nor on the old X-Wing. If it was it would require fan-blades etc. etc., all those parts that make a turbine a turbine. But it's not. The large splitting opening is simply an intake/nozzle. The actual thrust generation happens in the back in those offset exhaust-pipes and they are not affected by the s-foils.
static.vizworld.com/wp-content…
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You say if they look like a turbine when together, they're a turbine. I say if they split in half, they're clearly not a turbine.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Fuck you, J.J-I-fap-to-lens-flare-Abrhams.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
First: The comic is funny. Good job, jollyjack!
Second: If we use the turbine logic, then: if a lightsaber LOOKS like a laser sword, it should ACT like a laser sword, meaning they pass THROUGH each other harmlessly, and they don't stop at 1 meter, but blind pilots in flight, knock out satellites in orbit and generally mess things up near the combatants! Which brings me to my final point:
Third: It's a movie. Until we invent repulsorlift, hyperdrives, and atmospheric capable ion engines, "This bickering is pointless!" Personally, I'm hoping this series "will crush the memory of Episodes I, II, and III in one swift stroke!" Lucas is finally out of the director's chair, and while I'd have rather Chris Nolan or Brad Bird directing, anything will be a vast improvement...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
May Episode 7 just crash and burn like this crap design X-Wing and become known as THE FORCE FAILS.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Who crapped in your cheerios?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I may not be a fan, but I know a few who just HATE this new design...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>