is atmospheric landing even possible with either of the 38 playable ships???

[govny]

I am by no mean an aerospace engineer but after reading NASA's articles on their space shuttle , in particular the STS-120, I learned that it was built like a spaceplane.
What that means is, it can orbit Earth like a spaceship but when entering the Earth atmosphere, it glides down using its wings , taking advantage of basic aerodynamics.

NASA have a problem tha ED doesn't have.
When a NASA spaceship re-enter earth they are without any fuel reamining so they have to use aerodynamics to slow down.
In ED ships have thrusters that are active even during re-entry so they don't need aerodynamic at all to slow down. The thrusters do the job.

 

[Ezren]

It's pretty ridiculous to compare ED's ships to a space shuttle just on the base idea that a space shuttle can't just hover in place and perform VTOL.

 

[4ndr34]

What is "fantasy space" as compared to Sci -Fi ?

Sci-fi is something that in RL, right now is technologically not possibile, because we have no idea how to build that tech, but in theory it doesn't violate the physics rules or at least is strictly coherent with its own physics rules, and these physics rules aren't stated impossible to exist in a different reality.

Fantasy is, instead, something that it is already stated impossible also in theory that it violates its own physics rules, like magic, indeed, fantasy genre is usually associated to the use of magic, but actually it isn't just the use of magic, in general, as an example, the use of any deus-ex machina is fantasy, even in a futuristic setting, read it as quite infinite thrust/weight, read it as unmetered fuel consumption to gain that thrust/weight ratio and so on...

Just as a loose reference: https://www.nownovel.com/blog/difference-fantasy-science-fiction/

EDIT: It's pretty easy to note that is by far much harder to write a true Sci-fi space simulator instead of an ostensible Sci-fi but actually Fantasy one. Worse I am pretty confident that a true Sci-fi space simulator means a much more niche player base in comparison with a Fantasy one...

 

[[PS4 Pro - PC] earthtone99]

Sort of ELITE related, I’m looking at design similarities and seeing how a fantastical idea could be employed for atmospheric planet entry/space flight.

Space wise, the StarFury is still the best design for a star fighter. NASA actually looked into using the design as some kind of loader.

There’s a bomber variant that was used in atmospheric B5 settings, but wouldn’t the atmosphere rip the 4x wing struts off?!....... So a Chieftan for instance, would the wing struts rip off of those on atmospheric planetary entry?!....

What we fly in ELITE is very similar to the StarFury with the multi directional boosters fitted to our ships. Hats off to the B5 concept artist and design team.

o7

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

Sci-fi is something that in RL, right now is technologically not possibile, because we have no idea how to build that tech, but in theory it doesn't violate the physics rules or at least is strictly coherent with its own physics rules, and these physics rules aren't stated impossible to exist in a different reality.

Fantasy is, instead, something that it is already stated impossible also in theory that it violates its own physics rules, like magic, indeed, fantasy genre is usually associated to the use of magic, but actually it isn't just the use of magic, in general, as an example, the use of any deus-ex machina is fantasy, even in a futuristic setting, read it as quite infinite thrust/weight, read it as unmetered fuel consumption to gain that thrust/weight ratio and so on...

Just as a loose reference: https://www.nownovel.com/blog/difference-fantasy-science-fiction/

EDIT: It's pretty easy to note that is by far much harder to write a true Sci-fi space simulator instead of an ostensible Sci-fi but actually Fantasy one. Worse I am pretty confident that a true Sci-fi space simulator means a much thin playerbase...

Odd what you are saying, as most space sci-fis I've seen do not even attempt to get close to reality. I like Elite's lore exactly because it crosses the fantasy line only when necessary for gameplay, or to create background for something that is essential.

 

[Old Duck]

OP is confused (ships require LESS vertical thrust in atmosphere than they do in a vacuum thanks to buoyancy), but there is the point about drag to be made. I bought KSP on sale but have yet to play it. Does this take drag and friction into account, and also, does it let you build flying bricks? In other words, could you build a Type-7 in KSP and see if that thing will actually fly (including reentry) in an atmosphere without stalling or burning up?

If it can be done (make a KSP T7), then I think I must do this myself someday - for science!

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

Harrier jump jets when transitioned to land generate no lift via aerodynamic surfaces but 100% thrusters-

This is another good example of pure thrust.

The whole topic of aerodynamic becomes interesting upon power failure

This can be tested already. Go on a planet and fly regularly. Then suddenly disable Flight Assist e put throttle to zero e touch nothing anymore (not even the yoke). I expect to see a ballistic trajectory. The higher the gravity the shorter the distance before hitting the ground.
If you can afford to destroy a ship you can directly disable the thrusters and see what happens.
Of course the behaviour inside an atmosphere should be different beucase of the drag and we should be able to see differences between the ships types.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

Right now, the The Viper III/IV along with the Cobra III/IV are the only ones of the 38 that can.

They are all "Lifting Bodies" and should be able to do atmospheric landings.

You can use this software and some 3D modeling of the Vipers and Cobra's. I played with this awhile back when I thought atmospheric landings were coming to Elite.

They provide sufficient lift to glide to the ground. Of course, none of the 38 ships have the appropriate landing gear and the engines and thrusters on board won't stop you from smacking the ground. No way to stop the glide.

From a purely realistic and aerodynamic point of view the Cobra would not surive to an atmospheric reentry.
The reentry happens at supersonic speed and to avoid that your ship is litterally disintegrated by the air pressure there is a very important requirements to be fulfilled that the cobra highly ignore: the complete fuselage/body needs to stay inside the mach cone at supersonic speed and the cobra is clearly too wide.
Not so sure about the Eagle because of the pylons installed on the edge of the wings (these should make at least the supersonic flight unstable) and the wing itself doesn't have a typical supersonic profile, it seems more a piece of strut to support the pilon rather than a wing.
The Hauler should make it instead.

 

[Sylow]

Any ship that would fly or glide requires Lift and Drag IS an issue.

It's called the "Lift to Drag" Coefficient.

The lift to drag ratio (L/D) is the amount of lift generated by a wing or airfoil compared to its drag. The lift/drag ratio is used to express the relation between lift and drag and is determined by dividing the lift coefficient by the drag coefficient, CL/CD. A ratio of L/D indicates airfoil efficiency.

I know it's hard to grasp.

What's the lift to drag ratio of this?

That thing has no wing or airofoil. Yet there are reliable reports that it managed to fly. The lift is completely created by the thrusters.

Similary, this guy actually managed to fly across the English Channel, without wings or aerofoils:

And that's basically the whole point here: our ships have virtually unlimited power and magical thrusters. As others said: put strong enough thrusters to a brick and it can fly, no need for any aerodynamics any more.

Would the thread be about which of our ships are capable of aerodynamic flight, you would be right: few of them are. But that's not the question here.

 

[777Driver]

This is another good example of pure thrust.

This can be tested already. Go on a planet and fly regularly. Then suddenly disable Flight Assist e put throttle to zero e touch nothing anymore (not even the yoke). I expect to see a ballistic trajectory..

That is what happens. If/When atmos appear, the less aerodynamic ships should decelerate a lot faster if thrust is set to idle.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Worse I am pretty confident that a true Sci-fi space simulator means a much more niche player base in comparison with a Fantasy one...

Traveller vs D&D.

 

[Morbad]

All ships have static thrust to weight ratio of beyond one (that planetary landing suite dynamically adds the ships weight to the thrust of the ventral thrusters), so staying aloft will be possible irrespective of atmosphere, or shape of the ship, at least if there is no wind.

I'd still expect to see some pretty extreme effects from the presence of atmosphere, that will depend on the shape and density of the ship (most are very lightly built and would rationally be subject to extreme turbulence, especially the less aerodynamic ones), as well as the density of the atmosphere, which can range from so tenuous that it may as well not be there, to pressures that will put a larger mass of 'air' in a given space on some planets than there could be a mass of solid rock in the same space on Earth.

Mars (before terraforming) was well under 0.01 atm. Earth is by definition 1. Venus is ~93. Once we reach ~800 atm, we're at greater density than water. Depending on what's opened up we may be able to bring our ships into places with vastly higher pressures, where even mild winds create aerodynamic forces that completely overwhelm the main thrusters of the fastest and most agile ships in the game...a Viper can have a boosting thrust to mass ratio in excess 40, but this could fall well short of the drag forces on a planet with a very thick atmosphere.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Anaconda volume is lighter than the air it displaces.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

If its okay for the Falcon, then its okay for your Krait.

View attachment 173691

Completely different setting and tech background. So basically apples and oranges.

 

[Northpin]

A ship's shields can be used to deflect the atmosphere in the same way a conventional wing does.

Basically this.
It could make shields mandatory for atmospheric planetary landings - no shields, no atmo landings.

 

[Guizin239]

thrusters

 

[Cmdr Nemo]

I am by no mean an aerospace engineer but after reading NASA's articles on their space shuttle , in particular the STS-120, I learned that it was built like a spaceplane.
What that means is, it can orbit Earth like a spaceship but when entering the Earth atmosphere, it glides down using its wings , taking advantage of basic aerodynamics.

Now, looking at some of the 38 playable ships we have today, some of them are literally a flying brick , (type 9, python, anaconda etc etc) , how on Earth are they going to land on an Earth like planet with a gravitational force of -9.41g and having no WINGS whatsoever?? the moment they enter an Earth-like planet atmosphere they will fall down like a bird high on cocaine.
Now I know this is year 3036 or whatever and technology is far more advanced but think about it, even today, when you try to land on a low gravity planet , you can feel the ship being pulled down so an Earth like planet with super high gravity AND atmosphere - there is no way those behemoths can safely land. Unless Frontier is cooking up some new guardian technology that upon entering an atmosphere, a set of wings come out and you can glide down like an airplane. I just hope it's not going to be as fake as No Man's Sky with like zero realism...

if there are any real aerospace engineers or real-life pilots here, feel free to comment. I am really curious what options they have in terms of allowing those monster ships to land on an Earth like planet and yet keep the game as realistic as possible.

cheers

I'm no aerospace engineer, but as a previous military pilot for 2 years and owner of my own 4 seat Cessna for 40 years. Without wings there is no lift. One needs lift either ascending or descending. Without lift, one can't get off the ground, and if so, would fall back like a rock. Thus most of ED ships if using anything close to actual physics; Would crash!

The shuttle doesn't depend on lift to go up, but without the wings in its design, it would not be able to glide back to Earth in any kind of controlled flight.

 

[Morbad]

I'm no aerospace engineer, but as a previous military pilot for 2 years and owner of my own 4 seat Cessna for 40 years. Without wings there is no lift. One needs lift either ascending or descending. Without lift, one can't get off the ground, and if so, would fall back like a rock. Thus most of ED ships if using anything close to actual physics; Would crash!

The shuttle doesn't depend on lift to go up, but without the wings in its design, it would not be able to glide back to Earth in any kind of controlled flight.

Ships in ED and the space shuttle during launch get lift from their rockets. There is no, or marginal, aerodynamic lift, bit that is not the only source of lift.

 

[4ndr34]

Odd what you are saying, as most space sci-fis I've seen do not even attempt to get close to reality. I like Elite's lore exactly because it crosses the fantasy line only when necessary for gameplay, or to create background for something that is essential.

Let me rephrase your statement: "...as most of space fantasy I've seen, that I've 'till right now thought be Sci-fi,..."

Anyway it's really easy to being fooled that a Fantasy is Sci-fi:
List of some Sci-fi examples:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martian_(film)
• Most of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Expanse_(TV_series)#Season_1 (mostly episodes and lore, not every episode and not all the lore)

List of some camouflaged Fantasy as Sci-fi:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_(film)
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_Horizon_(film)

List of some notorious Fantasy:

• Star Trek and everything related to it
• Star Wars and everything related to it
• Mostly every movie, novel and game sold as Sci-fi actually are Fantasy.

Don't misunderstand me, I love both Sci-fi and I love Fantasy, probably Fantasy more, but even my big love for Fantasy isn't able to fool me that I think that something that it is actually fantasy is instead Sci-fi.

 

[Riverside]

They most certainly will, some turbulence and nice graphics. It could have been so much more, with minimal changes.

They haven't done it yet, you never know