Fed Dropship Mk 2, really FD???

[Apos]

Python productions tarted in 2700 so it's 601 years old. That said, Faulcon DeLacy may be onto something with that whole "put no money into R&D, dig up some museum piece and call it this year's model" strategy considering the a ship that's 600 years old solidly outperforms a military grade transport (Fed Dropship) built by the most technologically advanced human civilization currently existing. Core Dynamics, a megacorporation which has been doing R&D by advanced super-intelligent AIs and manufacturing ships free of any human mental or physical constraints for nearly a thousand years can't build ships better than some backwater shipyard slapping salvaged parts together 600 years before.

This is the equivalent of a C-130 gunship losing a fight to the ancient chinese gunpowder rocket chair.

True, which is why I'm looking forward to more ships and ship variants getting introduced. The corvette should push the anaconda back in sales for sure. If a ship manages to surpass the python as well, then DeLacy is toasted. Which is what I'm waiting for, unless someone works towards their miraculous save.

The anaconda and python being so old yet so good might indeed be a mistake, but it's there already. Faulcon has repeatedly relied on buying their competition out, so it makes little sense for them to design a ship after so many years of devotion to that tactic. They will either buy their way into wealth once again or fail to do so and meet their demise.

 

[Darkphoenix]

The main reason the Fed Dropship is not really popular is it is designed for a role that doesn't exist *cough* Orca *cough*....I don't see a Mk II Fed Dropship being any more popular unless they implement the role that it and ship(s) like it were originally conceived for

 

[Faybs]

Python productions tarted in 2700 so it's 601 years old. That said, Faulcon DeLacy may be onto something with that whole "put no money into R&D, dig up some museum piece and call it this year's model" strategy considering the a ship that's 600 years old solidly outperforms a military grade transport (Fed Dropship) built by the most technologically advanced human civilization currently existing. Core Dynamics, a megacorporation which has been doing R&D by advanced super-intelligent AIs and manufacturing ships free of any human mental or physical constraints for nearly a thousand years can't build ships better than some backwater shipyard slapping salvaged parts together 600 years before.

This is the equivalent of a C-130 gunship losing a fight to the ancient chinese gunpowder rocket chair.

Believe it or not, there is some IRL precedent for this. The world's best heavy-lift rocket engine is the soviet-made RD-170. It was first made in the 1950s, and 50 years later nether NASA, ESA or JAXA (arguably the most technologically advanced enterprises on earth) have figured out how to improve on the design. It's a problem, because the 50yo old engines are starting to fail due to age and no-one has figured out the metallurgy to make new ones. Energomash is for obvious reasons not telling anyone their secret

 

[Apos]

Which could be used to explain why they just upgraded their old model by sticking bigger shields, weapons and powerplant in the old hull (with a few additional fins or spoilers to make it look 'new') instead of designing something from scratch.

If you are willing to have a jump range of 5 LY and awful turn-rate from what you are describing, then by all means go ahead, but don't complain about it afterwards. I would expect DeLacy to try something greedy like that, but you understand that it wouldn't be exactly what you expect and it would indeed have to carry the downsides of such a rip-off with it. All of what you mentioned has a weight value associated with it.

 

[Apos]

Believe it or not, there is some IRL precedent for this. The world's best heavy-lift rocket engine is the soviet-made RD-170. It was first made in the 1950s, and 50 years later nether NASA, ESA or JAXA (arguably the most technologically advanced enterprises on earth) have figured out how to improve on the design. It's a problem, because the 50yo old engines are starting to fail due to age and no-one has figured out the metallurgy to make new ones. Energomash is for obvious reasons not telling anyone their secret

I'm glad I got to learn something new today.

That gives even more reason why Faulcon DeLacy might be feeling a bit too safe on their current assets, having no plans to design anything new under the illusion that they will always have the market by the balls. It also makes it less weird why some so old-designs still dominate the market.

 

[Seon]

Believe it or not, there is some IRL precedent for this. The world's best heavy-lift rocket engine is the soviet-made RD-170. It was first made in the 1950s, and 50 years later nether NASA, ESA or JAXA (arguably the most technologically advanced enterprises on earth) have figured out how to improve on the design. It's a problem, because the 50yo old engines are starting to fail due to age and no-one has figured out the metallurgy to make new ones. Energomash is for obvious reasons not telling anyone their secret

Yes, but that's 50 years. we actually had jet planes and most trappings of modern civilization back then.

600 years ago, we were still killing each other with unrifled muskets and pikes.

 

[Trafalgar Law]

If you are willing to have a jump range of 5 LY and awful turn-rate from what you are describing, then by all means go ahead, but don't complain about it afterwards. I would expect DeLacy to try something greedy like that, but you understand that it wouldn't be exactly what you expect and it would indeed have to carry the downsides of such a rip-off with it. All of what you mentioned has a weight value associated with it.

Then stick a bigger fsd in it as well. I get that you don't like the idea but that comment really is grasping at straws.

 

[Apos]

Then stick a bigger fsd in it as well. I get that you don't like the idea but that comment really is grasping at straws.

That won't fix its awful turn-rate at this point either. Are you going to put on some bigger thrusters as well?

Is there any hull left at this point?

Size isn't a matter of straws. You can't have a truck's engine inside a Hugo.

Or at least you can't expect it to look fancy enough in order to sell it as an upgrade. Because I'm sure there's at least some crazy person who has done just that.

The cobra is full of Class 4 everything and Class 3 distributor. Do you know what a Class 5 everything with Class 4 distributor is called? An ASP.

So what you want already exists in-game and on the right size required to facilitate those as well.

Edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4bEQlVvUvI

Just in case you haven't bothered pondering on size yet.

 

[Trafalgar Law]

Snip.

Ok lets have a look at this. Lets say we increase the size of the main guns from 2 to 3, we'll leave the c1's as is (needs to be different from the Clipper), that's an increase of 8 tonnes, we'll increase the powerplant from 4 to 5 which with A rated ones will be an extra 5 tonnes. Shield values have nothing to do with the size of the generator so we'll just up the base value, keeping it lower than the Vulture or Courier though, (yes I know it's stupid but that's the way they designed it) and leave it with at least one c4 internal. The ship could probably cope with the existing c3 distributor (it needs some drawbacks), but even a c4 would be just 5 tonnes more with an A rated one. To compensate for the extra space needed for the new stuff, we'll scarifice one size4 and one size2 internal. That's only an extra 13-18 tonnes over the current ship's weight, the bigger fsd wouldn't even be needed and would give the ship a stupidly amazing jump range. Bigger thrusters could be added of course which would be another 10 tonnes in weight and the ship would look cool with massively oversized engines sticking out its derriere but they wouldn't really be needed and would probably make the ship too good.

Edit: It would be slower and probably slightly less manoeuvrable than the Mk III, but I think that would be an acceptable trade off for better weapons and shields.

 

[Apos]

Ok lets have a look at this. Lets say we increase the size of the main guns from 2 to 3, we'll leave the c1's as is (needs to be different from the Clipper), that's an increase of 8 tonnes, we'll increase the powerplant from 4 to 5 which with A rated ones will be an extra 5 tonnes. Shield values have nothing to do with the size of the generator so we'll just up the base value (yes I know it's stupid but that's the way they designed it) and leave it with at least one c4 internal. The ship could probably cope with the existing c3 distributor (it needs some drawbacks), but even a c4 would be just 5 tonnes more with an A rated one. To compensate for the extra space needed for the new stuff, we'll scarifice one size4 and one size2 internal. That's only an extra 13-18 tonnes over the current ship's weight, the bigger fsd wouldn't even be needed and would give the ship a stupidly amazing jump range. Bigger thrusters could be added of course which would be another 10 tonnes in weight and the ship would look cool with massively oversized engines sticking out its derriere but they wouldn't really be needed and would probably make the ship too good.

Once again, you are dealing not only with weight, but also with size.

From the cobra's sleek design, chances are that all of its modules occupy space from bottom to top side. It might have the power to carry a higher class power plant, but it doesn't have the size. Taking a look at similar size ships like the viper, the adder, the diamondback scout,diamondback explorer and the eagle, we can see that none of them go above class 4. Something that the ASP does by being considerably bulkier in all 3 dimensions. So height is totally a factor in this and most likely some other modules as well.

And that's the power plant alone, we are talking about like 3 modules here.

Ships in elite, thankfully in my opinion, take many more factors in account when designed and not just making something cooler. Similarly, this is why you will see that the MK II version of the FDS won't have improvements without considerable sacrifices and it will not be improved on parts that are already on their maximum for its bulk.

The T7 could facilitate a class 5 power reactor on its current bulk. The cobra can't without a complete redesign and overall increase in size. At which point it won't be a cobra anymore.

What sounds possible, though, is going from 2 small/2 medium to 4 medium by sacrificing the smaller modules space and cluttering the weapons closer together. That seems perfectly fine in terms of size. And it should find itself balanced out by its own power distributor in this scenario.Although the diamondback explore shows that the cobra might be able to hold a class 4 distributor in there somewhere with some further sacrifices.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

This is exactly why the 30 ship limit is officially out the window, and good riddance! So no need to sweat it, variants mean there will be more than 30 ships. In fact, most likely considerably more.

The 30 ship number though still is relevant, and i might be putting the cat amongst the pidgeons here... but presume people do remember backers should be getting "free access" to one of the ships between 25 and 30...

 

[Apos]

The 30 ship number though still is relevant, and i might be putting the cat amongst the pidgeons here... but presume people do remember backers should be getting "free access" to one of the ships between 25 and 30...

Here comes an imperial eagle to park next to your initial free eagle.

 

[Trafalgar Law]

@ Apos.

You do realise that the Python is smaller in height that an Asp and yet has a size 7 reactor. I really don't think that size argument holds water especially as you're assuming that the reactor is going to be too big (it's only 5 tonnes heavier) and that there is only one design and size for a c5 reactor. Without knowing the possible dimensions for the different reactors (besides surely you could slave two smaller reactors together to get a similar power output? A 3A plus a 2A would actually give you more power for less weight!) the argument is basically moot.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

I love the Dropship, I am looking forward to rebuy it. It is weak in general, yes, but yoooo if piloted correctly, this can be a deadly ship. Mk2 you say? Yes please!

 

[Apos]

@ Apos.

You do realise that the Python is smaller in height that an Asp and yet has a size 7 reactor. I really don't think that size argument holds water especially as you're assuming that the reactor is going to be too big (it's only 5 tonnes heavier) and that there is only one design and size for a c5 reactor. Without knowing the possible dimensions for the different reactors (besides surely you could slave two smaller reactors together to get a similar power output? A 3A plus a 2A would actually give you more power for less weight!) the argument is basically moot.

What part of 3 dimensions wasn't made clear enough? Yes, it's less tall. It's also much wider. Just place it horizontally instead. The cobra is neither.

You can't straight up upgrade a ship without adhering to the same principles that all ships follow, the cobra simply doesn't have the size for that. If you increase the size considerably, it's not a cobra anymore. Sacrifice what you can, fine, but don't overload it.

And the python has been a continuous sort of debate that it's dimensions just miiiight be a tad off. We don't need a second source of such a debate. We've already seen what that leads to before the python nerfs. Trying to use the oddity as an argument which doesn't represent the rule isn't very honest. All small ships in the game have Class 3 or Class 4. Medium-ships have Class 5 and Class 6 is when you enter the big-boys alley. Even the python is classified as a big-boy and indeed does have the benefits of one like damage reduction, unlike the ASP. So the problem here is that it should be made bigger for what it has.(not in stats, weight is fine, just the skeleton itself should get some height going, just enough to still allow it to land on outposts but not THIS sleek) This is not proof that it can be done, it's just a mistake that should be corrected.

FD has done a great job making the ships and keeping their modules within some rules that make them feel that much more believable. Sure, breaking those rules might sound fancy and wonderful for the ship you like, but they are there for a reason. No ship within cobra's alley of size supports a class 5 PP, there's a reason for that. Deal with what you have, aka weapon placement, but don't expect to overload it "just 'cause".

 

[Trafalgar Law]

Once again you're jumping to conclusions that you have no evidence for, the Cobra is a pretty wide ship with plenty of cargo bays, seems like plenty of room for a bigger reactor in my opinion. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Personally nothing you've said convinces me that it won't fit as the only measurement we have is weight and I can't see you being convinced that it will fit either.

 

[Apos]

I already gave you a video that shows how big the cobra actually is, so in fact I did provide evidence. You're just dismissing it because you want to bend the rules like a video game indeed allows you since it's just numbers in the end of the day.

All the ships that have a class 5,aka asp, FDL, vulture are considerably bigger in all aspects than it and no ships within cobra's overall size can go above class 4.

So no, weight is not the only measurement we have when size is clearly taken into account when it comes to ship creation. Otherwise the courrier would have a class 5 indeed, since there was some clear bias to it when taking in account its shield base value. Yet, even that bias wasn't enough to uplift it to a class 5 PP or class 4 PD.

Speaking of which, the courrier is practically the cobra mk4 you are envisioning. without having to resort to higher classes of modules. Just go ahead and try it and see for yourself. Your suggestion of a cobra would obviously lose speed so it's exactly what you are asking for.

 

[Trafalgar Law]

You're video doesn't show any evidence as to the size of the powerplants does it? I am well aware of the height of the various ships, which is where I got the fact that the Python is shorter in height than the Asp from yet has a two grade higher powerplant. The Courier is an excellent little ship, one of my favourites, but it isn't a hypothetical upgraded version of the Cobra. Without the actual dimensions of a c5 powerplant (and assuming that there is only one possible size and shape for such a reactor) this entire argument is completely pointless. Feel free to disagree I won't be responding again.
.
Edit: If you want some real world facts the K48 reactor on the French Rubis class submarines generate 48mw of power (an 8A only generates 36mw) and fits in a boat with only a 6.4m draught. Reactors just aren't that big in real life. So much for realism.

 

[Axelsson]

FD just proves that it doesn't play the game themselves. There is no point in adding Dropship Mk2 without military dropship missions. King Cobra, Asp Mk2 and Python Mk2 would have made more sense.

 

[Stealth Gamer92]

FD just proves that it doesn't play the game themselves. There is no point in adding Dropship Mk2 without military dropship missions. King Cobra, Asp Mk2 and Python Mk2 would have made more sense.

From what I read the FDS Mk. II looks like it will not be a Transport foccused version though, more like a heavy weapons platform.