Not that FDev would do it, but...it would make for great graphics

kris44dad

kris44dad
I'm thinking atmospheric landings, but...

the addition of the unpowered reentry. I can see it. A slow buildup of speed/heat by gravity, along with the orange glow dancing off the canopy. I'd burn a 'conda just to experience it once.
 

[VR] scipio_77

[VR] scipio_77
Stealthie said:
Personally, I'd love to have to target a destination, reverse direction and then apply thrust in order to adjust my periapsis and de-orbit in a manner that allowed me to glide down to my destination.

I'm not holding my breath though.
Click to expand...

My memories might be hazy on this, but wasn't this a common thing to do in Frontier Elite II? I seem to recall the autopilot doing it on atmospheric landings and therefore picking up the habit myself, but memory is a dangerous thing.

I'm sure someone here has the answer...
 

PaxtonNewt

PaxtonNewt
id love to see the planet earth be recreated using the GTA5 engine - the whole world done, including the launch pads at the various sites around the world. it would be a massive undertaking probably impossible to do, but a futuristic earth you can land on, drive around in and take off.. with added benefits of being able to have your own base with unlimited storage and maybe your own engineering factory where you can custom build your own ship with as many modules as you want..
 

kris44dad

kris44dad
When they first installed planetary landings, I was disappointed that we could not land on the moon and see the Apollo landing sites. I would have thought FDev would have added that.
 

PaxtonNewt

PaxtonNewt
kris44dad said:
When they first installed planetary landings, I was disappointed that we could not land on the moon and see the Apollo landing sites. I would have thought FDev would have added that.
Click to expand...
Maybe its because..."We never landed on the moon"....

I believe we did land on the moon, hence the reflectors left there. precisely placed. maybe someone from FD are non moon landing beleivers and they decided we cant land on the moon either..
 

Dutchman141

Dutchman141
kris44dad said:
I'm thinking atmospheric landings, but...

the addition of the unpowered reentry. I can see it. A slow buildup of speed/heat by gravity, along with the orange glow dancing off the canopy. I'd burn a 'conda just to experience it once.
Click to expand...

Imho I think it would be normal to implement heat build up when entering a planet's atmosphere.
The friction alone would be enough, unless your shields magically negates it.
 

PaxtonNewt

PaxtonNewt
I think when you blow up you
Dutchman141 said:
Imho I think it would be normal to implement heat build up when entering a planet's atmosphere.
The friction alone would be enough, unless your shields magically negates it.
Click to expand...
I think when you burn up you should be ejected into an escape pod and have rescue rats come find you.
 

PaxtonNewt

PaxtonNewt
Dutchman141 said:
Erm... that would make atmospheric landings a very short lived feature though lol.
Click to expand...
though not understandee... when you enter correctly you survive.. if you don't you burn up.. at the point you burn up.. you escape into a pod.. you get rescued.. SAR Team..
it would make landing a very risky thing to do.. if you had damage on your ship from a fisty cuff in space with another ship, we all know what happens when the heat shields on the shuttle fell off..
 

RolloTreadway

RolloTreadway
kris44dad said:
When they first installed planetary landings, I was disappointed that we could not land on the moon and see the Apollo landing sites. I would have thought FDev would have added that.
Click to expand...
The moon is a densely populated industrial centre. The locations of the moon landings, if they're still preserved, are probably in the basement of some huge factory.
 

Dutchman141

Dutchman141
PaxtonNewt said:
though not understandee... when you enter correctly you survive.. if you don't you burn up.. at the point you burn up.. you escape into a pod.. you get rescued.. SAR Team..
it would make landing a very risky thing to do.. if you had damage on your ship from a fisty cuff in space with another ship, we all know what happens when the heat shields on the shuttle fell off..
Click to expand...

I could live with that, angle correct, perfect glide path, angle slightly off, minor damage, angle to steep, major damage or destruction, angle to wide, you bounce off.
Realistic and fun imho.
 

kris44dad

kris44dad
PaxtonNewt said:
Maybe its because..."We never landed on the moon"....

I believe we did land on the moon, hence the reflectors left there. precisely placed. maybe someone from FD are non moon landing beleivers and they decided we cant land on the moon either..
Click to expand...
LOL! No, it's probably because the Brits are p1ssed that the Americans did it, instead of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom