This, in my experience, is clearly rubbish. Hell, you don't even know how to repair your own hull.
How to get the shields of your exploration ship right?
- Thread starter Guizin239
- Start date
This, in my experience, is clearly rubbish. Hell, you don't even know how to repair your own hull.
Not without limpets (although if you bothered to bring limpets then you wouldn't be bothered to bring a small shield either way), nontheless, even using faoff a couple of meters off ground will not prevent some damage if landing on high-g planets so you are speaking rubbish.
As promised, I did a test, which surprisingly for me, supported your claim.
It's just a small test but it is telling imho.
Clean drives really seem to have a small advantage. PP efficiency still is the big factor though.
I use an A7 scoop on my Corvette and Anaconda. Often takes less time to fill the tank after a jump than the FSD cooldown, and I rarely have issues with dirty drives and an armored PP.
Seems plausible that the thruster thermal load could apply in SC or while scooping, but without a few more controls on this experiment it's hard to come to any definitive conclusions. Distance to the star is a huge factor in how hot a ship gets, but you seem to be moving inconsistently between tests and don't have the star targeted.
I'd recommend parking at a fixed distance from the star, dumping a sink to reduce heat to zero, then timing the increase to some arbitrary temperature from the time the sink is ejected.
Might do it myself, now that my curiosity on the topic has been renewed.
And I was wondering how I could keep a roughly consistent distance.
Sometimes I'm a bit stupid.
Too bad I overwrote the clean 4 drives with dirty to use them later on my Chief.
Will propably do another run of tests later, this time with the same distance.
Edit: I guess it's sufficient to only use the low emissions pp.
The better efficiency will propably make the difference more visible. I hope.
maybe orbit the star with supercruise assist
And I was wondering how I could keep a roughly consistent distance.
Sometimes I'm a bit stupid.
Too bad I overwrote the clean 4 drives with dirty to use them later on my Chief.
Will propably do another run of tests later, this time with the same distance.
Edit: I guess it's sufficient to only use the low emissions pp.
The better efficiency will propably make the difference more visible. I hope.
Nah, Morbads idea is sound.
I just was fixed on emulating the scooping process, totally ignoring the distances, I just eyeballed it.
But that's cool, gonna get another set of thrusters and do a revision 1 vid.
And I was wondering how I could keep a roughly consistent distance.
Sometimes I'm a bit stupid.
Too bad I overwrote the clean 4 drives with dirty to use them later on my Chief.
Will propably do another run of tests later, this time with the same distance.
Edit: I guess it's sufficient to only use the low emissions pp.
The better efficiency will propably make the difference more visible. I hope.
I should have enough materials to build a set of clean drives for my new Hutton Anaconda.
Smaller differences become more noticeable with longer scoop times. When it comes to the big scoops, I can't imagine it mattering unless one regularly empties the entire tank.
This is what I did with my CMDR's vette pretty much all the way to Colonia, with a few breaks for DW2 (and combat against DG2) and actual exploration, last time he was there:
Ok, thanks to @Morbad I ran another round of tests, I let you draw a conclusion yourselves 
(would be nice if it would be re-tested by someone else)
Nice example of feels over reals I guess. It felt much better with the clean drives, but the "test"
was in reality very much flawed by the star distance. Didn't really notice myself, I thought it would be pretty similar.
(would be nice if it would be re-tested by someone else)
Nice example of feels over reals I guess. It felt much better with the clean drives, but the "test"
was in reality very much flawed by the star distance. Didn't really notice myself, I thought it would be pretty similar.
That's closer to what I would have expected.
I think when I get around to testing this I'll use a larger star so the relative 30km/s movement is potentially less impactful, and I'll start my test at 100% heat because that's past the point where radiator disipation rate stops scaling with temperature, if I recall correctly. Don't expect the general result to be significantly different, but it should minimize a few more possible variables.
I think when I get around to testing this I'll use a larger star so the relative 30km/s movement is potentially less impactful, and I'll start my test at 100% heat because that's past the point where radiator disipation rate stops scaling with temperature, if I recall correctly. Don't expect the general result to be significantly different, but it should minimize a few more possible variables.
I'm thinking of doing a supercruise assist / orbiting test like @Guizin239 proposed.
Reason is this is more in line with normal scooping around the star.
Does supercruise assist work at all around stars? In the corona? Propably will have to change the
pp back to the guardian one, with the low emissions could be I won't reach >64% at all depending on the orbit.
I suppose the SC maneuvering variable may somehow depend on thrusters. Skeptical of this, but worth a test.
Not a clue, never launched a ship with one equipped.
supercruise assist won't get you as close as it could :/
thrusters dont change sc maneuverability
No, but possibly the heat generation like in normal space.
Gonna try to test this...
I know, and they shouldn't change SC thermal load either, but that would be the only explanation for clean drives affecting scooping temperature that I can think of that hasn't been convincingly tested.
I have no concept of how to pack light IRL, and that translates into games also. If I think I might maybe need something, I'm loading it up. My Exploration build has an amfu, repair limpets, etc. Just like in real life, where someone recommended I should take up camping so I got an RV... I either go prepared, or I don't go at all =D
I guess you could more reliably control the distance to star by crashing into it.
Then low wake on exit vector, but make sure you set throttle to zero before the counter reach 0 - so you always find yourself in SC at minimum speed
This way you can also test heat generation in a normal and hot space.
anyway, nice tests
hihi, just remembered the Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son of a in space! sequence