Planetary navigation, debate.

lysan

lysan
So we know that we will receive book marks in 2.1, that is all nice and dandy but what about the navigation to the landing pads. Sure we do have the radar however it would be "nice" to have a system that gives you the best flight path. In a small ship this doesn't matter much, the problem only immerge when you are in a bigger ship. I assume that we will have larger ships than the Cutter later on?

Landing you space ship can be done in two way on planets, airplane style or helicopter style.
The landing pad can only be approached in one direction if you want a fast docking procedure.

To make it easy, and to make it easy for the docking computer, we would need some guide lines from the ATC (request docking).

1. Move the request docking for planets out to 10 km or more, instead of 7.5 km.
2. introduce landing patterns to the pad.

Landing patterns

These are basically just an virtual way created for just your craft, the moment you request to land, the ATC issue a path to the pad. Your HUD will display this similar to the orbital lines.

6-15.jpg

This will give you a path right down to the pad, for a full comfortable docking experience, and the docking computer could use it too.

image007.jpg

And we will be able to say this at last.

[video=youtube;fOZk--oZdQk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOZk--oZdQk[/video]
 

MagicTofu

M
Sounds nice, I personally could settle for a simple straight line extending from the pad's hologram to indicate an example approach path from the outside of the starport.
 

Zebaoth

Zebaoth
I always wondered why this wasn't a thing already.
It's 1000 years into the future and yet we need to eyeball our approach to the (hopefully) correct landing pad.
The blue allignment dot really doesn't suffice.
 

The_Quasar

T
Zebaoth said:
I always wondered why this wasn't a thing already.
It's 1000 years into the future and yet we need to eyeball our approach to the (hopefully) correct landing pad.
The blue allignment dot really doesn't suffice.
Click to expand...

Why? Why do we need something to make it almost automatic, when the current system is already so easy?
Imho, more help in landing would make it more boring.
 

Altair8800

A
Zebaoth said:
I always wondered why this wasn't a thing already.
It's 1000 years into the future and yet we need to eyeball our approach to the (hopefully) correct landing pad.
The blue allignment dot really doesn't suffice.
Click to expand...

It is called DC, no need to care about landing pads, how to approch them, ecetera.
 

HappySlayerUK

HappySlayerUK
The_Quasar said:
Why? Why do we need something to make it almost automatic, when the current system is already so easy?
Imho, more help in landing would make it more boring.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will make it more boring but more realistic. We currently have aircraft that display ILS approach onto a HUD. Surely in the future it would be the norm. At the moment ED has a (manual) landing system on a par with a Sopwith Camel. Of course like ILS if you don't want to use a guided system you could always turn it off (Much like the choice of using a docking computer or not).
 

777Driver

777Driver
The_Quasar said:
Why? Why do we need something to make it almost automatic, when the current system is already so easy?
Imho, more help in landing would make it more boring.
Click to expand...

if you call it boring then Fair enough, I am sure others would disagree. What we do at the moment is called raw data flying. Personally I see nothing wrong with tools to enhance precision.

@Lysander lysan - Nice ideas, especially about the docking clearance range, I am quite OCD when it comes to landing at ports on planets, would really like a longer request range so I can set up the approach a lot earlier.

Regarding Heads up landing guidance, I have a strong feeling that something similar will be implemented once atmospheric worlds rolls out, landing at surface ports with dense cloud cover/fog will require a more sophisticated guidance system,
 

The_Quasar

T
777Driver said:
if you call it boring then Fair enough, I am sure others would disagree. What we do at the moment is called raw data flying. Personally I see nothing wrong with tools to enhance precision.
Click to expand...

No, it's a downhill path, I tell you... culminating in setting a course via the galactic map, then pressing a button to go there, including landing. Resistance is futile, it's the year 3302!

Some things, imho, do not need to be automated!
 

777Driver

777Driver
The_Quasar said:
No, it's a downhill path, I tell you... culminating in setting a course via the galactic map, then pressing a button to go there, including landing. Resistance is futile, it's the year 3302!

Some things, imho, do not need to be automated!
Click to expand...

Well I disagree, My Piper Archer has more tech than these ships in elite dangerous. Besides, you seem to be confusing automation with guidance systems :/
 
Last edited:

lysan

lysan
MAIN SEQUENCE said:
Semi-related, have you seen this? https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=241252
Click to expand...

No didn't see that one, How could I miss that one?

OUTSTANDING work!

Yes we need this, however FD need to do it, not some genius from the community.

I see some say, why do we need it, it already here. Well what we have is kind of ok, however down the line it will not be enough, think large cities, think areas where you can't spot the landing pad like we can now. A better NAV system is needed, and they (FD) should already now start to think about it. We don't need it for now, the resources should be used to fix bugs and flesh out what we already got in the pipeline. But they need to design it now on a napkin. Or 3rd party apps will take over this task and then it will be too late to fixe it, or protest if the apps data mine the game to make this kind of over lay.
 
Last edited:

Khelder

Khelder
It would be interesting. I certainly understand current day aircraft having landing guidance since there generally would be limited options for an efficient, safe, approach. There are so many "styles" that cmdrs could choose for landing ships with our kind of maneuverability, though. You would have to make a very big assumption on technique.

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

MAIN SEQUENCE said:
Semi-related, have you seen this? https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=241252
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. :)

As a side point, I am going to look at having settlement layout renderings for the nav system. Provided someone had previously entered in the exact coordinates, format, and angle of the settlement, this could be used to help locate target bays easier.

Having said that, improved pad positioning indicators are something that I would prefer to see in the game itself. I probably wouldn't go as far as a guided flight path. But it would be nice to have some sort of positional awareness well before you are right on top of the pad.
 

VR jefranklin18

VR jefranklin18
I expect this to be more important when landing on planets with atmospheres is released and if they include weather patterns. When visibility is reduced I think the guiding tunnel will be useful for instrument-only landings.

That being said, if Frontier wanted to include them now, I wouldn't object. ILS systems always run irrespective of the weather, so I guess the same holds true for without an atmosphere. It could even be extended so that at a busy starport, if you deviate too much from it, you get a warning/fine.
 

lysan

lysan
777Driver said:
Well I disagree, My Piper Archer has more tech than these ships in elite dangerous. Besides, you seem to be confusing automation with guidance systems :/
Click to expand...

Nice plane [up] my Diamond DA42 Twin Star got it too, well I had to sell her as I moved to another country, but it was standard equipment.
 

lysan

lysan
777Driver said:
Oh so nice :) I am incredibly jealous!
Click to expand...

Well, you have an airplane I can only see them in the air by now LOL, so nothing to be jealous about. I some times want to return just so I can fly again :) however she was a beauty for sure.

Edit: But what I love about it was the JS controls, that was sooo luvly balanced, actually one of the reasons I picked THAT model. (2006)
 
Last edited:

The_Quasar

T
777Driver said:
Well I disagree, My Piper Archer has more tech than these ships in elite dangerous. Besides, you seem to be confusing automation with guidance systems :/
Click to expand...

I can't afford that sort of thing these days, but to give you the sort of thing I like, the last aircraft I flew was a Stampe... now that's my sort of flying! More or less nothing but the basics.

Would be good if there were options for optional extras, like there is for the docking computer (ALS), something I've never used. I enjoy flying, and I don't like anything that dumbs that down!
 

bamber

B
If you keep it in the blue angle you are at best approach angle to supercruise at
.
When you glide you glide between 30 and 45 degrees
.
When you land you follow the hologram or compass dot
.
Don't see whats hard and why you need a hologram display
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom