Why don't we have vtols like this and advance technology?

Talk about a terrible fucking aircraft design.

Because of physics
Jets are terrible for this sort of thing.

>>31494214
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueTGjegTKoo

>>31494214
Because they look like Darth Vader's codpiece

File: Doragon gunship.jpg (137KB, 1600x1279px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1600x1279px

>>31494214
Because it's a gay as fuck design.

File: image.png (151KB, 341x314px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 341x314px

>>31495379
>2143 never

File: Dornier Do-31.webm (2MB, 726x400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 726x400px

There kinda was.

File: 623713640.jpg (26KB, 580x246px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 580x246px

BF2142 did it better

File: Dornier_Do_31_in_1968_(2).jpg (635KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

635KB, 1200x800px

>>31495588
>Frogs throwing a shitfit over their shitty Mirage IIIV killed this
REEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>31495722
dat dornier doe 31

>>31494214
There's a toy out that does that.

>>31494214
fucking faggot

File: 1453895708039.png (619KB, 1289x960px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 1289x960px

This shit looks cool until youre the one stuck keeping it airworthy.

File: ORCA_Aircraft_Family.jpg (288KB, 999x936px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 999x936px

>>31494214
That airframe looks like it has fuck all structural integrity.

Harriers and whirlybirds work fine.

It's not an ORCA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkgCT9aYBl4

File: 2345.png (11KB, 323x303px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 323x303px

>>31494214
Becusae physics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_loading
Physics sucks. It gives you headache in school it doesn't allow us to have cool things. We should do something about this Jewish inventory.

File: 1377684904790.gif (3MB, 375x204px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 375x204px

>>31494214
Excelent question, OP,
I had to give it some thought, and i got to some possible reasons why we dont have vtols like that:
those would literally melt the steel on any aircraft carrier;
make better runways in both land and sea would prohibitively expensive;
the closest thing, the f-35, is a cluster fuck that cost billions and billions and is not all that better;
you are a faggot;
shit is expensive.

>>31499530
You're not far off, the vertical takeoff with jet engines causes damage to runways and carrier decks. That's why in doctrine the Harriers are classified as STOVL, short takeoff, vertical landing. Sitting in one place with your engines blasting the ground, going through your flight checks and waiting for clearance tends to destroy the tarmac, set your wheels on fire and blast debris at your ground crew.

File: 1371066341284.jpg (76KB, 450x574px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 450x574px

>Why don't we have vtols like this and advance technology?

This is a bit like someone in 1901, posting this picture, and "why dont we have flying machines like this, and advance technology? The future looks so bright"/

File: HaloPellican.jpg (532KB, 2048x1217px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 2048x1217px

Supposedly the design for the Pelican from Halo uses a type of jet engine witch already exists

>>31495588
I didn't expect to get this hard

>>31500077
You mean thrust vectoring? That's been around for forever, and it's retardedly inefficient.

>>31500908
Not that anon, but the engines themselves actually rotate, like a V-22.

>>31500077
I like the surprisingly well shopped Hellfires and Hydra pods. Wouldn't be surprised if the scale is accurate. Pelicans are fucking massive.

File: phil-liu-phil-liu-pelicancockpit-cin1.jpg (277KB, 1891x1026px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1891x1026px

>>31500077

343i fucked ruined the Pelican design. That pic looks amazing, and practical/utilitarian. The nu-Halo Pelicans look like an aborted Hind.

File: 860 flight profile.jpg (20KB, 604x279px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 604x279px

>>31501048
Oh yeah tilt-engines are terribly inefficient. If you want to actually hover for any reasonable amount of time you're gonna need fans or a full-blown prop like the V-22.

VTOL aircraft that actually rely on direct jet thrust for vertical flight really only do so for extremely short periods of time - a hell of a lot shorter than the Pelican does.

>>31501120
>pic
jesus god-fuck that looks horrid

>>31501175
Bullshit. What about the Williams x-jet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXNNc_HFodI

>>31501175
Well, I'm going to hope that they've improved engine tech enough that it is viable for warfare by the late 25th century.

File: xfv12-2.jpg (78KB, 700x547px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 700x547px

>>31501220
>What about the Williams x-jet.
A single-man VTOL platform weighing less than 500lb and with an endurance of less than an hour? And that's with a hilariously low-powered engine. Actual jet-powered VTOL platforms meant for operational use run into issues like ingestion of hot exhaust air and damage to the runways during long-duration hovering flight.

There's been plenty of VTOL platform projects that used lift jets. The problem is that getting that much thrust with turbojets will always be tremendously inefficient, so you're inevitably sacrificing endurance and performance even for something as simple as taking off and landing vertically.

For real hovering flight like the Pelican does, jets are a pants-on-head retarded solution because they're so inefficient.

>>31501295
Don't count on it. Jet technology can only go so far, and we're already approaching the limit of what turbine engines can give us

>>31495722
Meh, if it was good the other partners would have carried on. It was simply shit and everyone was happy the frogs dropped first.

>>31501120
>Aborted Hind

You know, I'd be fine with it in something else, but the original design was clearly superior. They screwed the pooch.

I will say this, though, I don't hate the look of it. It just immediately calls to mind something Zeon would use more than anything in Halo, too rounded, green, and bubbly. If not Gundam, it's some kind of 70's-80's anime design.

File: p1154_03.jpg (45KB, 712x365px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 712x365px

>>31501334
It had potential, especially alongside the other aircraft being developed as part of the NBMR-3 program.

Instead the Frogs threw a shitfit because Dassault has to ruin everything and we lost not just the Do 31, but the P.1154 and VAK 191.

We could have had a supersonic Harrier a couple years early had it not been for the Frogs fucking everything up.

>>31501295
"improving engine tech" doesn't change the fact that jets suck for this thing
jets are for high speed flight, not for sheer lifting power.

The optimal way for VTOL is a nice big rotor

>>31501436
so you're saying we need to a genius to come up with a design that enables a jet to have the lifting power needed to sustain hover? Why not look to stronger grades of titanium first & improve the frame?

>>31502508
What the other anon is clearly having an issue explaining to you is that jets are inherintly inefficient for stuff like that. They work on forced air, so the slower it moves the less efficient it becomes. This is inherent to the design of a jet and can't be fixed with fancier materials