What was your methodology for triggering 50% throttle?
Yes I'm wondering whether it includes 'spin up' time or not. Some results here that differ a little:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...er-and-my-second-major-exploration-trip/page2
What was your methodology for triggering 50% throttle?
I chose to go with 50% because that's where the ship rotates the fastest in supercruise. Just to confirm, I ran some test on an Anaconda just now, and got the following for pitch at 0%/25%/50%/75%/100% throttle: 48/32/26/30/40Why 50% and not 75% where it would be in between the blue indicator?
What was your methodology for triggering 50% throttle?
Hm, two interesting things there. First, I didn't notice that my earlier results for a Courier were off from what I got now. I suppose that a difference of two seconds in pitch is plausible (I was probably sloppier back then), but eight seconds in the yaw? Similar differences with others', too. Then there's that goemon said that 50% was right in the middle of the blue zone in supercruise - and this was a year ago. Perhaps there were some stealth changes sometime?Yes I'm wondering whether it includes 'spin up' time or not. Some results here that differ a little:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...er-and-my-second-major-exploration-trip/page2
I am reading the post and I still cannot get, if you are guys doing this for pure scientific reason or actual maneuvering capability in supercruise is important in some circumstances?
I do agree that we should gather data on cool running, too. The Type 10 is sluggish but cool, the Asp X is agile and cool, etc. Lightspeed makes a good point that the heat ability of a ship almost makes more difference, to explorers.
excellent cockpit visibility (the best, I think?)
Yeah, I've thought about that too, but the question is, how to actually implement that? If FD were to introduce new blueprints, then people would either be upset about having to reroll their existing stuff if the new blueprint's simply better, or if it's not better but different (say, having a possible max. optimised mass increase of +40% instead of +50%, but getting better SC handling), very few people would actually use that.There really should be an option to improve supercruise handling. Since thrusters have a direct affect on flight model performance outside of SC, the FSD should in turn also directly affect handling in SC.
When I tried the recently released Type-10, personally I was surprised at how bad it handled in supercruise. Otherwise, it would make a decent exploration ship. But then the question became: exactly how bad is it when compared to the other ships? With no data on this, I set out to make my own. At first, I just stuck to explorer ships, but then I decided to go do multi-roles that are decent at exploration, and having done those as well, I then went to finish the rest as well.Edelgard von Rhein
Oh, and I'm posting this in the exploration subforum because in my opinion, exploration is where supercruise handling is the most relevant.
Thanks go to , Jackie Silverand Satsumafor sharing data from some of the missing ships!
It looks like you misunderstood what I wrote above. It was "exploration is where supercruise handling is the most relevant", and not "supercruise handling is the most relevant for exploration". The latter would mean that supercruise handling would trump jump range, internals and so on, which of course I wouldn't say. (I did, after all, say repeatedly that how people weigh the various factors depends on their own preferences.) The former, what I wrote, means that out of all the activities - trading, combat, mining, and so on - supercruise handling is the most relevant in exploration, and not in trading or others.Did you also not say here that Supercruise handling is the most relevant for Exploration?
It looks like you misunderstood what I wrote above. It was "exploration is where supercruise handling is the most relevant", and not "supercruise handling is the most relevant for exploration". The latter would mean that supercruise handling would trump jump range, internals and so on, which of course I wouldn't say. (I did, after all, say repeatedly that how people weigh the various factors depends on their own preferences.) The former, what I wrote, means that out of all the activities - trading, combat, mining, and so on - supercruise handling is the most relevant in exploration, and not in trading or others.
I might have been wrong on that though, in that I didn't consider interdictions, like piracy, undermining in PP, or assassinations.
Also, for the record, I've edited the first post now, because I worded the Type-10 part poorly there. When I wrote "When I tried the recently released Type-10, personally I was surprised at how bad it handled in supercruise. Otherwise, it would make a decent exploration ship. But then the question became: exactly how bad is its supercruise handling when compared to those of the other ships?", I should have written "exactly how bad is its supercruise handling when compared to those of the other ships?", as that was what I meant to say - but looking back on it, the original version was ambiguous. Also included that it would make a decent exploration ship in my opinion.