Page 3 of 3
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 8:54 am
by Adept
TurkeyXIII wrote:QUOTE (TurkeyXIII @ Apr 1 2010, 06:43 PM) The ships in Allegiance all have a maximum rate of rotation. Real objects in space would not have such a limitation, so the torque (AKA forces that change rotation) would play a for more prominent role in maneuvers. In Allegiance, the rotation limits are all low enough that even the heaviest ships can usually stop rotating after only a couple of seconds.
A real spacecraft has to be roll limiters too, or the pilot(s) will be quickly incapasitated. I Once worked out some of the forces in an Allegiance ship cockpit, and it would be a pretty wild ride.
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 9:08 am
by Jimen
That is what the fancy cushions are for! People don't fly ints constantly because they like to whore, they do so because those seats are comfy beyond belief such that the face-crushing acceleration of boosting only allows you to experience such pleasantness further.
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 9:23 am
by Adept
Jimen wrote:QUOTE (Jimen @ Apr 3 2010, 12:08 PM) That is what the fancy cushions are for! People don't fly ints constantly because they like to whore, they do so because those seats are comfy beyond belief such that the face-crushing acceleration of boosting only allows you to experience such pleasantness further.
The sad thing is by the way that the boosting accel in Allegiance is pretty modest. Sure it would be fun and all, but the horrible moments are when spinning the ship along the other axis. Then you're being pushed forward into your restraining belts as the ship spins around the center of it's mass. A real int jockey could well want to keep boosting in the tight turns just to keep his/her arse on the seat!
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 2:20 pm
by TurkeyXIII
My maths disagrees with you, Adept. The IC int gives the pilot 0.32 g into the harness at maximum rate of turn. Slightly uncomfortable I'd imagine, but horrible is a bit of an overstatement. The highest centripetal acceleration of the 7 ships I looked at was the dreg corv, delivering 0.53 g when spinning.
When the int boosts, the linear acceleration gives the pilot 4.95 g into their seat. Also tolerable if you're fit enough, but substantially larger than from the rotation.
I'm yet to look at tangential acceleration from maneuvering thrusters.
g = acceleration due to gravity on earth's surface = 9.8 m/s/s.
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 2:29 pm
by Koln
TurkeyXIII wrote:QUOTE (TurkeyXIII @ Apr 3 2010, 04:20 PM) My maths disagrees with you, Adept. The IC int gives the pilot 0.32 g into the harness at maximum rate of turn. Slightly uncomfortable I'd imagine, but horrible is a bit of an overstatement. The highest centripetal acceleration of the 7 ships I looked at was the dreg corv, delivering 0.53 g when spinning.
When the int boosts, the linear acceleration gives the pilot 4.95 g into their seat. Also tolerable if you're fit enough, but substantially larger than from the rotation.
I'm yet to look at tangential acceleration from maneuvering thrusters.
g = acceleration due to gravity on earth's surface = 9.8 m/s/s.
I think adept was thinking more on the direction of the accel rather than the magnitude. 0.32g to a side that is not the back of the seat would be a mess if you don't have a good safety belt
.
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:23 pm
by TurkeyXIII
Even so, you get 1.24 g into the harness just from hitting the reverse thrusters.
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 8:19 pm
by Adept
TurkeyXIII wrote:QUOTE (TurkeyXIII @ Apr 3 2010, 06:23 PM) Even so, you get 1.24 g into the harness just from hitting the reverse thrusters.
It's also possible I did very sloppy work at the time
Still I wonder how much of a vomit comet it would be, taking a couple of rapid 90 - 180 degree turns and hitthing the boostes and retros in an interceptor furball.
Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 1:12 am
by jpomailo2
Need anti-inertia.
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:13 am
by Bard
Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Apr 3 2010, 03:19 PM) Still I wonder how much of a vomit comet it would be
Five and you wash out of Cadet. XD