Long Distance Supercruise times - Anyone got rough numbers?

Eros

Eros
All i know is that... hutton takes around 90mins... 0.22ly

I know because iv done about 13 trips out there for the HUTTON MUG! *GET YOURSELF OUT THERE, free Anacondas, Combat, Trading and Exploration rankings upgrades, biggest station in the game... errrm what else... oh yeah, there is a night club there too. Get your party on! You just need to take some scrap over there, and sell it 1 tonne at a time.

;)
 

Futuristic Kung Fu

Futuristic Kung Fu
Eros said:
All i know is that... hutton takes around 90mins... 0.22ly

I know because iv done about 13 trips out there for the HUTTON MUG! *GET YOURSELF OUT THERE, free Anacondas, Combat, Trading and Exploration rankings upgrades, biggest station in the game... errrm what else... oh yeah, there is a night club there too. Get your party on! You just need to take some scrap over there, and sell it 1 tonne at a time.

;)
Click to expand...
Yes, and it's the only station where you get your personal offloading pythons!
 

Broon

Broon
I timed my very first Hutton run and I jumped to Hyperspace at 3:24pm and dropped from SC at 4:50pm, so 1hr 26min. My top speed from another run was 1867c. I gave up sitting and watching the trip after a few runs and now just set a 1hr timer once I hit 300c so I can go about my business.

I made my first million running from McMahon Dock in Eravate to Fairbourn Station in LHS 3447. Fairbourn sits at about 110,000Ls from the jump in point and would take me roughly 8-9 minutes to traverse with a top speed of 520c iirc.

When people complain about a 1 or 2 thousand Ls trip I just shake my head. Those are over before you know it.
 

Lupin

Lupin
Another quick update using 1.4 beta and Python with A FSD and C Thrusters.

110,000 piloted course for station.

10,000 4 mins.
30,000 5 mins.
100,000 8 mins.
110,000 and in orbit around station 10 mins.
 

dementia

dementia
I love taking my boat up to 2002C. Try interdicting me then! :)

2002C is pretty quick. Just over Warp 9.6 in Star Trek terms (next gen+)!
 

mossfoot

mossfoot
dementia said:
I love taking my boat up to 2002C. Try interdicting me then! :)

2002C is pretty quick. Just over Warp 9.6 in Star Trek terms (next gen+)!
Click to expand...

How'd you break the 2001 barrier? ;)

Also, it should be noted that just flying into the great unknown or a place like Hutton Orbital won't yield useful results. It has to be to another star, since you start to decellerate as you reach it. So you'd need to find a star 100,000Ls away from primary, 250,000ls, 500,000ls, etc...
 

dementia

dementia
mossfoot said:
How'd you break the 2001 barrier? ;)

Also, it should be noted that just flying into the great unknown or a place like Hutton Orbital won't yield useful results. It has to be to another star, since you start to decellerate as you reach it. So you'd need to find a star 100,000Ls away from primary, 250,000ls, 500,000ls, etc...
Click to expand...

Ha! You are right 2001C. Sorry I was typing whilst having my Rift on my face.
 
Last edited:

Futuristic Kung Fu

Futuristic Kung Fu
mossfoot said:
How'd you break the 2001 barrier? ;)

Also, it should be noted that just flying into the great unknown or a place like Hutton Orbital won't yield useful results. It has to be to another star, since you start to decellerate as you reach it. So you'd need to find a star 100,000Ls away from primary, 250,000ls, 500,000ls, etc...
Click to expand...
You start to decelerate even if you are going to a station.
 

Zoy

Zoy
Formula for time/distance in supercruise

I collected quite a few distance/times and used Excel to experiment with trend lines and reveal its magic formula when the line looked "right". The best fit I got was using a 3 term polynomial trend line. Let me state now, I am no mathematician, but I know Excel quite well. I can reason subjectively that the 3 term polynomial curve is good because there is slow initial acceleration, then steady acceleration up to a maximum (2001) after which speed is constant. I'm sure there are maths boffins out there who can comment on that :)

Here is the curve... timevsdistance2.jpg

The formula itself is...

time = 0.00000000000000000060 * distance^3 - 0.00000000000678782533 * distance^2 + 0.00003149498738794590 * distance + 2.84937163905262000000

For SQL afficianados, this is the formula I use in my Postgres database to give estimated supercruise times. I tweaked the final value in the formula to 2.4 so the rounded value for short distances would return 2 minutes as its minimum rather than 3. The other values are slightly different because I used an earlier version of the graph to work from - it seems good though

Code: 
SELECT.......
       sta.distance_to_star,
       round(0.00000000000000000055 * (sta.distance_to_star::real * sta.distance_to_star::real * sta.distance_to_star::real)::real -  
       0.00000000000628508209 * (sta.distance_to_star::real * sta.distance_to_star::real) + 
       0.00003001329672616270 * sta.distance_to_star + 2.4)::integer as sc_est_mins,
......FROM.....

See my forum post here for the formula being used in my Rare Goods CSV/Route plan
 

Serapo

Serapo
Zoy said:
I did some work in Excel fitting a regression line to a scatter chart of time (minutes) and distance (ls) and it derived the following formula -

time_in_minutes = 8.6692*LN(distance_in_ls)-92.826

Seems to be pretty reasonable, but I could do with a few more data points for my scatter chart - if anyone has collected some times vs distances, please reply here with your data and I will try and refine the formula

Values for ls > 1,000,000 would be most useful, but anything will help

I would prefer the timings to be as follows -

Hyperspace into target system, select distant target and start supercruise at max speed = Start Time
Supercruise at max speed until time to target < 15 seconds = End Time

Thx

View attachment 61232
Click to expand...

This is cool, ty. The resolution at the shorter distances is a bit low though and that is the most interesting part of the chart because it is the section most cruises will fall into.

But you formula is great. Bookmarked.
 

Zoy

Zoy
Serapo said:
This is cool, ty. The resolution at the shorter distances is a bit low though and that is the most interesting part of the chart because it is the section most cruises will fall into.

But you formula is great. Bookmarked.
Click to expand...

Make sure you are bookmarking/using the formula in my most recent post - the one you have replied to was before I had collected sufficient data points and switched to the 3 term polynomial formula as best fit (more data always welcome - especially if it is from a journey that didn't fit the prediction well)

Regarding the shorter distances, I guess it depends on your boredom threshold - I want to get an idea of the "OMG How Long?" cruises - i.e. Hutton Orbital, I'm less bothered about anything under 10 minutes :D

It is also important to remember that for shorter distances there are far more factors that make accurate prediction more difficult. If there are a lot of planets en route to your destination then your acceleration will be compromised by gravitational drag as you head to your target
 

Serapo

Serapo
Zoy said:
Make sure you are bookmarking/using the formula in my most recent post - the one you have replied to was before I had collected sufficient data points and switched to the 3 term polynomial formula as best fit (more data always welcome - especially if it is from a journey that didn't fit the prediction well)

Regarding the shorter distances, I guess it depends on your boredom threshold - I want to get an idea of the "OMG How Long?" cruises - i.e. Hutton Orbital, I'm less bothered about anything under 10 minutes :D

It is also important to remember that for shorter distances there are far more factors that make accurate prediction more difficult. If there are a lot of planets en route to your destination then your acceleration will be compromised by gravitational drag as you head to your target
Click to expand...

Indeed I did after seeing the updated formula.

3 term polynomial formula makes us sound so cool, I will see if telling my wife I use that in my spaceships-game actually impresses her.

Of course there will be some fuzziness on acceleration and slow downs, but I (and I suppose most people) will want to use your chart to get a fairly accurate estimate so that we can time our pee-breaks, food procurement breaks and so on in a manner that is free of WTH-moments... The OMG long haul distances are only for hard-core gamers that will want to chat to their spouses/conpanions while still playing the game, something that probably does not happen so often :p

Thank you again.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zoy

Zoy
Serapo said:
.....The OMG long haul distances are only for hard-core gamers that will want to hump their spouses/conpanions while still playing the game, something that probably does not happen so often :p

Thank you again.
Click to expand...

ROFL - I have a very strong suspicion what the most common reaction to "I've got about 45 minutes of quality time I can devote to you oh love of my life before I need to nip back and park my spaceship" would be. Still, we can always dream :p
 

Krieger

Krieger
Zoy said:
<snip>...
I can reason subjectively that the 3 term polynomial curve is good because there is slow initial acceleration, then steady acceleration up to a maximum (2001) after which speed is constant. I'm sure there are maths boffins out there who can comment on that :)
<snip>...
Click to expand...

I think you are correct. For very long trips the acceleration and deceleration phases have no impact on average speed, so average speed will equal maximum speed. The travel-time "curve" for very large distances (to the far right in the graph) is a straight line (distance / max_speed). For shorter distances average speed becomes lower than maximum speed due to the acceleration and deceleration phases, so the travel-time curve will lie above the (extended) line for large distances. But in the limiting case where travel distance approaches zero, travel time will also approach zero. Thus the travel-time curve will end in the graph's origin (0, 0).
To summarise: starting at large distances and moving towards zero (from right to left in the graph) the curve will start as a descending straight line, then flex upwards and then dive back towards the origin. That is exactly what your curve fit shows.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom