9.77G is soooo 3303
11 is the new 10 that was 9, let the cutter destruction commence!
11G Landable Planet
- Thread starter FixMeNow
- Start date
11 is the new 10 that was 9, let the cutter destruction commence!
So, you would be interested in seeing a video of me landing my unshielded cutter on 9.77G planet? Like i said, i will record it when i do the 11G but it will be awhile before i go back to Colonia.9.77G is soooo 3303
What is your jump range? My Cutter gets 47ly a jump. I built a T10 in coriolis that got 45ly a jump but decided to pass on it.A fair slop out then... Still if I get bored and can put up with the jump range of the T10...
Alright ladies, I entered the system while taking the last sip from my fourth (and last) bottle of beer... Then, for just a moment, I contemplated whether it was truly the smartest of ideas to attempt a landing on such a dangerous world after a.) lots of beer and b.) being tired after having travelled for over 12.000Ly in one session. And then I thought... "ah whatever"...
Approach:
That 11.01g world in my view, finally:
Looks pretty much like the other very massive landable worlds? Alright, let's get to it!
The early phase (anything before the glide) is absolutely easy and safe of course. To make things just a little bit more interesting, I picked the bottom of a crater for my landing spot! "Gotta get as many g's outta this as I can"'s what I thought...
Entered Glide mode at a shallow angle, just as always. Looking pretty good so far. Now, the way I'm landing on places like this isn't "airplane mode", at least not after getting down to 200-300 metres. This time, I started with flight assist off/on even earlier, at around 3km. To test the waters, so to say. Works as well as anywhere else:
Almooost... aaand:
Touchdown! On my third 9g+ world!
As easy as a stroll in the park on a midsummer sunday afternoon! And not a scratch on my Diamondback Explorer. Who needs shields again?
Landing on a 11.01g world fully drunk: Check!
Getting actual 11.01g's outta this: Fail. Dammit, only got 10.99g despite picking a crater for this.... oh well.
I better go to bed now...
Approach:
That 11.01g world in my view, finally:
Looks pretty much like the other very massive landable worlds? Alright, let's get to it!
The early phase (anything before the glide) is absolutely easy and safe of course. To make things just a little bit more interesting, I picked the bottom of a crater for my landing spot! "Gotta get as many g's outta this as I can"'s what I thought...
Entered Glide mode at a shallow angle, just as always. Looking pretty good so far. Now, the way I'm landing on places like this isn't "airplane mode", at least not after getting down to 200-300 metres. This time, I started with flight assist off/on even earlier, at around 3km. To test the waters, so to say. Works as well as anywhere else:
Almooost... aaand:
Touchdown! On my third 9g+ world!
As easy as a stroll in the park on a midsummer sunday afternoon! And not a scratch on my Diamondback Explorer. Who needs shields again?
Landing on a 11.01g world fully drunk: Check!
Getting actual 11.01g's outta this: Fail.
Dammit, only got 10.99g despite picking a crater for this.... oh well.I better go to bed now...
Last edited:
Looks like a textbook landing to me, commander. Great job and good night!!Alright ladies, I entered the system while taking the last sip from my fourth (and last) bottle of beer... Then, for just a moment, I contemplated whether it was truly the smartest of ideas to attempt a landing on such a dangerous world after a.) lots of beer and b.) being tired after having travelled for over 12.000Ly in one session. And then I thought... "ah whatever"...
Approach:
That 11.01g world in my view, finally:
Looks pretty much like the other very massive landable worlds? Alright, let's get to it!
The early phase (anything before the glide) is absolutely easy and safe of course. To make things just a little bit more interesting, I picked the bottom of a crater for my landing spot! "Gotta get as many g's outta this as I can"'s what I thought...
Entered Glide mode at a shallow angle, just as always. Looking pretty good so far. Now, the way I'm landing on places like this isn't "airplane mode", at least not after getting down to 200-300 metres. This time, I started with flight assist off/on even earlier, at around 3km. To test the waters, so to say. Works as well as anywhere else:
Almooost... aaand:
Touchdown! On my third 9g+ world!
As easy as a stroll in the park on a midsummer sunday afternoon! And not a scratch on my Diamondback Explorer. Who needs shields again?
Landing on a 11.01g world fully drunk: Check!
Getting actual 11.01g's outta this: Fail.
I better go to bed now...
Uh... minus the drink & fly part..
Ah yes, I must not forget to replicate your tests on that planet before I leave. Turn, roll, downthrust, etc.
Ah yes, I must not forget to replicate your tests on that planet before I leave. Turn, roll, downthrust, etc.
Full FA off?! What do you mean? Like manually controlling all the thrusters? No way. My vert/lat thrusters are on a ministick on my Logitech X56 throttle. That stick may be "ok", but for someting like this, no way. Even in space, flying with full FA off is total chaos for me, I just completely lose control of my ship...
And I don't think a vertical landing (like what I'm doing) would be possible with FA off. You'd have to do an airplane-style landing all the way to the ground. Controlling the vertical thrusters all the way down would be painful too, as the landing process on a world like this takes some time.. Just one slip on that stick and I'd be dead...
Anyway, I've completed GremlinSpotter's manoeuvres. I don't have a fancy video for you, but here are the results. Ah yes, ship was the [Dinnerbell], a Diamondback Explorer. Laden ship mass in zero-g is 340t. Should've been a few tons lighter than that effectively, because my fuel tanks weren't all full. Makes an effective weight of rougly 3700t under testing conditions.
Vertical thrust down (≈1 second):
Sharp 180° turn at ≈45° ship inclination:
Flight assist off (≈2 seconds):
I got a bit of a bad feeling in my stomach after the turn when I saw that I'd picked up quite a bit of speed in the wrong direction.. Over 450m/s downwards. Was the only time my thumb and pinkie were hovering over the boost and FSD buttons for a while... Turns are deadly! Just look at that drop, almost 30km, and that's in a relatively light vessel.
And in second place comes the roll. Not too shabby either. At almost 16km loss this can easily cost you life and ship if you aren't careful.
At the less dangerous end of the spectrum we find the FA off and surprisingly also 1 sec of downwards vertical thrust. Both result in a rougly equal loss of altitude of 2-3km. Pretty much survivable unless you pull the trigger when you're really close to the surface. For landing, my FA off actuation times are probably 50-100ms, but that's just a rough estimate of course.
On a sidenote: The crater I had picked for landing was almost exactly 30km deep from ridge to bottom. Doesn't look like it from the photos, but that thing is really, really large! And one more thing: At the bottom of the crater I had experienced 10.99g. But as my ship had risen to almost regular surface level at ≈20km, it was 11.00g! Isn't that a bit strange? See here:
Weird, right? But at least I've seen the number "11" now.
And I don't think a vertical landing (like what I'm doing) would be possible with FA off. You'd have to do an airplane-style landing all the way to the ground. Controlling the vertical thrusters all the way down would be painful too, as the landing process on a world like this takes some time.. Just one slip on that stick and I'd be dead...
Anyway, I've completed GremlinSpotter's manoeuvres. I don't have a fancy video for you, but here are the results. Ah yes, ship was the [Dinnerbell], a Diamondback Explorer. Laden ship mass in zero-g is 340t. Should've been a few tons lighter than that effectively, because my fuel tanks weren't all full. Makes an effective weight of rougly 3700t under testing conditions.
Vertical thrust down (≈1 second):
g-force: 10.97g
Starting altitude: 50.3km
Resulting altitude: 47.8km
Loss of altitude: 2.5km
One full longitudinal roll:g-force: 10.97g
Starting altitude: 49.7km
Resulting altitude: 34.1km
Loss of altitude: 15.6km
Sharp 180° turn at ≈45° ship inclination:
g-force: 10.96g
Starting altitude: 60.3km
Resulting altitude: 31.8km
Loss of altitude: 28.5km
Flight assist off (≈2 seconds):
g-force: 10.96
Starting altitude: 59.8km
Resulting altitude: 57.5km
Loss of altitude: 2.3km
I got a bit of a bad feeling in my stomach after the turn when I saw that I'd picked up quite a bit of speed in the wrong direction.. Over 450m/s downwards. Was the only time my thumb and pinkie were hovering over the boost and FSD buttons for a while... Turns are deadly! Just look at that drop, almost 30km, and that's in a relatively light vessel.
And in second place comes the roll. Not too shabby either. At almost 16km loss this can easily cost you life and ship if you aren't careful.
At the less dangerous end of the spectrum we find the FA off and surprisingly also 1 sec of downwards vertical thrust. Both result in a rougly equal loss of altitude of 2-3km. Pretty much survivable unless you pull the trigger when you're really close to the surface. For landing, my FA off actuation times are probably 50-100ms, but that's just a rough estimate of course.
On a sidenote: The crater I had picked for landing was almost exactly 30km deep from ridge to bottom. Doesn't look like it from the photos, but that thing is really, really large! And one more thing: At the bottom of the crater I had experienced 10.99g. But as my ship had risen to almost regular surface level at ≈20km, it was 11.00g! Isn't that a bit strange? See here:
Weird, right? But at least I've seen the number "11" now.
Last edited:
Its not the 11G but here ks a unshielded cutter landing on 9.77G planet. https://gamerdvr.com/gamer/gremlinspotter/video/78953251
I wonder which location would in general have the higher g-forces on high density worlds such as this one. The equator, or the polar regions? I would guess the polar regions, but I never tested it out.
Should be polar regions.
Alright, I'll keep that in mind. My next high-g landing will be on the polar regions then!
Here is the edited and shorter version of the unshielded cutter landing on Strong G. I will do another video of the 11G landing next time i head out towards Colonia.
You should find a way to add it to the elite dangerous star map and give it a cool name.
Depends on the speed of rotation surely?
On earth you weigh more at the poles, would be interesting to see if at a certain speed of rotation this changes much.
I guess the faster the body rotates, the more oblate it will become, making you weigh less and less at the equator? I assume your weights at the equator and at the polar regions would be closest to one another where the body would be as round as possible, like when tidally locked to another body at a distance as great as possible to allow for the lock?
Anyway, I'll surely try the polar regions next time. But first I need to find another high g world. Sifting through AA-A h systems with O+B, O+Herbig or lager numbers of bodies with a class O star present seems to not have been the best idea. I've done 20-30 or so now, with almost zero results in terms of planets.
Anyway, I'll surely try the polar regions next time. But first I need to find another high g world.
Sifting through AA-A h systems with O+B, O+Herbig or lager numbers of bodies with a class O star present seems to not have been the best idea. I've done 20-30 or so now, with almost zero results in terms of planets.There's a balance, if a body is oblate and you are at the equator there's actually more matter closer to you then if you are at the poles, and of course a metalic body would tend to be less oblate than a rocky or ice body spinning at the same rate, but I think we can probably assume that for any body that's not stationary gravity at the pole should be equal or greater than the equator, but a slowly spinning icy body may have equal gravity at pole and equator. I think the fact of being further from the centre of mass at the equator also makes a difference, I think the maths would be complicated.
As far as we know, ED simulates the planet's gravity as a point-mass, which means you would weigh more at the poles (on average) simply because any oblateness would put you at a lower altitude there, and thus closer to the gravitational point mass. Some of the smaller worlds might have enough altitude variations in terms of "lumpiness", that those probably make a bigger difference in those cases.
In reality, of course it's much more complicated, taking into account local variations in density, tidal/centrifugal "forces", etc.
In reality, of course it's much more complicated, taking into account local variations in density, tidal/centrifugal "forces", etc.
That's really hard to say really without testing, however at times on small bodies I have launched with the altimeter giving me up to -10km altitude, and on a body in many cases only 300km radius that has to make a difference. This does need testing, next tiny misshapen body I find will get a few landings.