two-dimensional ship designs

[alexios]

You're totally right, realism is deffinately the most important thing in the universe. Infact, let's change all ships so they look like space-shuttles, remove all sound

There is no sound outside of your cockpit. (that includes sound from other ships' engines, which is produced in your cockpit by your audio HUD)

remove lasers and projectile weapons (cause machineguns and the like require oxygen to fire)

Machine guns don't require oxygen to fire (the gas-operated ones require gas from the oxidation of the bullet's propellant —not oxygen!— to move to the next round, but mini-guns are electric). And bullets don't need oxygen, they contain their own oxidising agent and can be fired in space just fine.

 

[Graywolfe]

Wow, you guys seem to really hate anything that doesn't come directly from Elite. I don't know if you're just super-defensive about a game you don't want to change or if you're actually so close-minded that you think Elite ships are the only well-designed ships in history.

Personally I'd like Elite to keep its flavour and not end up looking like a mish-mash of every sci-fi concept compressed into one space because 'it would be cool if...' =)

 

[wstephenson]

It wouldn't hurt if the Devs allowed some fan creations to creep into the mix one day.

In the meantime, here's Concept Ships for some inspiration. (Some amazing stuff on the front page today).

The Scott Robertson page has some vertical-ish designs that start to approach the Elite aesthetic, some of the more angular designs in particular.

The vertical ships might ad a bit of cool variety, but it would mean a major redesign of stuff like going down into the hangar, unless it did land on its side, which is a bit odd.

Easy: vertical ships would require new infrastructure. It would be a low mass station providing gravity to verticals whilst docked. It would be more space efficient than the enclosed designs we see now. Think of it as a bright orange EasyStarport.

They'd have a standard docking adapter on the 'top' of the ship, which would mate to a point on a cylindrical hub on a station docking spindle. Once docked, the hub spins up to a few RPM and presto, your vertical ship has become a spoke on a daisywheel and all those floors now have a 'down'. Cargo and passengers exit upwards through the docking adapter into the low/zero-g transit area in the hollow station spindle.

To extend the station, more hubs are threaded on to the spindle, allowing more ships to dock. Just make sure to only thrust 'downwards' when undocking or your vertical ship will become an awesome spanner in the works, and be sure not to miss your docking/undocking allocation, as spinning up each hub takes a lot of energy.

A station with 5-7 hubs spinning at different rates to provide proper gravity to vertical ships of different 'heights' would be an awesome sight.

 

[letoras]

Wow, you guys seem to really hate anything that doesn't come directly from Elite. I don't know if you're just super-defensive about a game you don't want to change or if you're actually so close-minded that you think Elite ships are the only well-designed ships in history. Some replies are objective and bring up some good points for both sides, but most are just die-hard Elite fans who will shoot down anything that might change the game they hold so dear, regardless if it's a good idea or not. I guess that's the community you get when you revive a series that's been around for so long.

Personally I think the eagle is ugly, I think the Lakon is ugly, I think the viper is butt ugly, but these are my OPINIONS, and doesn't make them badly designed ships. Not to mention I'm a graphics artist myself, so I should know a thing or two about these things. I'm looking at the game objectively and simply noted a lack of variety in silhouettes, I didn't expect this community to be so protective of this one design aspect.

EDIT: I should also note that the Asp is probably one of my favourite ship designs ever.

+1 on that.

 

[Cosmo Bozo]

Easy: vertical ships would require new infrastructure.

Errr... that is a major redesign ....

 

[wstephenson]

Errr... that is a major redesign ....

I know, I know - this idea didn't start out entirely seriously, but as I went along it seemed more and more plausible. For a start, you could put the vertical ship docking collar anywhere along the axis of an Ocellus, Orbis or O'Neill, and you could weld an axle for one onto that annoying bit on the back of Coriolis opposite the docking slot.

 

[Zephyriel]

Not having played the original (cut me some slack, I wasn't even born at the time), the ship designs seemed very strange to me at first. Very old-school. But now I understand the idea and got used to them, to the point that I quite like them now. I like how they are like a complexified version of the original ships, and can imagine how cool that must feel for all you old geezers

Designs like the ones the OP suggest aren't necessarily bad ones, it's up to each person's tastes, but you have to admit they just wouldn't belong with the designs that are there. I wouldn't mind if they create new designs (they're all new to me anyway), as long as they keep the "philosophy" of the ones that are already there.

That being said, I gotta admit I have a hard time believing the devs when they say their designs are made to be aerodynamic so they can fly in an atmosphere. While I can easily suspend my disbelief and will accept to see them fly through the clouds when the expansions come out, I honestly think most of ED's ships would fly about as well as a coffin in an atmosphere. They're just too thick and bulky with a wing surface that is way too small. Also they lack rudders, elevators, ailerons... Like I said you'll never see me complain about this in the game, but please just don't try and make us believe these would fly in an atmosphere.

 

[wstephenson]

but please just don't try and make us believe these would fly in an atmosphere.

Does KSP count? Someone got a Sidewinder to fly in its simulated atmosphere.

I guess you don't actually need lift or control surfaces if you have huge amounts of omnidirectional thrust; the shapes are more about reducing drag and being tough in the face of atmospheric drag loads.

 

[Caylo]

Easy: vertical ships would require new infrastructure. It would be a low mass station providing gravity to verticals whilst docked. [...] A station with 5-7 hubs spinning at different rates to provide proper gravity to vertical ships of different 'heights' would be an awesome sight.

Whilst I have no quarrel with ship designs from other franchises, I feel a need to point out that the above suggestion would feel rather ham-fisted and artificial, rather than a natural evolution of technology.

To start, you can't just cut down on mass and size and expect a rotating object to still provide the same amount of gravity at the same RPM as, say, a Coriolis. And if you speed up the rotation to counteract the smaller size, you end up inducing negative side-effects on anyone working on or visiting this dock, from nausea to blackouts. Also, if you have a station supporting several docking hubs spinning at different speeds, you end up with an unnecessarily maintenance-intensive structure, compared to a Coriolis that just turns "as one" without having to bother with friction and torque.

Furthermore, there is that nagging question as to what those vertical ships would actually bring to the table that would justify the widespread creation of space structures built to accommodate them? They seem to offer no advantages (beyond subjective coolness), but come with a number of significant disadvantages (limitations on landing, significantly increased number of decks and thus more effort to move between them when subjected to gravity). Why would anyone build something like this?

I mean, the entire idea feels like building an airplane that is wider than it is long - for no other reason than the sake of novelty - and then expecting that airports just build bigger runways in order to conform to these few planes, rather than expecting the plane manufacturer to conform to established industry standards.

But as has been pointed out before, these disadvantages would only really be of concern for smaller ships - there's no reason that all capitals would have to follow the same school of design.

 

[HoshiQaVam]

Not going to read through 9 pages, but can I just point out that the majority of ships currently playable in beta are from a couple of different manufacturers, so it's no real surprise that they're all samey.

Sidewinder - Falcon DeLacy
Cobra - Falcon DeLacy
Viper - Falcon DeLacy
Anaconda - Falcon DeLacy

Type 6 - Lakon Spaceways
Type 9 - Lakon Spaceways
Asp Explorer - Lakon Spaceways

Hauler - Zorgon Peterson

Wait until you see some of the Imp designs. They have lots of pylons and circular bits.

As to the whole flat thing? It's one of the more efficient shapes for both thruster placement and atmospheric entry, not to mention landing.

A triangular wedge shape like the Anaconda is also a very efficient shape for weapon placement as, if weapons are well placed, the gradiant allows for total forward fire, while the triangular frame reduces any forward blind spot (at the cost of a larger rear blind spot, but that's true of almost any hull shape).

 

[letoras]

It's very frustrating that depending on what is the argument, Elite dangerous sometimes follows the realistic path (like the design of the ships must be like tacos to fly into atmosphere) and sometimes it's not realistic (like the flight mechanics).
There is no point on arguing.

 

[Riandor]

Have we seen the Imperial ships in game yet?
Have we seen the Thargoid ships in game yet?

No?

Then let's move along shall we, nothing to see here...

 

[bummer6]

Most of the people arguing against variety seem to still assume that adding something to Elite would completely kill the aesthetic... That's extremely simple and close-minded of you. Also, nothing, I repeat, NOTHING in this thread would require ANY redesign of ANYTHING. I'm not talking about CHANGING anything, I'm talking about ADDING things. THINGS THAT ARE AESTHETICALLY COHERENT WITH WHAT IS ALREADY IN THE GAME. Jesus christ it's hard to get through to some of you, it's like talking to a brick wall. I think you're just misunderstanding on purpose to be honest.

you guys think that a spaceship that's a tiny bit more three-dimensional would look COMPLETELY out of place in the Elite universe? You're wrong... simple as that, it's not a matter of opinion, you're just wrong. I think some of you are suffering from a form of tunnel-vision. You can't imagine anything that hasn't been spoon-fed to you. You want to be spoon-fed? Fine, I'll try to design something myself. Something with the current Elite aesthetics in mind. Something that has a three-dimensional element to it rather than just being a flat "cheese wedge".

Meanwhile, here's a design I found on the concept ships blog that I think looks awesome.
http://conceptships.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/heavy-space-tug-by-paul-pepera.html

 

[Rolands]

Have we seen the Imperial ships in game yet?
Have we seen the Thargoid ships in game yet?

No?

Then let's move along shall we, nothing to see here...

If these designs are still in making and not already made, this thread is meant for the community to express the need for, not only classic designs but also complex, futuristic, alien like ships, but im sure that that will come.
After all our galaxy holds so many civilizations and some of them are advanced enough to make their space ships with their sense of style and functionality.

 

[Monk]

I'm waiting to see some of the more "elegant" ship designs. Not to be nasty but these Federation workhorses will never compare to a beautiful curvy Imperial vessel. Just look at the Imperial Courier concept for proof.

Which is why I will be joining the dark s...ahem...Empire when I can get to imperial space.

 

[Aravan Darkvale]

While "tall" ships can have a pleasing aesthetic, they aren't practical for a game that's a simulator. Many of the vertical ships suggested originate from works of science fantasy, and not science fiction.

Star Wars is science fantasy. It's like sci-fi but requires an additional element regarding the suspension of disbelief. In Star Wars they never try to explain how any of the tech gadgets work in any detail. They aren't worried about attitude thrusters or positioning thrusters or things like that. The ships just have engines and they fly.

Star Trek, for example, is science fiction. They utilize ideas and technology that have roots in reality and, in many cases, are theoretically possible. They do in some cases explain a theory behind their technology.

Elite is a sci-fi simulator, hence the ideas therein try to stick to plausible mechanics. So if anything, maybe we could take a page from that school of ship design and get some round/flat ships.

I would totally fly around in a saucer...just sayin.

 

[bummer6]

While "tall" ships can have a pleasing aesthetic, they aren't practical for a game that's a simulator. Many of the vertical ships suggested originate from works of science fantasy, and not science fiction.

Star Wars is science fantasy. It's like sci-fi but requires an additional element regarding the suspension of disbelief. In Star Wars they never try to explain how any of the tech gadgets work in any detail. They aren't worried about attitude thrusters or positioning thrusters or things like that. The ships just have engines and they fly.

Star Trek, for example, is science fiction. They utilize ideas and technology that have roots in reality and, in many cases, are theoretically possible. They do in some cases explain a theory behind their technology.

Elite is a sci-fi simulator, hence the ideas therein try to stick to plausible mechanics. So if anything, maybe we could take a page from that school of ship design and get some round/flat ships.

I would totally fly around in a saucer...just sayin.

Star Wars not trying to explain how things work in detail? Are you insane? Do you have ANY idea how many super-detailed blueprints of the X-wing exists? The one fantasy element of Star Wars is the force, which has nothing to do with the design of the spaceships.

And no, Star Trek isn't the slightest bit more realistic than Star Wars when it comes to design. Nevertheless, atleast the enterprise has a three-dimensional design that is recognizable from all angles, even if it is butt ugly, so you only proved my point further.

now, let me type this in all-caps to make sure all of you understand it this time, even though I've said it before...

A MORE THREE-DIMENSIONAL DESIGN DOES NOT NECCESSARILY MEAN SOMETHING AS EXTREME AS A B-WING, BUT RATHER ANYTHING THAT HAS A STRONG SILHOUETTE FROM ALL ANGLES, NOT JUST THE TOP.

There, hopefully people will READ IT this time.

 

[Wavey]

I started to get interested in your post bummer but shouting ie *in caps* is what kids do for attention and so i will ignore everything you have said .

 

[Asp Explorer]

what is important to remember that design must follow function.

I'd love beautiful pyramidal engine pistons and octagonal wheels on a bike - I am sure some flash designer could make it look lovely!

Unfortunately, engineers have a rather harsh ruler called Physics. No designer has ever faced him and lived

 

[Zenicetus]

I would totally fly around in a saucer...just sayin.

I would too! Especially if it looked like the Starship C-57D from Forbidden planet.

It would even fit the station slot and landing pads.

On the other hand, FD seems to be basing their designs on the original Elite/Frontier ships, and I don't think any of them were saucers. Well, maybe the Thargoids were saucer ships...