Pitch Roll and Acceleration for (nearly) Everyship.

[TuxedoSteve]

Haven't seen this thread before, nice! Essential reading for Buckyball Pilots everywhere (shhh, don't tell the others).

P.S. any chance we could get some deceleration figures in there too? (all I know is that I keep twatting the back wall of the station in my Asp but can usually get away with an overzealous entrance in the Cobra).

Deceleration values should just be the reverse thruster's acceleration values.

Hello !
Thank you for theses great mesures !
By the way, if I understand why mesures were done with optimal mass, can we have an idea of difference provided by better thrusters (like +2% or +20% ?), and an idea for each ship if available thruster improvement is significant or not.
(for example, corvette get better mesures than anaconda, but anaconda is way much lighter with same thrusters ... It wouldnt be fair to consider corvette is more agile due to better thrusters used)

For speed; This thread has the speed multiplier for different rated thrusters relative to thruster optimal mass, so multiply the speeds given in the OP's table by the speed modifier to find the speed the ship would manage at a specific mass (though http://coriolis.io/ can do it for you)
As for maneuverability, I'm not aware of any formula for calculating its change, testing in game always works though.

 

[Cliffson]

Hello !
Thank you for theses great mesures !
By the way, if I understand why mesures were done with optimal mass, can we have an idea of difference provided by better thrusters (like +2% or +20% ?), and an idea for each ship if available thruster improvement is significant or not.
(for example, corvette get better mesures than anaconda, but anaconda is way much lighter with same thrusters ... It wouldnt be fair to consider corvette is more agile due to better thrusters used)

Thanks.

in my other thread (linked in the first post) I go over the rough % in bands between 100-50% optimal mass. I also detail in there that the same ratios seems to apply to turn times. (I.e A rated thrusters at 50%Omass give a 1.16 multiplier to speed and a reduction in turn time of (time/1.16)
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=164931

I was going to put together a list of what ships could expect in an optimum combat fit but then went on a break from the game. Whether it is worth it or not is ultimately a matter of personal preference though. Also I'm not sure how many ships it applies to as aside from the Vulture I can't think of any ship powerstarved enough to not run A-rated thrusters along with a strong shield/weapon loadout.

 

[SushiCW]

Interestingly, some very specific numbers that Mike Evans was using for the Viper and FAS don't line up with the collected data:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=245258&p=3816324#post3816324

Not clear whether that's his mistake or yours!

 

[freedom4556]

This data is only ~1.5 seconds off Mike Evans for the FAS (remember OP is timing a 360 degree flip by hand). That lines up with stopwatch error. It's also noteworthy that the Viper Mk III is couple seconds slower than the FAS on pitch, just as Mike Evans suggested.

 

[Julio Montega]

Great stats, allthough i feel that the FGS has a higher upwards lat-thrust, than downwards,
it might be worthy to test the values in gravity environments, like planetside tests, aswell.

Also please add differences of pitch/yaw/roll and acceleration statistics with 0,1,2,3,4 pips to engines.

Great work, indeed!

 

[Derath]

Great data, now lets slag off all the ships that stick out!

 

[Karla]

Pretty much this. To expand on this: In order to keep something from looking at you, you need more than maneuverability. You need speed as well. The reason smaller ships are so effective against big ships is because once they get in close, they tend to stay there. If you find yourself head to head with a Conda at less than 800m, DON'T boost. You will overshoot and have to start all over again. I know it seems counter intuitive but put all pips to shields and go full throttle towards the Conda (or similar ship). Use your vertical thrusters to get above or below them, then an FA off pivot if need be to face their side or top. Keep using your vertical thrusters, this will force the Conda into a much wider turing arc, and it makes it's huge size a physical hindrance. Remember that with FA off not only do you turn "faster", but you can actually make much better use out of your lateral thrusters maximum potential. So just tap the button as needed. With this setup any ship with a couple of thermal weapons (or one beam if you must) and 2 C2 multi cannons will hammer a ship's power plant and bing you a quick and (once you get the hang of it) easy victory against such a ship. Mind you this is mostly for PvE. Though this works for PvP, you will have to adapt and change it up a bit more.

This is why I had trouble adapting to the FDL after flying the Vulture for so long. I would end up flying towards them too fast and would overshoot. I'm having better success now by using the lateral thrusters to always position myself behind them. I tried to avoid that in the beginning because I thought that I would end up too far away, but ironically I now compensate by increasing the speed.

So say the target is pitching up and I am behind them also pitching up, I used to laterally thrust up to keep them in my field of view. But now I often laterally thrust down instead to get directly behind them but increase my forward speed to make sure that I am not too far away. I'm still getting the hang of it but it means that I'm beginning to make the FDL's speed work for me, not against me.

 

[Cliffson]

Interestingly, some very specific numbers that Mike Evans was using for the Viper and FAS don't line up with the collected data:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=245258&p=3816324#post3816324

Not clear whether that's his mistake or yours!

It could be niether mistake. After all he says 'best' is'about' 4 secobds. Does this mean at 50% optimum mass and A rated, that'd shave 1.5ish seconds off.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Great stats, allthough i feel that the FGS has a higher upwards lat-thrust, than downwards,
it might be worthy to test the values in gravity environments, like planetside tests, aswell.

Also please add differences of pitch/yaw/roll and acceleration statistics with 0,1,2,3,4 pips to engines.

Great work, indeed!

Sure let me just set up a kickstarter to fund me taking a couple of weeks off work

Great data, now lets slag off all the ships that stick out!

I like your attitude!

 

[SushiCW]

It could be niether mistake. After all he says 'best' is'about' 4 secobds. Does this mean at 50% optimum mass and A rated, that'd shave 1.5ish seconds off.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Yeah he clarified later that he meant using optimal mass / A rated thrusters.

 

[Julio Montega]

Sure let me just set up a kickstarter to fund me taking a couple of weeks off work

How about trying to define a common testing method/testing grounds and ask around for people willing to forward
data as vidz?
Tried that some months ago with weapon testing,
maybe after the Beta more players will come to see the new shinies and are willing to sign up for testing?

 

[goemon]

It could be niether mistake. After all he says 'best' is'about' 4 secobds. Does this mean at 50% optimum mass and A rated, that'd shave 1.5ish seconds off.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



Sure let me just set up a kickstarter to fund me taking a couple of weeks off work



I like your attitude!

this thread is one of my most quoted, i highly appreciate your work!

doing BGS testing i have an idea, how much (gaming!-)time that is.

much appreciated!

 

[Poy]

And here I was naively thinking that a warship would handle better than a tanker.

Wrong apparently, the Cutter really IS the imperial T9, except at this point we should call the T9 the Lakon Cutter...

 

[Hydrino]

{Disclaimer: These figures are intended for comparison and reference only. There is no substitute for hours in the cockpit finding out what your ship can and can't do. Clever use of FA-off and thrusters can achieve greater agility}

Thanks to the BETA I've been able to finally get round to testing the remainder of the ships, and also retesting some of the previous ones.

Taking on board comments in my previous thread I have included Acceleration statistics for Lateral thrusters now to give a picture of overall agility for each ship.

As before all testing is performed at thruster Optimal mass and and with 4 pips to engines. (Note peak performance is achieved at 50% of optimum mass with A rated thrusters see links for more information)

Results:

	Top Speed	Boost	Pitch 0 (S)	Pitch 50 (S)	Pitch 100 (S)	Roll 0 (S)	Roll 50 (S)	Roll 100 (S)	Fwd 0-100 (S)	Accel Fwd (MS-2)	Lat 0-100 (S)	Accel Lat (MS-2)	Back 0-100 (S)	Accel Back (MS-2)	0PiP speed Ratio	Yaw 50
iCutter	200	320	25.1	20.12	30.4	10.1	8.06	9	4.89	30.56	16.94	6.05	10.41	10.1	0.800
F.Corvette	200	260	16.1	12.8	18.67	6.09	4.93	5.45	6.07	20.28	10.58	10.1	10.6	10.12	0.500
CONDA	180	240	18.03	14.49	18.75	7.59	6.04	6.85	10.6	19.83	10.6	9.9	10.55	10.54	0.445
PYTHON	230	300	31.1	12.4	39.4	5.17	4.08	6.71	4.06	28.72	6.68	15.7	6	17.92	0.610
FDL	260	350	23.7	9.7	21.4	5.81	4.63	7.54	3.55	30.05	5.27	20.92	4.2	24.42	0.845	29.7
ORCA	300	380	28.87	14.5	35.2	8.35	6.6	8.21	3.8	29.1	5.12	19.55	4.46	25.03	0.665
CLIPPER	300	380	22.54	9.5	19.62	5.68	4.49	7.45	4.81	25.13	10.33	9.9	5.6	20.17	0.600
FGS	170	280	18	14.4	23.55	5.65	4.52	5.11	5.3	25	10.71	10.45	6.53	18.45	0.590
FAS	210	350	11.85	9.52	14.788	4.99	4.04	4.48	4.64	40.05	7.54	15.63	6.1	20.41	0.710
FDS	180	300	15	12	16.3	5.7	4.39	4.94	5	30.28	10.59	10	6.09	20	0.555
ASP	250	340	23.73	9.73	23.97	4.41	3.4	5.83	4.78	22.98	7.12	15.06	7.03	15.43	0.480
Vulture	210	338*	17.28	8.66	16.45	4.25	3.36	4.2	3.4	42.03	5.54	20.8	4.08	30.81	0.905
Asp Scout	220	300	15.02	9.22	14.8	4.3	3.38	5.5	3.73	34.48	5.48	22.3	5.49	20.72	0.500
Keelback	200	297*	33.32	13.4	43.27	4.6	3.54	4.08	5.63	20	7.02	15.92	7.1	15.25	0.450
Courier	280	380	23.7	9.6	22.7	5.1	4.11	6.76	3.01	59.19	4.66	24.95	4.1	31.41	0.785
DBE	260	335*	25.91	10.46	32.4	5	4.08	6.71	3.56	33.12	5.4	20.8	4.57	25.51	0.615
Cobra M4	200	300	30.06	12.12	38.03	5.06	4.03	6.68	4.34	26.88	7.03	15.48	5.57	20.5	0.5	36
DBS	280	376*	21.5	8.73	20.67	4.68	3.66	6.05	3.38	39.12	4.59	26.7	4.03	33.27	0.605
Viper Mk4	270	340	30	12.1	29.3	5.23	4.12	6.75	3.08	53.4	4.6	23.1	3.95	31.3	0.650
Cobra	280	400	22.57	9.17	27.04	4.59	3.71	6.05	3.59	33.86	5.45	20.96	4.56	26.26	0.500
VIPER	320	400	25.77	10.42	24.8	5.14	4.31	6.74	3.06	53.06	4.57	25.53	4.1	32.07	0.625
iEagle	300	398*	20	9.14	25	4.59	3.68	4.26	3.59	37.38	4.43	28.83	4.29	28.63	0.700
EAGLE	240	348*	16.07	7.42	19.72	3.9	3.21	3.602	3.23	43.89	3.9	33.03	3.95	30.33	0.750
T9	130	200	22.57	18	27.7	20.19	18.24	22.65	6.14	18.56	10.6	10.1	10.55	10.52	0.31
T7	180	300	32.7	16.5	26.85	7.59	5.98	6.9	5.69	21.5	6.82	16.4	7.26	15.29	0.33
T6	220	348*	30.26	12.21	39.2	4.76	3.75	4.08	5.52	20	6.99	15.625	7.05	15.5	0.41

Boost* figures are the highest boost achieved in practice due to speed bleeding out. Other figures are where a hard limit was clearly hit on boosting.

Pitch and Roll figures are seconds to complete 360 deg, results are averaged over several repeats. 0,50,100 refers to throttle % applied.

Acceleration figures for each direction give the 0-100 time and the peak acceleration measured as the time taken to go from 50-150 (or 100-200 on the faster ships) this is to highlight the spooling time effect of drives on different ships.

For the effects of Thruster rating and Optimal mass tuning see my previous thread:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=164931

Or this thread here for a formula and graphical approach :

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=182057
(also source for most of the 0Pip figures, NB this ratio is 100% speed only, boost is unaffected and rotation is affected differently on each ship)

Enjoy!​

Maybe in 2.1 this can be updated with FD numbers.

But based on this (first time I've seen it) chart, the ship settings are borked. Cutters and Condas more or equally maneuverable as Cobra, Viper, Eagle is just insanely wrong. But it does seem to reflect some of my combat experiences where I can't stick to the tail of a big ship without constantly using boost and all pips to engines. It should be the other way around, big ship have to put all pips to engines while my fighter puts them all to weapons and fighter should still be more maneuverable.

 

[Cliffson]

How about trying to define a common testing method/testing grounds and ask around for people willing to forward
data as vidz?
Tried that some months ago with weapon testing,
maybe after the Beta more players will come to see the new shinies and are willing to sign up for testing?

Thats a good idea.

But i'd rather get paid to play elite.;-)

 

[tresch]

I really wish the Adder was on here

 

[Cliffson]

I really wish the Adder was on here

*Face Palm*

I'll make it so.