![[VR] Frank_G](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/59/59394.jpg?1553527111){kind=avatar}
I bet, we will see crewed turrets on larger ships in the future (just look behind you)... Or maybe we can get external mounted exploration cams and visual scanners for co-pilots... Plenty of opportunity to look in all kinda directions then.
Even my car has a rear view camera
- Thread starter Smotz
- Start date
Meanwhile fighter-jets, lorries, transport ships and aeroplanes don't have them
A toggle option for rear-viewscreen would be kinda sweet though
Last I checked, fighter jets and airplanes do not have a REVERSE. Good grief man, bad analogy. Also those things you mentioned all have people who guide them so as to avoid accidents. Like air tower control, or port authority to let them know the lanes to use, or approaches.
Learn to read the radar. Back mirror not needed. Breaks immersion. Unrealistic.
Same "logic" that you use. It's 3,300 and people are using "mirrors" for behind view?? You would thought pilots would be better and reading the radar was something a 6 year old kid could do!!
Same "logic" that you use. It's 3,300 and people are using "mirrors" for behind view?? You would thought pilots would be better and reading the radar was something a 6 year old kid could do!!
Who said you had to stop using the radar? Radar is useful in open areas where a signal can bounce back without conflict, visual checks are used in areas where radar is not useful. This does not break immersion, it enhances it. This is how it works IN THE REAL WORLD. The reality is that you and I paid full price for half a game. Standard options form any space or flight sim are glaringly missing in ED. The excuse of it breaking immersion is used.
Old Elite had this kind of cameras - no idea why we cant have the same ones now.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
How is mechanical tool equipped on your ship break immersion? I would really like you to respond to that.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
How is mechanical tool equipped on your ship break immersion? I would really like you to respond to that.
Last edited:
No, looking back would not be a view of the future, it would be dark because the photons, being pathetically restricted to the speed of light themselves as they are, wouldn't be able to catch up with your eyes or your camera.
While travelling faster than the speed of light a spaceship couldn't "look" forward either as space would be compressed with many more photon impacts as the craft would be catching up with the photons (think more raindrops hitting a car windscreen when driving forward compared to being stationary), which would create a growing field of light and other radiation - in otherwords before too long all you'd be able to see was "white".
Both of these are hypothetical of course, and with the current gameplay idea of folding time and space in front and shoving it behind in order to move forward, this would create a further complication as to what would be seen. Most likely nothing and I'm not about to waste the time of some seriously smart physicists to ask them what they could imagine the view would look like. But this is a game, it's sci-fi and the game needed to solve the tedium of flying from one distant system location to another.
I want a Bobblehead doll too!
It was in beta as a test for inconsequential(*) micro transaction payments and objects in game.
* FD have made it clear that any paid for extras will not improve a player's chances in the game. Good on them. Other than full expansions of course which can only directly affect gameplay, but that'll be a whole new issue to deal with when there is a game in place to expand.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Hahaha. That should be featured on some "appalling photoshopped images" website. Nice touch with the doiley and hanging decorative CD
However I notice that your bike has rear view mirrors on it. Does this make you feel less like you are riding a bike?
Last edited:
You would indeed see nothing. You'd also see nothing in front of you either.
Simple: no aircraft uses back mirror!! I would feel I'm flying a car, not a real space ship! Did any space shuttle had mirrors??? Even that camera they talk about, the fact is that a mirror is useful only when moving in a 2D environment, like cars. But not 3D. Is just a waste and not practical, IMHO.
Unlike the outside view, this would be used in combat. Another tool. I see more opposition from that side.
Quite honestly, I couldnt care less as I won't use it. But between the docking computer, the death penalty for loitering over a pad, the lack of traffic control, the lack of NPC's following green/red side, every element adds up to feel more like a kid's space ship and far from a more real spaceship "feel" that requires skill.
Thinking more about it, you know what I think would be more realistic?? A camera to look straight down for landing. Lol. I know. Call me crazy, but That, I see making sense in the ED universe.
Either way, we got bigger problems to tend to than views. i think that was taken care of satisfactorily with the debug can. At least for now.
Uhhh what? You sure? Here's a video taken from inside the cockpit of an F-18, where you can clearly see the three mirrors spaced around the cockpit. They are VERY common in aircraft and have been since world war one!
[video=youtube;VbLJXfB2oIs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbLJXfB2oIs[/video]
... and here's a pic looking back at the rear seat in an F-14, where you can clearly see the rear view mirror at the top of the frame.
Next time do a little research first.
Last edited:
Your radar tells you all of that when you select them.
Slopey
Volunteer Moderator
Hmmmm... actually, you'd visually check that there's nobody around before startup/taxi, and then you'd visually check that there's nobody on approach when you're about to enter the active runway - you don't check the nearby area before take-off - you're already on the runway, and you couldn't see what was behind and above you anyway (which has been the cause of high-wing/low-wing accidents previously). And it's not really for situational awareness in a broad sense (or in a ED dogfight sense) - it's to check you're not about to get hit by something, or hit someone.
Most aircraft do not have radar (if they do, it's not for aircraft anyway, but rather for weather). They have transponders, which can be interrogated by round stations. Combined with primary radar returns, or purely secondary in the transponders case, this lets someone else know where they are. The can see other transponding aircraft in the cockpit however on a TCAS display which will advise of action in case of a conflict. Non-commercial jets may not however have TCAS.
So aircraft don't use radar on the ground. Radar is ground based, and airport based ground radar (combined with transponders) is pretty good. Your comment about trusting radar close to the ground is irrelevant, as aircraft don't have radar.
You can't really use a real-world aviation analogy in this case, as it's not really accurate, or relevant.
Last edited:
For the same reasons that every military jet and most large civilian aircraft have cameras and mirrors... scanners don't tell you everything, and scanners need interpretation which takes precious seconds in combat whereas a mirror/camera is intuitive. It's the same reason they stopped using analogue gauges and went to digital ones, analogue ones need interpretation (is that need pointing at 5 or 6? That needle's moving right, is that good or bad?) while a digital readout is faster to comprehend (153kn means 153 knots, not 150 or 155). And simply because it's free, easy situational data when you need as much situational awareness as you can get, so why WOULDN'T you include it?