Ring Wing - Lockheed Airliner Concept

[lakeroadster]

This idea was presented on this thread.

Lockheed’s Concept Ring Wing Airliner

I built an Open Rocket Simulation and then started the build.

I'm using BT-188 and a full length coupler. I sliced a hole into the BT-188, then used some white school glue and slid the coupling in. I cut the ring fin on my chop saw using a 4" shipping tube, then glued the ring to the BT / C-188.

For the vertical upright I'm using 1/8" basswood. I sanded it to a knife edge on the front.... and a radiused edge for the back.

​

 

[Daddyisabar]

Putting all the junk in the trunk on one side sure gives it a cool looking, flat bellied appearance. Awesome Ring World engineering. Keep me in the loop! It's going to fly rings around the competition.

 

[BABAR]

just another unasked for idea.

the body tube is big enough you could probably recess the motor a bit (I think the rule is less than 1/2 body tube diameter) without inviting Uncle Krushnic.

every little bit helps, especially as the design has your tail fin plumage a lot farther forward than standard.

I will be curious to see how much if any corkscrewing you get on boost.

 

[lakeroadster]

just another unasked for idea.

the body tube is big enough you could probably recess the motor a bit (I think the rule is less than 1/2 body tube diameter) without inviting Uncle Krushnic.

every little but helps, especially as the design has your tail fin plumage a lot farther forward than standard.

I will be curious to see how much if any corkscrewing you get on boost.

The design uses the ring fin hack, where 6 std. fins are placed to simulate the ring fin. Those fins are input as transparent, while the ring fin is input but it's weight and drag are overidden to zero.

They show up in Open Rocket when using the side view.

 

[neil_w]

My biggest concern for stuff like this is the asymmetry of drag and possibly mass (not factored in well if your ring fin hack fins are arranged symmetrically around the body tube). I wonder if mounting the motor a bit off-center, towards the top of the rocket, would help a bit. But it's hard to figure this sort of thing in advance.

 

[lakeroadster]

My biggest concern for stuff like this is the asymmetry of drag and possibly mass (not factored in well if your ring fin hack fins are arranged symmetrically around the body tube). I wonder if mounting the motor a bit off-center, towards the top of the rocket, would help a bit. But it's hard to figure this sort of thing in advance.

Agreed, but we've all seen offset fins and other such "tomfoolery" on rockets which don't appear to affect the flight path. For this rocket the weight of the ring fin is pretty minimal when compared to the rest of the rocket.

But... we'll see.

 

[BABAR]

My biggest concern for stuff like this is the asymmetry of drag and possibly mass (not factored in well if your ring fin hack fins are arranged symmetrically around the body tube). I wonder if mounting the motor a bit off-center, towards the top of the rocket, would help a bit. But it's hard to figure this sort of thing in advance.

You can get away with a lot.

















that said, all of my asymmetry in rockets has been placed at the far end of the rocket, and usually a relatively long rocket, although I don’t think I added nose weight. So I sort of use Captain Kirk’s kobayashi maru solution (Kudos to whoever can remember McCoys line from that way back blast from the past!)

this one has the asymmetry a bit far forward….

@neil_w , does open rocket give warning flags for asymmetric thrust or drag?

as @lakeroadster says

we'll see.

wise words.

 

[neil_w]

You can get away with a lot.

Did it fly straight, or corkscrew?

@neil_w , does open rocket give warning flags for asymmetric thrust or drag?

No. Handling of asymmetry is an under-developed area of OR right now.

 

[BABAR]

Did it fly straight, or corkscrew?

No. Handling of asymmetry is an under-developed area of OR right now.

Most of my Asymmetric Birds have some corkscrew, but it is unpredictable to ME. I prefer to think of it as an entertaining enhancement rather than a defect. Doesn’t seem to affect the net flight trajectory or result in delayed ejection, and seems to get more “oooohs“ and “aaaahs” then “uh-ohs” at my few public flights.

with all due respect, from a ground observation standpoint, after the 100th observation of “straight and true” to me it gets boring. The exception now for me is when one of MY asymmetric finned birds goes “straight and true”. That’s rare enough it gets my attention!

 

[Daddyisabar]

The asymmetry envelope can be pushed far with long, beautiful, sleek rockets. But silly, stubby, airplane oddrocs are like the Emperor; less forgiving.

Moving the thrust centerline will help, but by how much? Calling up the advanced software in the top secret government research facility. We could use your wind tunnels too!

Push the envelope of asymmetry until it power prangs. Push the recessed motor envelope until you get a call from Mr. Krushnic.

 

[grapetang]

Very nice! I forgot the "Lt." part, but something like "you're looking at the only Starfleet cadet to beat the no-win scenario"?

Make it fly RG or BG, as Lockheed intended, pretty, pretty please with sugar on top?

 

[BABAR]

). I wonder if mounting the motor a bit off-center, towards the top of the rocket, would help a bit.

I like this idea. Personally I think doing this on a NORMAL rocket would have little effect, on this one I think it would be advantageous.

And if anyone can do eccentering rings, it would be @lakeroadster !

@Daddyisabar, you obviously are A master Jedi if not THE master Jedi in canted motors. I know you’ve done two and three, have you ever done 1? I’d be afraid it would do more harm than good, especially as a SINGLE canted motor may have different results for different motors.

 

[lakeroadster]

I like this idea. Personally I think doing this on a NORMAL rocket would have little effect, on this one I think it would be advantageous.

And if anyone can do eccentering rings, it would be @lakeroadster !

It's rear eject. I could make a std concentric spool, and then another eccentric spool. But the offset would only be just a bit under 3/8"...

​

 

[lakeroadster]

Very nice! I forgot the "Lt." part, but something like "you're looking at the only Starfleet cadet to beat the no-win scenario"?

Make it fly RG or BG, as Lockheed intended, pretty, pretty please with sugar on top?

RG or BG?

 

[BABAR]

It's rear eject.

View attachment 601209​

on a number of your rockets “rear eject” seemed a very logical notice based on the rocket configuration. Columbine was a great example.

this design seems to have plenty of forward space that would easily allow more traditional forward eject.

I grant there is a cosmetic advantage of rear eject in that you can hide (using CWF or BONDO Or other filler) the nose cone body tube joint. There is however the cosmetic DEFECT that after the first flight or two unless you land on a nice soft grassy field the nose cone tip paint is gonna get chipped (May be able to avoid this by putting a nose cozy on the tip before actual launches.)

you HAVE a very good system for rear eject that works for you, I am guessing that is your reasoning?

something that may help save your nose a bit with rear eject. are You gonna need nose weight?

If so cut the bulkhead off the nose cone (so the inside hollow area is accessible to body tube.)

extend motor mount INTO nose cone as far as possible.

wrap your nose cone weight around the forward end of the body tube INSIDE the part that sits in the nose cone.

slather JB Weld or some other protectant inside the cone to protect it from blast, unless you have a baffle in your now very long motor mount.

result?

The extra nose cone weight is EJECTED and recovers with the POD. The MAIN BODY mass (including nose cone) is less, so lower kinetic energy on impact with ground

trick 2

rig your recovery harness so the ejected motor pod hangs several feet LOWER than the body of the rocket.

result?

the motor pod hits first. The chute after pod lands is supporting less weight, so IF there is enough length, the rocket body descent rate will slow a bit (not sure how much LENGTH is needed to allow the body to bleed of the velocity imparted by the falling COMBINED weights of the motor pod AND the body. I am SWAGging 10 feet.

just some thoughts.

 

[Daddyisabar]

I like this idea. Personally I think doing this on a NORMAL rocket would have little effect, on this one I think it would be advantageous.

And if anyone can do eccentering rings, it would be @lakeroadster !

@Daddyisabar, you obviously are A master Jedi if not THE master Jedi in canted motors. I know you’ve done two and three, have you ever done 1? I’d be afraid it would do more harm than good, especially as a SINGLE canted motor may have different results for different motors.

When this Youngling appeared before the council they sensed much fear of a single canted motor. That new P38 rocket kit then appeared on Mace Windu's notebook screen.

Verdict: the Youngling's destiny is Nerf Herding.

 

[BABAR]

I forgot the "Lt." part, but something like "you're looking at the only Starfleet cadet to beat the no-win scenario"?

When Lt. Savik asked how then Cadet Kirk had beaten the No-Win scenario, McCoy piped in,

“He cheated.” He reprogrammed the computers to allow a winning solution.

The Admiral Kirk had two replies.

First,

“It had the advantage of having never been tried before.”

And Second,

“I don’t believe in No-Win situations.”

The second statement (possible also the first) I believe is a key tenet of the “OddRoc Code.” I am sure @Daddyisabar would express it in more thematic terms, usually in sentences starting with Verbs, but that’s my take.

 

[Daddyisabar]

When Lt. Savik asked how then Cadet Kirk had beaten the No-Win scenario, McCoy piped in,

“He cheated.” He reprogrammed the computers to allow a winning solution.

The Admiral Kirk had two replies.

First,

“It had the advantage of having never been tried before.”

And Second,

“I don’t believe in No-Win situations.”

The second statement (possible also the first) I believe is a key tenet of the “OddRoc Code.” I am sure @Daddyisabar would express it in more thematic terms, usually in sentences starting with Verbs, but that’s my take.

I wish I could find the old video of the guy in England who flew the balsa WWII fighter planes off a wire guide ramp with a single, tiny, mid canted rocket motor...INDOORS! YIKES!

Fear is the mind killer. STAY SAFE!

Yes, I will continue to annoy the tender sensitivities of the elite a talkin' like ye ole tyme mountain man and even referring to myself in the third person, a sure sign of delusion. Illeism rules and Bob Dole was cool.

Big ring fins are cool.

 

[grapetang]

RG or BG?

RG if possible, though I haven't been very successful. BG otherwise?

 

[GlenP]

Boat tail?

 

[lakeroadster]

RG if possible, though I haven't been very successful. BG otherwise?

Neither are applicable to this rocket.

 

[lakeroadster]

Boat tail?

I struggled with this... just isn't a good fit unless I was to make it attach to the motor... hmmm.

That and it will reduce, if not negate, the Base Drag...

 

[GlenP]

I struggled with this... just isn't a good fit unless I was to make it attach to the motor... hmmm.

That and it will reduce, if not negate, the Base Drag...

Maybe you could just add a darker contrasting color swoop wrap that matches the trim on the main body in an upward swoop to give the illusion of a curved chamfer cut on the aft end to more closely resemble the aircraft. Just an aesthetic suggestion for these airliner type rockets, to me they look like they need a boat tail of some sort,

for example

 

[mbeels]

Cool, following this build.

 

[BABAR]

Verdict: the Youngling's destiny is Nerf Herding.

I prefer Near Earth Rocket Fabrication Director.

 

[Daddyisabar]

I prefer Near Earth Rocket Fabrication Director.

I hear Corellia is lovely this time of year! The planet where all the kids who are good rocket builders go. No ring fins on Corellian ships.

 

[lakeroadster]

Maybe you could just add a darker contrasting color swoop wrap that matches the trim on the main body in an upward swoop to give the illusion of a curved chamfer cut on the aft end to more closely resemble the aircraft. Just an aesthetic suggestion for these airliner type rockets, to me they look like they need a boat tail of some sort,
View attachment 601394
for example

Thanks Glen... that'll look good.

​

 

[BABAR]

Here’s a puzzler for you.

If you offset the motor, does it mess with the base drag hack?

yeah yeah, I know,

we’ll see.

 

[lakeroadster]

Here’s a puzzler for you.

If you offset the motor, does it mess with the base drag hack?

yeah yeah, I know,

we’ll see.

No worries. Base Drag has to do with the shape of the rocket... not the motor location.

But yeah, we will see.

 

[neil_w]

No worries. Base Drag has to do with the shape of the rocket... not the motor location.

But yeah, we will see.

In theory, you don't get base drag where the exhaust plume of the motor is (I think). So moving the motor around does relocate the base drag a bit, although it shouldn't change the overall quantity.

I'm not even going to try to guess what effect it will have on the rocket. I'm guessing very little. The offset of the motor relative to CG and/or center of drag seems much more relevant, but I don't know how to quantify those either.

So... we'll see times three.