Battlestar Galactica II (No Joke)

[geoschmo]

Ok, here's a good example to demonstrate my point. Look at a gun camera from a present day fighter. And not the slowed down for TV films. The real thing, full speed. It will look like a bunch of planes zipping around changing directions and speeds at impossosible angles. But view the same manuvers from a few miles away on a slow moving aircraft, or from the ground and you will see lots of graceful curves. It's more to do with your pespective and speed relative to the action.

Geo

[capnq]

If you take our own history, and take an Aircraft carriar of today back to WWI era, they would not under stand the physics and technology of it or the aircraft that it carries.

Dean McLaughlin did a quite good treatment of this idea in "Hawk Among The Sparrows".

[Baron Munchausen]

Originally posted by geoschmo:
What? I am missing something here. If the thrust is pointed aft, your ships will go forward in a straight line. If your engines are on the back pointing aft, you will always move in the direction your nose is pointed. So if you want to go a different direction, you move your nose. Point your nose at something, fire engines aft, go there. Seems pretty simple and realistic. whether it's a ten degree course change or a 90 degree course change, the principle is the same.
Geo

You are missing the STYLE of the change in direction. We are not talking about the arc of the fighter's movement, we are talking about the way it changes attitude in the process of that movement. In B5 you can see thrusters fire to make the fighter change attitude and then it starts to change velocity -- after the main thrusters have changed direction. In most other SciFi shows the fighters/ships just swoop nose first wherever the choreographers of the fight think they should go with no visible forces exerted as if they had an atmosphere to maneuver in! Get it? Invisible forces in space. It doesn't make sense.

[ June 25, 2002, 22:06: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

[Phoenix-D]

"Dean McLaughlin did a quite good treatment of this idea in "Hawk Among The Sparrows"."

Was that the story where the modern-day fighter pilot ends up in WW1, but gets screwed because his missiles won't lock onto wood planes?

Phoenix-D

[geoschmo]

Ok, I did misunderstand you then. I got hung up on your comment about the physics being wrong, when you actually aren't complaining about the physics as much as the lack of detail in the effects.

It actually doesn't take a lot to rotate a ship in a zero-G vacuum. Keep in mind you don't have much inertia to fight against just to reorient the ship. You aren't actually trying to move the ship against it's forward inertia, just turning it and flying straight in another direction. It's not extrodinary to think that the retro rockets wouldn't make a noticable exhaust plume. I guess I always just assumed it's there and just not immedietly visible.

Now if the viper had moving flaps and other atmopsheric control surfaces moving in correlation to it's space manuvers I would have to agree totally with you.

Geo

[Phoenix-D]

"You aren't actually trying to move the ship against it's forward inertia, just turning it and flying straight in another direction."

Umm, WHAT? You kind of need to cancel the velocity from the first vector before/while doing another, otherwise you'll keep going that way. So if you turn around, point straight 'up' and just use the rear engine, you'll end up going diagnally forward.

Come to think of it, that sort of thing might be good to 'fake out' inexperienced pilots.

Phoenix-D

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
"You aren't actually trying to move the ship against it's forward inertia, just turning it and flying straight in another direction."

Umm, WHAT? You kind of need to cancel the velocity from the first vector before/while doing another, otherwise you'll keep going that way. So if you turn around, point straight 'up' and just use the rear engine, you'll end up going diagnally forward.

Come to think of it, that sort of thing might be good to 'fake out' inexperienced pilots.

Phoenix-D

No. That is only true if you fire your retro and cut your rear engine. If you fire your retro and fire your rear engine that will push you in the new direction.

Vipers are like the Appolo command module we used to get to the moon. They only fly one direction. straight ahead. To change course you fire a retro and rotate the ship. You are still aiming and flying straight ahead, it's just straight ahead is a different direction.

Your forward inertia does continue to carry you in your original direction until your main engine has canclled that completely and you are on your new course. That is the reason you can't change directions in sharp angles. It's inertia.

Geo