No atmospheric flight on the horizon

Mike Evans

Designer- Elite: Dangerous
Frontier
Iori said:
Considering how the Clipper struggles with vertical thrust already, I'm starting to worry.
Click to expand...

Ships will have their upwards thrust scaled up to a certain degree at the detriment of the other directions. The largest ships might be able to just about land or take off but only if they stay relatively level or build up considerable speed (lifting body effect). Smaller ships can easily fly upside down on anything but the heaviest worlds without suffering.
 

Iori

Iori
Mike Evans said:
Ships will have their upwards thrust scaled up to a certain degree at the detriment of the other directions. The largest ships might be able to just about land or take off but only if they stay relatively level or build up considerable speed (lifting body effect). Smaller ships can easily fly upside down on anything but the heaviest worlds without suffering.
Click to expand...

Is it possible that if the planet has high enough mass, some ships won't be able to land or take off at all?
 

Whiterose

Whiterose
Mike Evans said:
Ships will have their upwards thrust scaled up to a certain degree at the detriment of the other directions. The largest ships might be able to just about land or take off but only if they stay relatively level or build up considerable speed (lifting body effect). Smaller ships can easily fly upside down on anything but the heaviest worlds without suffering.
Click to expand...

This is what i am looking forward to the most. Getting a T9 / Condie up and down from a planet with >1g.
 

Tinman

Tinman
Mike Evans said:
I'm not sure right now.
Click to expand...

Let's help you then. :D

I think that some planets SHOULD be off limits for some ships for the very same reason outposts aren't available to some. To create variation and purpose when making ship choices. Ships aimed for exploration should obviously be able to land on pretty much everything though. ;)

Big ships could however in theory carry smaller ships in case you really wanted the big one but still the possibility to get down there. ;)
 

PiLhEaD

PiLhEaD
Tinman said:
...Will certain ships not be recommended for planetary landings due to their size and mass? I hope so since that would create even more reason for using/not using certain ships for different tasks.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Having smaller ships still purposeful is key to enjoyment for me. I'd like to see missions limited to small mass ships, esp smuggling and discreet missions.
 

Duckfather

Duckfather
Mike Evans said:
I'm not sure right now.
Click to expand...

I really hope so. Having larger ships be unable to land on really high G planets would add an extra layer of realism to everything. If all ships can land on all planets, then it would be a bit of a fudge from my point of view! Having said that, we would need some sort of warning from the onboard computer that gravity was too high for a particular ship before attempting to land. Otherwise, we'd just be committing suicide!
 
Last edited:

newman1702

newman1702
Wicz said:
The point in the quote was cooling the engine, not fuel? I've edited the quote to avoid confusion.

However, I was just pointing out that the Harrier is a very bad example for sustained "brute force" flight.
Click to expand...


It's a fine example since it's about 1000 years behind the technology levels of the current ships in-game. 1000 years ago we used horses and ships with oars and sails to get around. The Wright Brothers first took to the air in a fixed wing aircraft just over 100 years ago, yet 66 years after that we had people walking on the Moon. Using an already old plane such as the Harrier to argue the realism of 1000-year-in-the-future spaceship's VTOL capabilities simply doesn't track - if we can do it in a limited fashion now, one would expect we'll be able to have pretty large, lumbering spaceships VTOL-ing all over the place 1000 years into the future.. at the very least it's not that big of a stretch for a sci fi game.
 
Last edited:

Zak Gordon

Zak Gordon
askavir said:
The ships rely on constant thrust to keep airborne. Don't forget the Elite ships have thrusters on all axis, not just in the rear like airplanes. Airplanes need wings to sustain flight because they only have forward thrust.

But think of helicopters, and some fighter jets that can already takeoff and land vertically (because their jets can be turned downwards to provide vertical thrust. Its the same principle.

All ships in Elite have thrusters in all directions, and are totally capable of sustaining their "airborness".

.................

Now these jets can only point their thrusters in one direction at a time, Elite ships have thrusters in all directions, it will be a breeze for them to keep airborne without wings.
Click to expand...

Just this. In the future even giant bricks will be able to 'fly' in atmospheres.

What would be nice is if they make them handle differently, so maybe the more aerodynamic craft handle better in an atmosphere compared to the 'space bricks'. But yeah in general the OP's point does not really apply do to the use of sophisticated thrusters in the Elite ships, and remember we have been here before in two previous games, 'atmospheric shields' the only real requirement for atmospheric entry (without burnup).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom