Author Topic: SH Gargant?  (Read 102467 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Even if game mechanics are nothing to go by, I still think fighters should be more agile than capital ships, or it makes fighters completely useless.

 

Offline Mobius

  • Back where he started
  • 213
  • The Lightblue Ribbon
    • Skype
    • Twitter
    • The Lightblue Ribbon | Cultural Project
And you are right. The only bad thing here is about capship's speed, not particurarly realistic in FS.
The Lightblue Ribbon | Website

Inferno Series: Inferno: Nostos - Inferno: Alliance
FSCRP Contributions: Aftermath - Deep Blood - Warzone
A tribute to FreeSpace in my book: Riflessioni dall'Infinito
My interviews: [ 1 ] - [ 2 ] - [ 3 ]

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
I've often wondered if the speeds we see during a mission aren't meant to represent relative speeds to a universal reference point (for instance, a jump node).  We know that capital ships are capable of orbiting planets, which last time I checked requires a speed just a tad greater than 15 meters per second; having that speed be relative to a reference frame (which would be non-inertial, since the whole system is in an orbital state) would let you get around that complication.  That still doesn't do anything for the "why do ships have max velocity" question, which is just inherently part of the game's non-Newtonian nature, but at least it makes things a bit more realistic.

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Thumbs up to that. Makes lotsa sense.

 

Offline CaptJosh

  • 210
Agility is maneuverability. Fighters are by far more maneuverable than the ships.  And they're faster too. As it should be in something that's basically WWII style combat in space. Even in modern warfare, a fighter is much faster than a carrier or any other ship in the navy. One of the US Navy's nuclear carriers, Nimitz class, or even the Enterprise, which has no vessel class, as she was a prototype, with a public top speed of some 48 knots, probably really can pull about 60, and no problems with motors burning out like on the AEGIS cruisers and tin cans, who might keep up for a little while, but not long, whereas the carriers with the steam generated by nuclear reactors can sustain their top speed as long as the equipment will take the vibration. Even so, fighter craft go a LOT faster.Your basic F-14 takes off from a ground based runway at 150 Kts, and can break the sound barrier. The F-22 cruises about about 1.5 mach with no afterburner. Fighters being much faster than ships is expected. Hell, the USAF F-15 has a positive thrust to mass ratio, meaning it can accelerate in a sustained climb. Fighters are faster than capships and supercaps, period.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

 
Agility is maneuverability. Fighters are by far more maneuverable than the ships.  And they're faster too. As it should be in something that's basically WWII style combat in space. Even in modern warfare, a fighter is much faster than a carrier or any other ship in the navy. One of the US Navy's nuclear carriers, Nimitz class, or even the Enterprise, which has no vessel class, as she was a prototype, with a public top speed of some 48 knots, probably really can pull about 60, and no problems with motors burning out like on the AEGIS cruisers and tin cans, who might keep up for a little while, but not long, whereas the carriers with the steam generated by nuclear reactors can sustain their top speed as long as the equipment will take the vibration. Even so, fighter craft go a LOT faster.Your basic F-14 takes off from a ground based runway at 150 Kts, and can break the sound barrier. The F-22 cruises about about 1.5 mach with no afterburner. Fighters being much faster than ships is expected. Hell, the USAF F-15 has a positive thrust to mass ratio, meaning it can accelerate in a sustained climb. Fighters are faster than capships and supercaps, period.

But that's because they're moving in the water or in the atmosphere. It's completely different in space - no friction and negligible gravity
Sig censored by people with no sense of humor

 

Offline CaptJosh

  • 210
Yes, no friction. Just tons of mass and inertia to overcome. Fighters can move faster because they accelerate faster. Plus, you don't want to get capships moving that fast because then you have to stop them.  And, as you say, no friction in space. You have to fire retros against the motion. In a big ship, to stop quickly, you'd have to flip it end for end and fire the main engines against the direction of motion. FS2 doesn't really follow the laws of physics well in this respect, but it's true.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

 

Offline blowfish

  • 211
  • Join the cult of KILL MY ROUTER!!!!!!!!!!1
Of course, speed is relative in space anyway.

 

Offline Droid803

  • Trusted poster of legit stuff
  • 213
  • /人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\ Do you want to be a Magical Girl?
    • Skype
    • Steam
Petition for the Gargant's max speed to be 9001ms-1:P
That might break something though.
(´・ω・`)
=============================================================

 
Petition for the Gargant's max speed to be 9001ms-1:P
That might break something though.

Yeah, right. Instead of the head of a 6 km long juggernaut crushing you at 200 m/s, you've got a 60 km long superjug atomizing you at 10000 m/s.

Write, write, write, finish your testament, pilot!
And this ain't no ****. But don't quote me for that one. - Mika

I shall rrreach worrrld domination!

 
Isn't that 9000 m/s to the -1 power, which would be 1/9000 m/s?

Sig censored by people with no sense of humor

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
How very dreadfully slow.

 

Offline Androgeos Exeunt

  • Captain Oblivious
  • 212
  • Prevents attraction.
    • Wordpress.com Blog
 :wtf:

Set it to 5 or 10 m/s and leave it at that.
My blog

Quote: Saturday, 11 July 2020, 1354hrs UTC, #freespace
streeeeeeeeeeeee
you know you ****ed up your voice acting if the vasudans sound more coherent than the terrans

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Currently I believe it is something around 25 m/s

 

Offline Droid803

  • Trusted poster of legit stuff
  • 213
  • /人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\ Do you want to be a Magical Girl?
    • Skype
    • Steam
Isn't that 9000 m/s to the -1 power, which would be 1/9000 m/s?

No, its 9000 m x s-1, which means its m/s...it's just a different notation.
Its noted like that in the FSWiki:

ie. http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/GTF_Ulysses

Where did you learn your exponent laws?  :P
(´・ω・`)
=============================================================

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Where did you learn your exponent laws?  :P
American skool sistern.

  

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Before we jump on board with the generalizations, the American school system taught me exponent laws just fine.

 
Taking something to the -1 power gives its reciprocal, does it not?
Sig censored by people with no sense of humor

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Yes. So seconds become 'per seconds', or 1/seconds. Thus, m * (S^-1) is 'meters per second'.

 

Offline Mobius

  • Back where he started
  • 213
  • The Lightblue Ribbon
    • Skype
    • Twitter
    • The Lightblue Ribbon | Cultural Project
Where did you learn your exponent laws?  :P
American skool sistern.

**** you. :P
The Lightblue Ribbon | Website

Inferno Series: Inferno: Nostos - Inferno: Alliance
FSCRP Contributions: Aftermath - Deep Blood - Warzone
A tribute to FreeSpace in my book: Riflessioni dall'Infinito
My interviews: [ 1 ] - [ 2 ] - [ 3 ]