Coriolis Station Physics

[Susimetsa]

only thing actually missing is the corresponding thrusters automatically firing on the ship. Basically a small (yet important for immersion) cosmetic change could alleviate this issue.

Indeed, and this is a cosmetic change that I requested all the way back when the docking design was first discussed on these forums. One of the devs was taking part in that conversation as well, but they never committed to saying whether the thruster action would be there or not.

I'd still hope to see it in the final product.

 

[NeilF]

Centripetal acceleration at the outside edge is therefore 0.315 G. Nowhere near enough for the 1G we're after - though it would be quite usable.

Would sound about perfect. Enough to be useful (keep things in place etc), but low enough so mass is reduced.

If you think of it as twice of the force when on the moon, it's more than sufficient

 

[Pyros]

Would sound about perfect. Enough to be useful (keep things in place etc), but low enough so mass is reduced.

If you think of it as twice of the force when on the moon, it's more than sufficient

AFAIK it was later determined (in the thread) that the station is indeed bigger and also rotates slower than Drew initially thought. Current estimates point to sub 1G outer edge, but not by much. 0.1G-0.2G or so on landing pad.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

K.

 

[Captain N]

I think the thruster firing effects actually might be there, but the thing is both the "gravity" and the coriolis effect are so small you don't really need huge thrust to counter them. So it may be pretty hard to notice. The thruster plumes are not that prominent even when assisting turns, and that's a much bigger force you need to apply.

 

[NeilF]

K.

LOL!

RE: Second position - Tht is of course assuming the interior floors aren't simply angled at 90 degree to spin

 

[Captain N]

Yes, a magic toggle. How exactly does that happen? Nothing that is seen in the videos suggests that the station is turning according to normal physics for those on the inside.

Okay if you need video proof, here's me docking and undocking without flight assist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6roNa2MbmI

The Coriolis effect is the most visible at about 1:55 where I'm moving away from the pad vertically, which causes me to move at a curved path relative to the station front wall.

You can also see the centripetal force simulate gravitational pull towards the pad during the landing, which forces me to play a little bit of Virus to get into the correct position.

 

[NeilF]

Okay if you need video proof, here's me docking and undocking without flight assist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6roNa2MbmI

The Coriolis effect is the most visible at about 1:55 where I'm moving away from the pad vertically, which causes me to move at a curved path relative to the station front wall.

Beautiful demonstration! So the station is rotating clockwise, so you have a lateral vector. As soon as you lift off and go up, that lateral (left) vector is enough to make you head/veer left in relation to the (rotating) station!

Nice!

 

[PacalB]

I've just worked out, because I could, the internal centripetal G of the Coriolis station and the station isn't rotating fast enough, or it's much bigger than previous estimates.

I assumed that the station was 1km in diameter, as per the original Elite manual.

One complete rotation takes about 80 seconds, about 4.5 degrees s-1

That gives:

Radius (R) = 500 metres
Angular Velocity (Ὠ) = 4.5 degrees s-1

Centripetal acceleration at the outside edge is therefore 0.315 G. Nowhere near enough for the 1G we're after - though it would be quite usable.

To achieve 1G at the outside edge, the Coriolis needs to be significantly larger at the current spin rate.

I've calculated it as follows.

Desired Centripetal Acceleration = 1G
Angular velocity (Ὠ) = 4.5 degrees s-1

Radius (R) = 1590 m

Thus, if the Coriolis is producing 1G at the outside edge, it's over 3km in diameter.

If someone could time the rotation more precisely I can give a more accurate figure.

It would also be interesting to see if people can estimate the size by some cooperative triangulation in the multiplayer, if you can put away your guns for a few moments...

Cheers,

Drew.

Drew, first I think we have a size, scaling issue here. Example: Big Ben's tower is 96.3m (316 ft)

Compared to say the Kingdom Tower 1,000 m (3,281 ft) being built in Jeddah:

There is absolutely no way the size of the coriolis station in alpha 3 is scaled at 1km, it looks to be half that or less.

...

Keep in mind the scale of those ships, then look at this image and scale across from left to right to a 500m building. It's noway even that big let alone 1km. No, we have a massive scale issue to deal with first before we can start guessing at rotational speeds.

 

[Susimetsa]

Okay if you need video proof, here's me docking and undocking without flight assist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6roNa2MbmI

Very smooth!

What sort of controllers do you use?

 

[Captain N]

Drew, first I think we have a size, scaling issue here. Example: Big Ben's tower is 96.3m (316 ft)

Um, what are you talking about? 96.3 is almost one tenth of the Kingdom Tower's height.

You can clearly see from the station exterior pic that the docking port is about one tenth of the station's width (or less).

Ingame, you can easily fit several Sidewinders side by side inside the slot.

There's no scale issue that I can see.

Very smooth!

What sort of controllers do you use?

CH Products Fighterstick, CH Pro Pedals, keyboard.

 

[Slythe]

...It's noway even that big let alone 1km. No, we have a massive scale issue to deal with first before we can start guessing at rotational speeds.

I suggest you catch up with the rest of this thread! The station has been measured at between 2.8-3km long, giving a largest dimension, diagonally between two corners, of at least 4km.

 

[PacalB]

I suggest you catch up with the rest of this thread! The station has been measured at between 2.8-3km long, giving a largest dimension, diagonally between two corners, of at least 4km.

Just done that, now thats more like it, thanks Slythe.

 

[Slawkenbergius]

I got my space-ruler out, and this might be completely wrong, but I measured one edge of the square front of the Coriolis to be roughly 2.5km. That makes the diagonal of the square around 3.5km, and furthest two points apart around 5km distant.

My methodology was a bit convoluted though. I basically took a screenshot of the Impeccable from 4km so that I could use it as a measurement of length (the spec sheet says 2km). Then I took a screenshot of Port Zelada from 4km, and essentially measured the capship against it to work out the 2.5km.

For figuring out the rest, handily I already had the co-ordinates for the original Coriolis model [taken from Ian Bell's website] plugged into Blender. All I had to do was look at a few edge lengths to work out the ratios.

 

[NeilF]

Ummm... If you know the velocity of your ship (eg: 250m/s) can't you just fly along its length/width to approximate its size?

 

[Slythe]

)

POOT!!! Looking at this image shows that my assumption that the hatch was recessed into the face of station was completely wrong. Instead it shows that the circular features all extend out from the face, and the hatch itself is pretty much level with the square face. This means that my measurements of the hatch are all out...


Oh well, back to the drawing board.

EDIT:
This shows my basic working:


Zoomed in and cropped:


Taking measurements from this, assuming the hatch is more or less level with the square face, suggests that the hatch is about 8.7% of the width of the station; 240-260m wide & 60-65m high (if 2800-3000m long is correct for the entire station).

It also suggests that the internal hangar is about 24.3% of the width of the station, so about 680-730m.

 

[NeilF]

POOT!!! Looking at this image shows that my assumption that the hatch was recessed into the face of station was completely wrong. Instead it shows that the circular features all extend out from the face, and the hatch itself is pretty much level with the square face. This means that my measurements of the hatch are all out...


Oh well, back to the drawing board.

What's wrong with my suggestion? Velocity is known, so just fly along the length/width and time it?

If/when doing the rotating front face, just measure center to edge/corner and double.

Done!

 

[Slythe]

What's wrong with my suggestion? Velocity is known, so just fly along the length/width and time it?

If/when doing the rotating front face, just measure center to edge/corner and double.

Done!

Sounds good, get back when you've done it and got an accurate measurement!

 

[Pyros]

What's wrong with my suggestion? Velocity is known, so just fly along the length/width and time it?

If/when doing the rotating front face, just measure center to edge/corner and double.

Done!

well as the station itself is moving at an unknown speed it may be more difficult said than done. But one could always go along an stationary axis,,,

 

[NeilF]

well as the station itself is moving at an unknown speed it may be more difficult said than done. But one could always go along an stationary axis,,,

Exactly... Just fly:-
a) Along it and time it.
b) Fly across the rotating face and time the distance from edge/corner to middle (& double). Might take a couple of attempts.

I don't have the Alpha so I can't do this

But it should give a good approximation of the dimensions to tens of meters?


ps: I don't think it's movement is an issue. eg: Reduce speed to 0m/s, is the station moving away? Don't believe so?