Laser Dogfight

[robobob]

Now something I love is a good dogfight, and what with the unrealistic possibility of mounting actual guns to a plane and trying to shoot it out of the sky, I think using laser tag systems would be a a good solution. How about dismantaling two laser tag gun systems and mounting the laser gun components on the wings/noses of two planes. Of course take some of the laser receivers and dot them around the parts of the plane, either wing, the aft section and the front section. The planes I guess could be of flyer's choice, though it would also be cool to see an FT spitfire and some other WW2 plane used for this.

I have no idea how feasable this is based on either the weight of the components needed for the laser tag systems, or how one would actually dismantle it from whatever form it came in first and foremost, but I'd love to believe it would be possible and I think it would be some great entertainment if done correctly.

 

[PsyBorg]

I thought of something similar the first time I saw streamer fights on FT a few years back. The laser tag systems are cost prohibitive. I mulled the idea of a diy project and decided to buy a quad at the time instead. It shouldn't be that hard to do and not add too much weight.

 

[robobob]

I mean they did something like that on top gear with the cars and some planes on the I believe American road trip? (Top gear fans correct me if I'm wrong) and the planes seemed perfectly able to hut the targets. Yes these are full scale planes but the principle of hitting a fast moving target from a plane is there. I've also been thinking a little more deeply about it and an interesting factor would perhaps be the fact that the planes wouldn't really have to bother with bullet drop as such, but I assume there is a range limited factor to the laser tag systems. This would presumably have an effect on the aerial combat: I'd assume it would make the flyers much more reliant on acrobatic flying to physically avoid being out of the sights of their opponent. I'd also assume that it would make the technique of trying to shoot the other planes down would be more of point and shoot approach, but I really don't think one could know for sure.

 

[JimCR120]

I'm picturing airborne FPV paintball. Besides getting marked by paint, paintballs go right through foam (hence they're not a good way to knock planes down from trees).

 

[SlingShot]

This is how full scale simulated dogfighting is conducted.

If it was done FPV style and you were able to calibrate your weapons properly? The potential would exist for a fun time. The lack of different views however would make it extremely difficult to maintain situational awareness while attempting to fight.

 

[French]

This could be fun if you had a safe, wide open space without dry grasses and foliage around. Never point fireworks at people, guys!!!

 

[robobob]

I'm picturing airborne FPV paintball.

Oh yeah I'm loving the paintball idea, it'd be interesting to actually make the planes drop out of the sky if they're hit in the right place....

 

[JimCR120]

Those paintballs will go right through foam. I tried to knock my profile F-18 down from a pine and ended up with a holey (not wholly nor holy) plane. Imagne some paintballs going through a control surface or getting paint into the ESC, or if it hits the FPV camera. It could be so much fun. Of course the hard part will be actually hitting it because there is that inversely proportional constant that states yu can't hit things that you want to hit and you will hit what you want to avoid.

 

[PsyBorg]

You guys are getting away from the idea as well as forgetting one important thing. Dropping a foam airplane out of the sky in a battle only costs a few dollars and some time. Dropping a 500 dollar quad out of the air is a whole other story. I am not sure how electrically conductive paint balls would be but I do know since I used to play long ago is that paint gets EVERYWHERE and can be a royal PITA to clean from something like the tightly wired innards of a quad.

The idea I had for the laser unit incorporates a system that with each hit motor performance drops between 5 and 10 hits or so allowing the pilot time to make the decision to stay and fight or do a controlled landing which would be far more safe as well as less costly then a full on shoot down. The system would have a switch operated reset on the TX but would only activate after a short random timer in an unarmed state before they could get back in the air.

For planes you could also mod the programming so that if certain areas were hit control surface function would be reduced as well.

 

[JimCR120]

Sonds good. Perhaps an electronically ignited smoke for when you get shot up enough.

You have a good point about the paint. I guess that's one more reason why fixed wing is better.:black_eyed:

 

[PsyBorg]

Hey back in the day we used to custom "Tune" resistors by letting a little of that magic smoke out. You just put em on a power supply set for fixed voltage and adjust current up a touch till they get toasty. Check with an ohm meter and repeat until tolerance range was met.
Nothing says we cant put a few bigger resistors in the loop and have the amperage adjusted thru them higher to create the smoke and suck down power to the air frame.

So fixed wing is better when it looks like swiss cheese? That aerial jenga episode where they drilled holes in a plane WAS pretty cool come to think about it.