is atmospheric landing even possible with either of the 38 playable ships???

[VR SenseiMatty]

I am by no mean an aerospace engineer

I am,
Not the best one for sure and very far from the hollywood aerospace engineers that design every single system of spaceships and can repair them in a bunch of minutes
Don't compare ED ships with shuttle, airplanes, helicopter or any real flying vehicle.
Why not? What's the main difference?
HUUGE THRUST!!! OMG YOU WON'T BELIEVE HOW MUCH THRUST THESE SHIPS HAVE!!!
You can have lift with an aerodynamic profile (airplanes/helicopters/glider/shuttle) or with thrust (lift-launchers like the Saturn V) which is the ED ships way.
If you fly over a high gravity planets you will see that the vertical thrusters are always on. This means that the guys that designed the flight model made a good job! That's the first evidence that ED ships don't need aerodynamic forces to balance the gravity/weight.

Another case where we see this difference: maneuvering
Airplanes maenuver thanks to aerodynamics: the elevators and the ailerons modifiy the lift balance and the airplane rotates and changes movement direction.
In ED we manuever our ships with thrusters: lateral, vertical, even front thrusters to reduce the speed or to stop the ship. There are a lot of thrusters on our ships, so this is another reason why we don't need aerodynamic profiles on our ships.
Compared to airless planets, the only atmospheric planets additional effect is the drag that in space flight has the most concern in the atmospheric reentry because of the heat generated. But also here the game handles it very well (from a fictional point of view) because the orbital flight and the glide phase are done in Supercruise, where the ship is not affected by the normal phyisics law. Moreover our ships can fly close to stars without melting so the heat management at this level is not an issue.

As a final evidence, in game you can land on airless planets with very high G, I've been to the planet "Strong G" few times which is almost 10G and airless. So no aerodynamics and no lift. All ships can land and lift off without big issues (you need to be careful though),

Now, looking at some of the 38 playable ships we have today, some of them are literally a flying brick , (type 9, python, anaconda etc etc) , how on Earth are they going to land on an Earth like planet with a gravitational force of -9.41g and having no WINGS whatsoever?? the moment they enter an Earth-like planet atmosphere they will fall down like a bird high on cocaine.

The atmosphere has no influence on the gravity pull. The gravity well would attract the ships from much farther then the current exclusion zones. This is not simulated in the game. You can fly in normal space at a planet exclusion zone (both atmospheric and airless) and the ship is not pulled down by the gravity. This is a game limitation so atmospheric planets will make no difference.

Real evidence: most people believe that the ISS is not affected by Earth gravity becuase it's in space and we can see astronauts floating around.
Actually the gravity on the ISS is only -11% than on Earth: at sea level G is around 9.81 m/s2 and on the ISS it is around 8.7 m/s2.
The reason why astronauts float is because all forces are balanced: gravity is balanced by the centrifugal acceleration given by the orbital flight so the feeling is like the ISS is constantly falling. If one of the 2 forces (gravitational pull or centrifugal force) would increase the ISS would fall on the planet or escape the orbit (depending on which one of the two is stronger).

 

[[VR] Orodruin]

The reason why astronauts float is because all forces are balanced: gravity is balanced by the centrifugal acceleration given by the orbital flight so the feeling is like the ISS is constantly falling. If one of the 2 forces (gravitational pull or centrifugal force) would increase the ISS would fall on the planet or escape the orbit (depending on which one of the two is stronger).

Gravity is not a force, gravitational acceleration is due to a particular choice of coordinate system. Zero g has little to do with gravitation balancing the centrifugal force and everything to do with the world line of the observer being a geodesic. If you fall freely towards the Earth, you would experience zero g. No centrifugal force required.

 

[[PS4 Pro - PC] earthtone99]

I can imagine:

1. atmospheric entry modules becoming a thing with a need to install ceramic external hull plating and or wings.

Another option alongside or without above, could be:

2. to have an atmospheric entry vehicle that can be purchased and fitted out, stored in the vehicle hangar. You could leave the ‘mothership’ in orbit and go down and take a look.

Or going back to my first option, take the biggie down and explore the surface in an SRV, at a cost to heat build up, integrity/hull damage etc.

Just my thoughts

o7

 

[Rubbernuke]

The Planetary Landing Module description installs various bits to your ship to enable it to land via abstractions, I imagine this will have a variant for atmospheres. This would add surfaces, extra thrusters (abstracted I imagine, i.e. not visible) and computer assistance. IRL you have unstable aircraft that rely on computers for micro adjustments, although this has limits it can be applied to our ships too. Any turbulence that might jostle the slab of metal you fly would be countered leaving you to look cinematic.

In handwavium nothing will really change- we have crazy thrust levels coupled with advanced flight computers that take an unstable object (your ship) keep it 'flying' in a controlled way- I say the latter because not many ED ships look like lifting bodies so for most its using thrust to balance and prolong a ballistic trajectory.

Heat won't be a problem, since you can park next to a star which is 5000+ deg C (and higher I imagine for some types) and re-entry won't top that.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

I hope, however, that at least there will be arbitrary drag applied to the ships so that an FDL or an Adder should be faster/handle better than a T6 or a T9.

 

[Ashnak]

... Physics education is much more helpful with understanding this however, than pilots license, heh:
...

Even pilots (should) know this. There used to be a say about thrust (or large engines) and barn doors. Although nowadays, aircraft design seems to tend towards efficiency. The "brute force" approach as it is used in ED (with respect to atmospheric flight at least) seems to have become somewhat outdated.

Like others already said: keep in mind that we're dealing with enough power to hurl a ship of several thousand tonnes with up to 2001 times the speed of light through space. The only problem something with that kind of power would have with atmospheric flight would be avoiding to smash itself against the atmosphere. Call it the Granny Weatherwax approach to aerodynamics.

 

[LumberTubs]

I'm 142 years old and I've been flying since I was 3.

Seriously though, this is a game where faster than light travel is possible and the galaxy has a universal time which isn't relative. Those things were rightly put in place for gameplay reasons and so will atmo landings (if they're ever implemeneted). Realism to the extent being sought on here went out the window a long time ago.

 

[Susanna]

Transporters. The new Scotty module is on stand-by.

Ah! So that is why everyone wants Space Legs.... Beam me up Scotty!

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

I can imagine:

1. atmospheric entry modules becoming a thing with a need to install ceramic external hull plating and or wings.

Another option alongside or without above, could be:

2. to have an atmospheric entry vehicle that can be purchased and fitted out, stored in the vehicle hangar. You could leave the ‘mothership’ in orbit and go down and take a look.

Or going back to my first option, take the biggie down and explore the surface in an SRV, at a cost to heat build up, integrity/hull damage etc.

Just my thoughts

o7

If Drew Wagar's book are canon, then even Anacondas can plough through the skies.

 

[Ashnak]

I'm 142 years old and I've been flying since I was 3.

Seriously though, this is a game where faster than light travel is possible and the galaxy has a universal time which isn't relative. Those things were rightly put in place for gameplay reasons and so will atmo landings (if they're ever implemeneted). Realism to the extent being sought on here went out the window a long time ago.

Spoilsport

 

[Maggie_Oz]

A ship's shields can be used to deflect the atmosphere in the same way a conventional wing does.

 

[[VR] Marrs]

I'm 167 and have been flying since I was 1 and so has my wife. Expecting realism here seems unlikely. As long as it's fun and a bit of a challenge I'll be happy. Oh and I want to go underwater too - Moray Starboat anyone?

 

[zimms]

Read about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_wing

And this https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-2_Spirit , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_X-33, don't their shapes remind you some ship?

Ah, yes. And then we have the Type 9 - hanging in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Ah, yes. And then we have the Type 9 - hanging in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't.

Strap enough rockets to the brick though and it will 'fly', its just a matter of being able to control the thrust. Harrier jump jets when transitioned to land generate no lift via aerodynamic surfaces but 100% thrusters- the same could apply to the T-9.

 

[Kathryn Kando]

Also a pilot here, sometimes watching people with their model aircrafts on a airfield next to my base.

I‘ve seen lawnmowers happily flying around there. My flight instructor used to say many moons ago: with enough power a hangar door will fly.

We have no issue with power on all ED ships. The whole topic of aerodynamic becomes interesting upon power failure. Cobra ftw.

 

[4ndr34]

Long story short:
There are already ED ships that as they are right now are able to do atmospheric landings without any modification at all using RL physics. But ED isn't a realistic space simulator at all. ED isn't even a Sci-fi space simulator at all. Elite Dangerous is a fantasy space simulator.

Long story long:
Just to reply to OP I have already introduced RL physics about Delta Wing and I have pointed out that already some ED ships have Delta Wing and body lift:

Read about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_wing

And this https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-2_Spirit , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_X-33, don't their shapes remind you some ship?

A part that someone has already pushed the argument far up, eventually simulating in a wind tunnel simulator software...

Right now, the The Viper III/IV along with the Cobra III/IV are the only ones of the 38 that can.

They are all "Lifting Bodies" and should be able to do atmospheric landings.

You can use this software and some 3D modeling of the Vipers and Cobra's. I played with this awhile back when I thought atmospheric landings were coming to Elite.

They provide sufficient lift to glide to the ground. Of course, none of the 38 ships have the appropriate landing gear and the engines and thrusters on board won't stop you from smacking the ground. No way to stop the glide.

But in the end as I have already stated above, Elite Dangerous is a fantasy space simulator, it's quite a waste of time to look for RL physics in it.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

What is "fantasy space" as compared to Sci -Fi ?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

With enough thrust, even a brick can fly.

 

[StuartGT]

is atmospheric landing even possible with either of the 38 playable ships???

Yes.

 

[Arioch]

I would hope the sound department does their usual sterling work for our flying bricks powering around in-atmo, absolutely shredding the air around them like every Saturn V going off at the same time mixed with the screams of a thousand tortured souls and causing the sort of sonic damage that’ll get the NPC Imperial Herald / Federal Times readers firing off letters starting, “Why oh why oh why...”