94
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 4 points 1 week ago

Are military aircraft size determined by the pilot? I figured it would be proportional to the ordinance they're carrying.

[-] da_gay_pussy_eatah@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago

Not having to accommodate a pilot necessarily means it can be smaller.

[-] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 2 points 1 week ago

the cockpit on modern fighter jets is so tiny though

[-] fox@hexbear.net 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You don't need to accommodate for stuff like the pilot passing out from g forces if there's just a computer flying the thing. This can also extend the operational window past however long a human can stay awake, so you can get aircraft that are more maneuverable, faster, with longer ranges.

[-] MLRL_Commie@hexbear.net 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

To add, the weight of the human isn't much, but the weight of the chair; safety equipment for the human; the extra metal needed to make space for the human, the chair, and the safety equipment; the extra distance for equipment to steer/handle from the pilots seat as opposed to a distributed system all add up to sooooo much space and weight.

Also you can put fuel in the center (you usually don't cuz a human is sitting there) and that changes so much about the mechanics of the wings and the control system capabilities. The limiting factor was humans, but the next limiting factor disappears with the humans in the form of limited distribution patterns of fuel weight/less room to shift fuel during flight phases for different manoeuvres

this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
94 points (99.0% liked)

technology

23656 readers
153 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS