Author Topic: About ship movement....  (Read 7142 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline terren

  • 27
I thought Bobboau already added a method of using particle thrusters?

this thread
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,28489.0.html
Proud user of wings 3-D

                 
Mad? Oh yes quite mad.

 

Offline WMCoolmon

  • Purveyor of space crack
  • 213
Hmm, forgot about that. Bears closer investigation, methinks...
-C

 

Offline Goober5000

  • HLP Loremaster
  • Moderator
  • 214
    • Goober5000 Productions
Quote
Originally posted by Woolie Wool
Uh, to decelerate in space, no only do you have to cut off your engines, but you have to fire thrusters on the opposite side of the ship. Not only would you have to turn off your car, but you'd have to push it from the front.
But it's long been established that the Freespace universe doesn't use Newtonian physics.

 

Offline -Norbert-

  • 211
And if you would really implement newtonian physics (which I hope you will not) you would have to do a secend physics model for ne nebulars (if thats even possible) because there is enough matter to slow down a ship with shut off engines. After all theres enough matter for those turbulences that fast ships make.

 

Offline Nico

  • Venom
    Parlez-vous Model Magician?
  • 212
Quote
Originally posted by -Norbert-
And if you would really implement newtonian physics (which I hope you will not) you would have to do a secend physics model for ne nebulars (if thats even possible) because there is enough matter to slow down a ship with shut off engines. After all theres enough matter for those turbulences that fast ships make.


No there's not.

On a side note: why do you hope they wouldn't implement it? Like everything, it would be off on default, so why do people are always hoping stuff will not be done when THEY don't like it?
:doubt:

Anyway that's useless rambling, it won't happen.
SCREW CANON!

 
I'm curious to know what alternate thruster concepts have been thrown around - my comment was actually prompted by the awful thrusters on the Lucy (flat plane + 20 meters of empty space + teardrop-shaped red shape = stupid).  Movies etc seem to lean more towards glows (probably to avoid the other issue; the Aeolus or Deimos superimposed thruster 'concept'), Homeworld just uses little ribbon things, etc.

With the superimposition, I'm not sure particles would look good (we'd all see how stupid it is to put a part of your ship behind an ion drive).  Some fighters (herc2) look crazy during battle, being visually 50% thruster glare.  A proportional exhaust flare based on acceleration, giving fighters longer trails, capships short ones, and leaving its intensity tied to current speed, maybe?

And I was too tired to notice the broken analogy; turning off my engine at the lights would be like a spaceship shutting its powerplant down; having the thrusters buring would be analogous to my tyres turning, which they certainly aren't when I'm stopped.  Engine = engine, thruster=tyre, etc etc noone cares but me :)

 

Offline Goober5000

  • HLP Loremaster
  • Moderator
  • 214
    • Goober5000 Productions
Actually, having the thrusters burning is like having exhaust coming out of your tailpipe.  As long as the engine is on, both will happen.

 

Offline Flaser

  • 210
  • man/fish warsie
AFAIK we all agreed that from the little data we have it seems FS ships use fusion engines: A fusion reactor is used to generate heat which forces the propellant to expand and leave the ship.

The propellant isn't travelling by any means near lightspeed.

2 possible variations:
-The propellant is plasma itself from the reactor (I think this is what's used on capships)
-The propellant is stored separatly and the reactor gives off just enough heat to keep the reactions going.
(I think fighters would use this, although it is not as efficient as the first solution it is safer - the engine output doens't force a complicated thermo-nuclear reaction to adapt - and offers a longer operations - though less thrust).

OK - we have a reactor and an engine.
I want to switch the engine off - I close the valve from the propellant - no propellant ejected, no thrust.
OK - but what do I do with the heat that the engine would normally take out of the ship?
1. Lower the reactor output - risky, reactors are not known to like instable changing reactions. May be done to a limited degree only.
2. Let it burn on as regulated as I can keep it, and release the rest of the heat onto heat-sinks.

Now, where do I put these heatsinks? They would be an obvious target and getting them knocked out could endanger the ship.
Remember! These are heatsinks used only when the engine's off and the reactor running - how about putting them in the exhaust of the engine? Protected, and that way you can already take care off the cooling of the exsthaust since wihtout that it would melt under the extreme punishment the hot propellant deals it.

So if things happen as I put in my scenario, then when a capship or a fighter comes to a  halt, the 'normal' thruster effect will cease to be and instead a low-wavelenght radiation (heat) ergo a reddish-orange shimmer will come from the exhaust.
"I was going to become a speed dealer. If one stupid fairytale turns out to be total nonsense, what does the young man do? If you answered, “Wake up and face reality,” you don’t remember what it was like being a young man. You just go to the next entry in the catalogue of lies you can use to destroy your life." - John Dolan

 

Offline WMCoolmon

  • Purveyor of space crack
  • 213
That'd actually be pretty cool.

Too bad we don't have the pixel shaders to make the shimmer possible.
-C

 
Quote
Originally posted by Turambar


lol, i'd love to see a ship slow down/ exit hyperspace and everyone on the bridge just flys forward and hits the viewscreen


you're "escorting" a big ship through subspace that has a weakness in its inertial dampers...when in fact you're part of a scheme to pillage the ship...you waste its inertial damper system in subspace just before it exits the tunnel...

out of tunnel: *screams of those aboard the ship* BLAM, "Play dead" SEXP, bring in the boarding ships!

LOL

That said, ANY mission where the power goes offline in a ship, and that ship gets smacked during the mission, must have some sort of "handling for casualties-caused-by-crewmen-bludgeoned-against-walls."

Boy, I wonder how much insurance benefits GTVA officers get due to inertial drive failure...
« Last Edit: January 28, 2005, 04:54:16 pm by 1644 »

 

Offline Flaser

  • 210
  • man/fish warsie
/Phicysics purist mode != ON

Fot the thousands time: their is no such thing as inertial drive or anti-inertia systems.

All you can do is use anti-thrusters in normal space. Beside that you need some sort of field or gas to interact with if you want to slow down: either magneric, gravitic or just an atmosphere for to do aerobraking.
"I was going to become a speed dealer. If one stupid fairytale turns out to be total nonsense, what does the young man do? If you answered, “Wake up and face reality,” you don’t remember what it was like being a young man. You just go to the next entry in the catalogue of lies you can use to destroy your life." - John Dolan

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
There's no such thing as artificial gravity either yet FS2 seems to have that already.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

  

Offline terren

  • 27
Hyperspace is fake, so are beam cannons, and I've never met a vasudian or a shiven.  

/Phicysics purist mode != OFF

Never never NEVER forget to close your tags.  Bad stuff happens
Proud user of wings 3-D

                 
Mad? Oh yes quite mad.