Ships that look like they should be in space

[Hellhawk666]

...
Regarding aerodynamics, all of these ships are designed to operate with force-shields, rather than hitting the atmosphere naked. The underlying hull design should inform the shape of those shields, but by no means precisely define them. If and when we get atmospheric entry in the game, it will be a very excellent thing if we see that (a) the shields are aerodynamically contoured, rather than the simple bubbles we see in combat and (b) ships which lose their shields in air combat suddenly plummet like bricks. Waiting for that shield to recharge would take on a whole new meaning...

What a great gameplay idea - shield management during atmospheric flight. This could be implemented together with navigation using something like the docking display to stay within a flight corridor. Stray too far and the shields start to deteriorate. Would be very interesting in conjunction with heat management and atmospheric combat!

In another thread someone mentioned that the ED ships rely far more on brute power than aerodynamic design to create lift - sounds reasonable to me.

- - - Updated - - -

...
I actually doubt this is a coincidence: SF artists of the era - Chris Foss, especially, judging by the look of his stuff - would often have used actual physical models to get the lighting right. Simple geometric shapes are the easiest things to render physically, as well as on a BBC Model B. I suspect Foss spent a lot of time looking at large buildings.

I'd not thought of that - have some rep

 

[Krovennan]

If we were solely interested in what's necessary for space travel. We'd basically be playing as the Borg. A literal brick can fly in space and it would still work, but it would be so boring to look at. I see this argument crop up all the time in every sci-fi game I've ever come across, even in games with an established lore to work off of or in a creative game where someone's personal creation gets lambasted for having frivolous styling.

Think of it like this. There's all these different shapes of cars. You could just make everything out of cubes and it would work as a car but that's boring. You turn your head to look at the Ferraris and BMWs, even if none of the fancy bodywork is "necessary" to the function of the car. Its the same with ships. There's actual spaceship companies in this game, like there are car companies. They are of course gonna style their ships just as they would cars because that's what gets people looking through the dealership windows or gets someone head turning down the street/docking bay thinking "Wow that thing looks awesome, I should save up and get that!"

So don't worry about not looking like it should be in space, because what looks like it should be in space is either boring to look at or looks like the International Space Station, and neither would look as good in a dogfight or supercruising around the furthest reaches of the galaxy.

 

[CMDR Holycow]

One thing that has gotten to me is many of the ships (besides the 6 and 9) look like they aren't made for flying in space but on a planet. I want elite to make more ships that has odd shapes, and doesn't look aerodynamic (it doesn't have to be since it's in space).

Not a single ship in this game, save for MAYBE the eagle... looks even REMOTELY CLOSE to being made for flying "on a planet"...

 

[nedeaalex]

Yup. It bothers me too that almost every ship is a wedge.

They will eventually land on planets in an expansion. Besides maybe they were launched from planets ?

- - - Updated - - -

Not a single ship in this game, save for MAYBE the eagle... looks even REMOTELY CLOSE to being made for flying "on a planet"...

FDL??? It looks almost like our Rockets these days

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Someone please explain to me how an FD can generate enough lifting force to keep it airborne? If gravity is 10m/s/s, and an FD weighs 1,080 tons, how much lift is required to keep it in the air?

 

[AH_ImADot]

Someone please explain to me how an FD can generate enough lifting force to keep it airborne? If gravity is 10m/s/s, and an FD weighs 1,080 tons, how much lift is required to keep it in the air?

Lift will be from the engines and thrusters, not from an airfoil body.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Lift will be from the engines and thrusters, not from an airfoil body.

Obviously. But how much downwards force is required to keep that thing from falling like a brick?

The ultimate goal of the question is to see if the belly lateral thrusters can move the ship fast enough in space to actually keep it aloft.

 

[graham.reeds]

Obviously. But how much downwards force is required to keep that thing from falling like a brick?

The ultimate goal of the question is to see if the belly lateral thrusters can move the ship fast enough in space to actually keep it aloft.

They can via suspension (of disbelief).

Seriously however, the pointless wings and stabilisers really annoy me. As well as the deviation from canon to Type X.

Once the atmospheric expansion is released, then I can understand adding these - make them a purchase by all means - but please get rid of them.

Also while you are at it can you make the Asp slightly shorter? The original design was a classic: 3 pentagons with 3 squares and an equilateral triangle underneath.

Penultimately, where are all the old ships from previous games?

Finally, the slowness with which the ships are being released.

 

[Joe Spivey]

The trick is to think of the ED ships as ships and not aircraft. They are big and heavy and armoured. Something like the Cobra would likely plough right through the majority of SC ships and just leave lots of tinkly bits in their wake. ED ships are designed to take punishment, either from weapons or just smacking into things.

 

[jonny taco]

An aerodynamic object is flat under, round over and have no sudden cuts over the stern,

What you've more or less done here is describe a wing, not an "Aerodynamic object". Does that mean that the space craft in this game are aerodynamic? No, but by your definition a bullet designed to minimize air friction at transonic and super sonic speeds is not aerodynamic either. Also, if you take a look at super sonic bullet design, you will see that a "boat tail" or tapered base to the bullet does not have any significant improvements to the aerodynamics until the bullet enters the transonic realm or just before. The shock waves produced are too significant to allow airflow past the back of the bullet.

Take a look at the design of real hypersonic aircraft such as the htv-1 and htv-2.

 

[CMDR Holycow]

FDL??? It looks almost like our Rockets these days

I don't see anything on that ship that would create lift. nope.

 

[DocLooshkin]

[...] can you make the Asp slightly shorter? The original design was a classic: 3 pentagons with 3 squares and an equilateral triangle underneath [...]

I loved the original Asp design and I'm glad to see I'm not the only one. They don't need to change what's here now, but it would be nice to get a classic model, as well.

 

[Holven]

What you've more or less done here is describe a wing, not an "Aerodynamic object". Does that mean that the space craft in this game are aerodynamic? No, but by your definition a bullet designed to minimize air friction at transonic and super sonic speeds is not aerodynamic either. Also, if you take a look at super sonic bullet design, you will see that a "boat tail" or tapered base to the bullet does not have any significant improvements to the aerodynamics until the bullet enters the transonic realm or just before. The shock waves produced are too significant to allow airflow past the back of the bullet.

Take a look at the design of real hypersonic aircraft such as the htv-1 and htv-2.

Granted, I described a wing. Anything traveling at super-/transonic speeds have different requirements. But bullets aren't designed to land at low speeds. Bullets don't have to be perfectly aerodynamic, just to generate some lift to extend the time they are airborne. Granted that Elite ships would easily fly like bullets, that is not a speed I'm comfortable landing at, nor, I think, the ships. So OK, aerodynamic at supersonic speeds, still not aerodynamic at maneuvering speeds, or whatever I should call that.

 

[ChaosCloud]

One thing that has gotten to me is many of the ships (besides the 6 and 9) look like they aren't made for flying in space but on a planet. I want elite to make more ships that has odd shapes, and doesn't look aerodynamic (it doesn't have to be since it's in space).

Buy Kerbal Space Program, build a rocket with an "odd" shape, try to fly that, sit in the corner and think about what you've asked for.

 

[G in the Fl]

In all honesty, due to the friction of space, having a wedge shape is still practical. For atmospheric flight, our ships can probably produce an artificial buoyancy by compressing a column of air directly below the craft, allowing it to just be supported in mid air without lift, just like how a boat floats.

 

[CTCParadox]

Obviously. But how much downwards force is required to keep that thing from falling like a brick?

The ultimate goal of the question is to see if the belly lateral thrusters can move the ship fast enough in space to actually keep it aloft.

All Elite ships can generate local gravity + 5 m/s ² of thrust to counter gravity so it's not a problem.

CMDR CTCParadox

 

[InMemoriamSirocco]

The Adder and the Hauler struck me as fairly aerodynamic. I figured this was a pre-planned niche for these ships.

The Orca is shaped like it is meant for aquatic environments.... just putting it out there

 

[Lestat]

One thing that has gotten to me is many of the ships (besides the 6 and 9) look like they aren't made for flying in space but on a planet. I want elite to make more ships that has odd shapes, and doesn't look aerodynamic (it doesn't have to be since it's in space).

Question to you. and I want you to think about this. What ships do you think should be out in space? I don't really think inventors of the horseless carriage expected them to look the way they do now.