Type-6 as fast as an Eagle.... Come on....

[Morbad]

Maybe they will do something similar to tie fighters and forego shields entirely in favor of manouverability. Whichever faction feels life is the most cheap and an expendable commodity is most likely to produce one.

Only way to keep shields off ships is to remove all of their internal compartments, or heavily discourage their use for shields by limiting the size of the power plant (which would probably discourage their use first).

That said, the small maneuverable fighter route in ED seems to take the opposite approach. Imperial Fighters and Federal Condors can mount pretty decent shielding, but they have extremely fragile armor. Makes sense that hull is heavier than a shield generator.

True. Real space ships wouldn't magically stop to accelerate at some point. There is no aerodynamic drag in space.

Doesn't imply soup, or any other medium causing drag, because there isn't any drag.

The reason there are speed limits is because of flight assist, which can never be disabled completely. The ship itself is enforcing it's limitations, not the environment.

 

[pev69]

The reason there are speed limits is because of flight assist, which can never be disabled completely. The ship itself is enforcing it's limitations, not the environment.

Well, this might be as good an explanation for the speed limit as any, when trying to fit it to game lore. But personally, I would not put it to the flight assist either, since after all we have the function of turning it off, so why on earth would it still have this effect ? In my mind there simply is no good in-game explanation for speed limit or a couple of other things. Just have to let these go as gameplay decisions, however "unfortunate" it is, eh.

 

[terminatahx]

Is a Hercules as fast as a F-18 fighter. No.

I know the Eagle is much more agile but should it not also be much faster?

Vehicles that fly in an atmosphere have more propulsion challenges than in outer space, no?

 

[pev69]

Vehicles that fly in an atmosphere have more propulsion challenges than in outer space, no?

Hey, this is actually another good and unique point! But I think this is a two-way tie: In atmosphere it is more challenging since you have to fight the air-drag, BUT you can use wings and ailerons (or more generally, adjustable air-foils, or planes) to make manouvers, whereas in space you don't have to fight drag, but all manouvers must be made with thrusters (or space-drive).

 

[Muthax]

True. Real space ships wouldn't magically stop to accelerate at some point. There is no aerodynamic drag in space.

That's because you have Flight Assist on. If you turn it off you don't decellarate

 

[Beetlebum]

That's because you have Flight Assist on. If you turn it off you don't decellarate

Really? Thought they patched that out. I will give it a try soon.

 

[Jockey79]

Really? Thought they patched that out. I will give it a try soon.

they did, in beta they patched it out to stop people silent running and drifting in to dock. But you slow down slower than if you leave it on

 

[kiario]

it should be only about acceleration.
there is 'no top speed' in space... well except c maybe, but our ships can fly faster than c.

I know, but in ED there is a speed cap. So in this world I think a Eagle should be faster.

And what will happen when we get planetary landings. Then suddenly atmosphere will come in to play and throw all the present vacuum flight out of the window?

A Type-6 in atmosphere should have completely different performance than an aerodynamic Eagle?

 

[Muylaetrix]

yes sorry about the paste lol but clear on wiki,

Basicaly all I am trying to say is you can not go faster then the "speed of the exhaust gases are leaving the engine", no matter the size of engine. as is said in wiki: "A rocket is propelled forward by a thrust force equal in magnitude, but opposite in direction "

noone seemse to mention this, but it makes a difference if there is an atmosphere. rockets are efficient when there is an atmosphere against which they can push, but lose efficiency when there is no atmosphere and the only thing that matters is the (mass * speed) of which matter is ejected in the oposite direction of travel. rockets going in space get almost all of there speed inside the atmosphere, before leaving the atmosphere. once outside of earth's atmosphere, rockets are not doing that much really.

ion drives might eject 'matter' at high speed, but the mass of the matter (ions) ejected is rediculously low compared to the mass of the potential space ship.

 

[Morbad]

after all we have the function of turning it off, so why on earth would it still have this effect ?

It's never completely off. Setting FA off just puts it in a less intrusive mode.

but all manouvers must be made with thrusters (or space-drive).

Or gyroscopes/reaction wheels.

 

[Muylaetrix]

"Timey-Whimey"

lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY_Ry8J_jdw

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Mass does not matter in space.

I'm afraid mass does matter. Matter and energy also matter.

 

[Hominin]

just look at the 2 ships with particular attention to engine size to ship size ratio. T6 is some cargo space with a couple of giant engines strapped to it and its specific role is as a long distance cargo carrier so it makes sense that it is built to go very fast in one direction. Eagle is designed for close range combat where maneuverability is more important than straight line speed.

i won't try to apply any more logic to it than that as we already discussed the realism issues sufficiently at beta2 when they ruined that aspect of the game.

 

[SpiralRazor]

Uh...no. no it should not.


Speed is about weight to engine power and the little eagle dinky engines and power plant cannot match a larger ships capacity...so while you may in fact be more maneuverable, you are NOT going to be faster in a straigh line, or have more of a jump range.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I know, but in ED there is a speed cap. So in this world I think a Eagle should be faster.

And what will happen when we get planetary landings. Then suddenly atmosphere will come in to play and throw all the present vacuum flight out of the window?

A Type-6 in atmosphere should have completely different performance than an aerodynamic Eagle?

it most definitely will.

 

[BrewerGeorge]

Uh...no. no it should not.


Speed is about weight to engine power and the little eagle dinky engines and power plant cannot match a larger ships capacity...so while you may in fact be more maneuverable, you are NOT going to be faster in a straigh line, or have more of a jump range.

Agreed. Plus, if you posit that a given engine has a certain amount of thrust available you can say that Eagle designers chose to use more of it for maneuvering thrusters and less for straight ahead. The T6 is the opposite. This concept is displayed in the Harrier and other VTOL planes. Just having the capacity for that vectored thrust usually reduces the top speed of the aircraft.