Altitude limit for the use of back thrusters

[appel]

If I understood Speedy correctly you could hov..herhmm..use backthrusters within 15m of the ground. This is defined by a altitude limit variable, which I believe is set at 15 m now? Anyway, it would be nice that this is a bit, higher. 35-50m would be a acceptable new value?

[Avatar]

Actually I'd like Ken to explain how that works...  He mentioned something about losing thrust as you ascend but it seems to be more than that at work.

-Av-

[SilverB1rd]

and NO not even low altitiude flying is going to be but back live with it.

[Acer]

and NO not even low altitiude flying is going to be but back live with it.

i dont think he meant flying but rather the ability to slow down your descent rate by using backtrusters. right?

[appel]

I'm talking about the usage of back thrusters, for whatever purposes.

[SilverB1rd]

Check the new post at the top, it has a new scout for people to test check it out.

[Speedy]

I believe that when the ship is over the 15m mark, it gradually loses thurster power (since the jet-fumes, or something aren't hitting the ground). That means that there is no acceleration but there is still velocity which is taken away by gravity. Remember physics? Thruster Acceleration != Velocity.

[MowerMan]

Speedy you better learn some physics...  

Thrust acts against the atmosphere as well and the ground...  otherwise jets/planes wouldn't be able to fly.

[NukeDaddy]

They would have to be chemical, nuclear, or ion rocket engines, not jet engines. Jet engines require air intakes for the air-fuel mixture. Perhaps you could generate your own air, but you would need lots and lots of it.

The reason for the loss in effectiveness of the reverse thrusters would be the fact that when in the "air" they would be thrusting against a greater force than usual (the entire weight of the vehicle).  Normally, they would simply be designed to reduce forward velocity (or change it if the vehicle is stopped).  The gravitational force component in that case is extremely minimal.  The force they mostly thrust against is forward momentum.  And you don't need a completely equal and opposite reverse thrust to slow the vehicle down and eventually stop it.  The smaller the reverse thrust, the longer it takes to stop it, but it will stop it...eventually.

Of course, the game assumes gravity is the same on all planets, which is not realistic.

[PhoeniX-FlamE]

u guys gotta stop talking about whats relastic and whats not

[Scout]

well there is only one thruster on most of the hoverships anyways.. the back thruster that propells the ship forward.. would like to think there was something other than invisible jets powering reverse and straf etc..

like a mag lev/ electro-static replusors and the like.. with the ship repelling off the ground it would work like two north poles the ground and the ship..

When they are far appart there isnt much force between them now is there?

well ive proposed many times that there be a slider in the shell options that controlled the fade out of the replusion effect with height gain.. but this would prolly take some odd amount of coding..

Another "radical" idea of mine was having the repulsor fade+a different thruster physics.. seeing as the ships get pushed across the ground by a rocket thruster.. propellent Ion/Chem what ever pushing off the back of the ship wouldnt cut thrust with any height gain.. so pretty much if u facing up while going up a hill you would keep your air..

basicly you could close huge gaps on maps like "raverace" in bz1 with both Realism and Fun.

but i guess that can wait for another game.

[Tank]

i disagree with app, leave it at 15m it's fine  the hover fag manover is dead .

[MowerMan]

Well it would'nt be a electro-static or magnetic field, the hovering would have to work on a gravitational field.  If so the craft would be able climb hundreds to thousands of meters before there was any drop off of the hovering effect (inverse square law), because of the large planetary mass.