Newcomer / Intro FSD cancelled, exceeds drive fuel limit of 3T?

[Touchwood]

Please help me to understand this?

I'm doing a CG, transporting titanium (this time) I didn't have the fuel to complete the trip in one series of jumps, so elected an intermediate station where I know I can re-fuel. All was going well until I was jumped by an NPC.

I submitted to the interdict, and boosted away - no problems, he never touched me. However, when I tried to re-engage the FSD with my next star en-route I got the message as in the thread title (may have got the wording slightly wrong)

I had to jump to galaxy map, select a closer star (17.5 Ly as opposed to 20 LY from memory) and managed to high wake away - but I haven't a clue why it happened, or how to avoid it in future?

 

[Chris Simon]

Every time you open the Gal Map, your computer calculates and recalculates the route taking into account your current weight, unless you tell her otherwise.

If you plotted the route with an empty tank and then refueled, your jump range got shorter. Not every jump on the route is a max possible distance - You evidently were able to do the first jump, but the one that failed was probably on the limit of your fuel-less jump range, so refueling made it impossible.

So how to avoid it? After refueling and stocking up with cargo, fire up the Galaxy map and let the computer recalculate the route.

 

[Touchwood]

Every time you open the Gal Map, your computer calculates and recalculates the route taking into account your current weight, unless you tell her otherwise.

If you plotted the route with an empty tank and then refueled, your jump range got shorter. Not every jump on the route is a max possible distance - You evidently were able to do the first jump, but the one that failed was probably on the limit of your fuel-less jump range, so refueling made it impossible.

So how to avoid it? After refueling and stocking up with cargo, fire up the Galaxy map and let the computer recalculate the route.

Many thanks. I guess that's what happened.

Whilst researching my question I've come across another puzzle - getting the right shield generator. I currently have a 3A - optimal hull mass 165 T. Hull mass on my Cobra seems to be 290.2 T (first and middle figures in the ship stats, which read "TOTAL MASS 290.2/290.2/630.0 T) I've been looking for a 4A but can't find one yet, but where I am now has a 4C with optimal hull mass 285.0 T - BUT the figures for minimum/optimal.maximum strength are all red - down 40%/90%/140% respectively. So is the 4C better than the 3A for my ship or not?

 

[Klab]

If the numbers appear in red when you are looking to buy a new module it means it is worse than what you currently have fitted. Blue numbers mean it's better.

 

[Touchwood]

If the numbers appear in red when you are looking to buy a new module it means it is worse than what you currently have fitted. Blue numbers mean it's better.

Yes - but the hull mass figures are blue, the strength figures are red - question is, which is more important?

 

[aRJay]

Many thanks. I guess that's what happened.

Whilst researching my question I've come across another puzzle - getting the right shield generator. I currently have a 3A - optimal hull mass 165 T. Hull mass on my Cobra seems to be 290.2 T (first and middle figures in the ship stats, which read "TOTAL MASS 290.2/290.2/630.0 T) I've been looking for a 4A but can't find one yet, but where I am now has a 4C with optimal hull mass 285.0 T - BUT the figures for minimum/optimal.maximum strength are all red - down 40%/90%/140% respectively. So is the 4C better than the 3A for my ship or not?

Sorry the answer to that is yes and no with a side helping of that bit isn't clear, but long story short get the 4C.

To explain starting with the not clear bit, the mass of the ship the shield needs to match is that of the bare hull now this is easy to find in Coriolis.io less so in outfitting, but for the Cobra 3 it is 180t.

The important figure is the shield strength in MJ as that is what the weapons hits are destroying, however you are usually better of with a slightly weaker shield that meets the tonnage requirements than a stronger one that doesn't think of the shield like an empty drinks can if the tonnage is right and there are no dents in it if you put that can on end and stand on it carefully it will support your weight however if the shield is to small it is distorted like a dented can which won't support as much weight.

The 4C is better defensively the 3A will produce less heat it is what A rated stuff does and is lighter so you can jump a bit further but it is 18MJ less power and it's integrity is reduced by the mass thing. Not to mention that the 4C is a lot cheaper.

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

Yes - but the hull mass figures are blue, the strength figures are red - question is, which is more important?

Look at the shield figure in the stats at the bottom left that should be blue.

 

[Klab]

Yes - but the hull mass figures are blue, the strength figures are red - question is, which is more important?

Most modules that improve something will likely be heavier or use more power or some such downside. The blue is the good bit , the red is the bad bit. It's always a trade off, but look for the piece of info that you are most interested in and make sure it's blue and you will be ok.

 

[CMDR Mr. Boombastic]

Many thanks. I guess that's what happened.

Whilst researching my question I've come across another puzzle - getting the right shield generator. I currently have a 3A - optimal hull mass 165 T. Hull mass on my Cobra seems to be 290.2 T (first and middle figures in the ship stats, which read "TOTAL MASS 290.2/290.2/630.0 T) I've been looking for a 4A but can't find one yet, but where I am now has a 4C with optimal hull mass 285.0 T - BUT the figures for minimum/optimal.maximum strength are all red - down 40%/90%/140% respectively. So is the 4C better than the 3A for my ship or not?

The stats that you are referring to 290.2/290.2/630.0 actually refer to current/fully laden/max mass. It's not very intuitive and had to look it up myself to check.

AFAIK...
Current Mass = ship hull mass + module mass + current fuel mass + current cargo.
Fully Laden Mass = ship hull mass + module mass + max fuel + max cargo. So in this particular case you are currently fully laden hence why both the first and second numbers are the same.
Max Mass = maximum mass that is allowed. This (I think) only changes if you fit different thrusters. So in some cases you cannot downgrade your thrusters as your current mass would exceed the maximum allowable mass and so your thrusters would not powerful enough to move the ship.

But the key statistic missing from the outfitting screen is the ship hull mass which for the Cobra Mk III is 180t. And this is where the optimised hull mass of the shield generator becomes important.