"Ding! " of course! I was in tunnel vision there, Dang I am a fool lol
Sorry Innigo Morbad and anybody else, took me a while but yes you are right.
Now hang my head in shame.
back to school I go.!
Type-6 as fast as an Eagle.... Come on....
- Thread starter kiario
- Start date
"Ding! " of course! I was in tunnel vision there, Dang I am a fool lol
Sorry Innigo Morbad and anybody else, took me a while but yes you are right.
Now hang my head in shame.
back to school I go.!
This. "Is it fun" is far more important than "is it realistic" in this case.
Look on the bright side, you don't have a lump of wood and felt bouncing off your head.
I had a bunch of stuff quoted, but others have already made those points. Rockspider, you're making a mistake that is very common in beginning physics which is misjudging the frame of reference of the system under discussion. In your rocket-ship example, the only two things in the system are the rocket and the ship. Exhaust leaves the system and transfers force to it in the process of departure. The speed of all of it is irrelevant. Force is what matters, and every single atom of exhaust pushes on the rocket with the same amount of force as it leaves the system. As force is applied to a constant mass, it accelerates, gaining speed from the point of view of an observer outside the system. But the rocket engine and the ship still have zero relative velocity (being attached together) while the exhaust continues to push outward just as hard, forever.
But that's just the real science. In the game, the limits are set for playability and balance.
ETA:
I typed the above while you were typing this. Not piling on...
But that's just the real science. In the game, the limits are set for playability and balance.
ETA:
I typed the above while you were typing this. Not piling on...
Last edited:
Great, it takes guts to admit if one is wrong, therefore I give you +rep for this
Makes me think we should have a sticky in this forum to talk about this AND all other things related to the actual physics (but of course in a non-PhD-friendly tone), and the eventual game-implementation differences, of things related to space
it should be only about acceleration.
there is 'no top speed' in space... well except c maybe, but our ships can fly faster than c.
Haha just as well I dont work for NASA lol
And as you say I totaly misjudged the system in my lil brain by adding an invisible force to something that was not there lol
Innigo good on him,kept saying about it but I was blind to it. my bad!
Yeah. Actually I often think that in the real future all space ship movement (from 0 speed to however fast) is achieved by something similar to the supercruise of the FSD, which is also summarily called a "space drive" (as opposed to a thruster-type drive).
EDIT: Oh, and for inter-system (and longer) distances perhaps something like a wormhole (but an instant-transfer wormhole, not some strange notion of "hyperspace", "witchspace" or whatever-strange-space). And we have to travel with the space-drive first to establish the endpoint of the wormhole, something similar to a gate e.g. in X-games.
Last edited:
another noteworthy point:
there is no such thing as deceleration. it doesn't exist. there is only negative acceleration in the vector you are moving in. this will either slow you down or make you move in "reverse" based on speed and how fast you are negatively accelerating.
there is no such thing as deceleration. it doesn't exist. there is only negative acceleration in the vector you are moving in. this will either slow you down or make you move in "reverse" based on speed and how fast you are negatively accelerating.
You should see some of the truly awful physics miscomprehensions going on as a matter of routine over in the Star Citizen forums. Your error, which basically boiled down to misunderstanding inertial frame of reference was actually totally understandable. Put it this way, not too terribly long enough some eminent scientists believed a rocket in space couldn't work because there was no air to push against.
Still say an Eagle should be able to fly faster than a type 6 though.
Oh, come on, you're trying to be clever for the sake of it! It's just the matter of word definition. When we define deceleration as meaning reduction of speed (or negative acceleration, if you will), then deceleration exists!
Great, it takes guts to admit if one is wrong, therefore I give you +rep for this
Makes me think we should have a sticky in this forum to talk about this AND all other things related to the actual physics (but of course in a non-PhD-friendly tone), and the eventual game-implementation differences, of things related to space
Thankyou I deserve a slap lol Sticky sounds good to me, I promise not to help write it !! lol
I deff need to re read a few things
Keep it easy now lol
I do know something lol
He is actually correct though. Deceleration is not a proper term within physics. We know what it means, but you know what lolz means - don't make it proper tho innit
Where did you learn this?
240/350 versus 220/350, it is. However, put a T6 with A thrusters and Power Distribution versus a stock Eagle, the T6 will be spamming boost more often.
Sure. But I'll just add a point, which is that in whatever discussion also the context, media and intended public should be considered, and therefore as this forum certainly is not exclusively for professional physicians, more common words should also be used freely, provided that their meaning is generally understoodHe is actually correct though. Deceleration is not a proper term within physics. We know what it means, but you know what lolz means - don't make it proper tho innit
Last edited:
Sorry again Innigo, You were spot on tho
I agree on the speed the Eagle is slow for a small fighter at 240, then you get a viper and bang 320 with 400 boosted
As someone pointed out the eagle is an old ship, plus very small and manoeuvrable. Maybe they weren't designed for speed?
Also maybe they would be far too good as a cheap starter ship with high speed!
Perhaps a ship later in game release can be a modern version of the eagle with a really fast engine, which is a lot more expensive?
Also maybe they would be far too good as a cheap starter ship with high speed!
Perhaps a ship later in game release can be a modern version of the eagle with a really fast engine, which is a lot more expensive?
Maybe they will do something similar to tie fighters and forego shields entirely in favor of manouverability. Whichever faction feels life is the most cheap and an expendable commodity is most likely to produce one.
True. Real space ships wouldn't magically stop to accelerate at some point. There is no aerodynamic drag in space.
Last edited: