Star Wars Aerodynamics Explored

Star Wars spaceships aren't exactly designed for aerodynamic performance, but let's explore it anyway! Do any of these ships have objectively good aerodynamics? Which Star Wars ship is the best? Let's find out!

Brought to you by amazing supporters on Patreon:

[thatstarwarsnerd]

I always assumed shields were used to make them more aerodynamic, as most ships in Star Wars don’t even try to look aerodynamic

[JohnBodylski]

Aerospace engineer here, a note about coefficient of drag. Cd values published for cars aren’t directly comparable to aircraft because the reference area used is very different. Cars use the frontal area, where as aircraft use the wing area. I suspect that is why the Cd numbers for aircraft in your comparison are .02ish and the star wars vehicle it is compared to is an order of magnitude higher. The wing area of an aircraft is an order of magnitude larger than its frontal area.

[JeghedderThomas]

"We could do this all day but..." No no, really, let's do this all day - I love these examinations of vehicles.

[KaiSong-vvwh]

Hi. NES guy here. The mesh is to coarse at 0:40. YOu can see the voxels around the x-fighter wing tips at the front and these voxels are way bigger than the features of the wingtip. However, for a boundary layer they instead would have to be much much smaller and thinner to resolve any turbulance. Speaking about turbulence, your Reynolds numbers seem far too low, hence there are no turbulent eddies visible at the tail. Instead, any vortices depicted stem from Kalman effects, which are eddies on a much larger and slower scale.

[kirgan]

Who need aerodynamics, then we have the engine power to beat the atmosphere into submission.

[cloudy]

This video reminds me of what my professor told me during my fluid dynamics class: _"If you don't know the C_D for an object, assume 0.1 for a bullet, 0.5 for a cow and 1 for an upright human. Interpolate."_ I still sometimes think about it

[tf]

Ah, EC Henry. Doesn't upload often, but when he does you know it's golden.

[M.r_D.u.c.k.i.n.g_D.u.c.k]

Part 2? millennium falcon, both with and without escape pod? land speeder? pod racer? death star? imperial star destroyer? Imperial Shuttle? Vulture Droid? Naboo Royal Starship? Trade Federation Battleship? Slave 1? etc

[AldanFerrox]

If I remember correctly, the shields of a fighter also influence its atmospheric speed. And the shield bubble is often teardrop shaped.

[liam]

5:00 This point about sharp leading edges being worse than rounded ones is definitely true for subsonic aircraft (which is the speed this has all been modelled at, I'm pretty sure) but at supersonic speeds the opposite becomes true, sharp leading edges are much more aerodynamic because every point that sticks out into the airflow creates a shockwave, therefore if you get a sharp point out in front the rest of the surface can be "inside" the shockwave - that's why a lot of modern fighter jet wings and missile fins etc all have very, *very* sharp leading edges. I'd imagine a lot of the spaceships can go pretty fast in atmosphere, so something like the N1 being designed for supersonic flight could make sense! (Although, I'm not sure sticking an astromech out into a supersonic flow face-first is a great idea...)

[charlessaint]

"And they (Jeeps) are not exactly designed for flight."
Someone must have told them about my little maneuver at the Battle of Taanab.

[hudsonball]

I remember the X-Wing series of Comics where one of the rebel pilots (I think Wedge) takes advantage of this principle when he was dog fighting 3 TIE fighters at once in an atmosphere. One of the TIE pilots was inexperienced and when he tried to yaw turn to follow the X-Wing, The Turbulence caused by the Vertical solar panels caused his TIE to shutter violently. he pulled out of his turn, only to get blasted from behind by the X-Wing he was trying to turn with. The other Two TIE had experienced pilots so they knew to roll first before pulling up to turn. So the X-Wing Pilot spins his X-wing which causes a vortex to form behind him and causes the TIE fighters to collide into each other, destroying them both. He literally says "Put them into the Spin Cycle! And Turbulence does the rest!"

[SledgeOfHouseHammer]

Drag isn't just the Cd. The frontal area is also important. For example, the A-wing isn't just slipperier. It also is smaller than most snub fighters which compounds it's aero advantage.

[thetvguy]

You and your team are single handedly keeping my love for Star Wars alive these days. Thank you!

[fredericlepeltier]

It never clicked in my mind for the last 40 years that the A-wing fuselage was made from parts of two F14 wing box cut in the middle and mirrored up and down! 😮 The slot on the side is where the glove vanes retract on the F14! Now i see it! THANKS!

[TSIRKLAND]

Two things: Well- three things:

First: what a fun video! Even among fictional fantasy stuff, it's sometimes fun to pretend that physics exists in these places, and if so, how would these fantastical inventions of some writer's mind work, in theory? Well-researched, well-presented. Cheerful, enthusiastic narration. Informative, interesting-to-look-at visuals. Who could ask for anything more? (apart from rhythm and music, which I presume you already have.)

Second: Though these are chiefly space vehicles, they are frequently shown entering and exiting planetary atmospheres, as easy as flying. No problem with losing atmosphere at higher elevations, no worry about burning up upon atmosphere re-entry. And I don't recall even hearing any mention of switching from space propulsion to atmosphere propulsion. Is it the same, regardless of whether they are in air or not? Which brings me to the actual point: what makes these things GO? Many of them are shown to have SOME kind of "thruster" that usually looks like a jet engine or a rocket of some kind, with some space-age-y blue lights or something.  Which brings me to...

Third: But in atmosphere, jets don't jet around because they have jet engines; they jet around because they have wings. The engines make them go forward; it's the air molecules moving over the wings that makes them stay in the air, or maneuver through it. So what is it about any of these vehicles that creates upward lift?? And in space, there is no such need for "wings, " because there is no air molecules to push against or interact with. How do modern rockets in space travel and maneuver? Not by pushing against air, but by pushing against themselves: the whole "equal and opposite force" thing, from what I understand. So the ultra-maneuverable dog-fighting craft should have a bunch of tiny rockets all over them, shooting in the opposite direction of where they want to go.  
But they don't seem to work that way in this universe. They have "boosters" and "hyper-speed" and protective invisible force fields. Because: science fiction! :)


They do whatever looks cool; they do whatever helps tell the story; they do what they do to immerse us in a world that seems familiar (fighter jets and dog fights, like in WWI and WWII), but in a world of space and fantasy. And if it can look and sound at least *plausible* that it works, then we will believe it. And we can sit back and enjoy the show.

[Tar-Numendil]

The Delta-7 Aethersprite Light Interceptor would be interesting.

[johnnych.]

1:28 The "flying brick" made me laugh so hard. That being said, nice video!

[captaindoubleday]

I wonder how the Naboo Royal Starship would perform since it is supposed to be modeled after the SR-71

[offroadbandit]

Aerodynamics don't matter in space, but no less a great breakdown. Love it