The best space CQC scene ever

[starikki]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhKWeGXduzs

 

We can all see Avorion's potential, I 'd hope we can have slightly better RCS thrusters, to perform similar higher g strafing maneuvers on small ships

[Sable Phoenix]

The Expanse is a phenomenal series, and that scene was full of pulse-pounding awesomeness.  I'd love to see this kind of combat in Avorion.  This kind of combat would be pretty rare in deep space though.  The battle was complicated by the existence of the station, which granted something almost impossible to find in space: cover.

[Tsunamik]

Well you can theoretically hide in space, but what would be probably much more different is distance... you can easily hide behind planet or asteroid, but you certainly won´t circle around anyone, as engagements range would be MUCH longer (I mean, even modern jets fight at ranges beyond visual detection, and modern ships fight over horizon, so in space the range would be even greater most likely)

[DivineEvil]

Actually I have no idea what the problem with Avorion, that prevents you to have similar battles, except maybe for high-tech available after Iron. Current thrusters easily allow for unrealistic maneuvers which likely would instantly kill the entire crew otherwise.

 

I'm more looking for Donnager/Unknown-type combat, with variable range profiles, properly balanced railguns and boarding.

[starikki]

Actually I have no idea what the problem with Avorion, that prevents you to have similar battles, except maybe for high-tech available after Iron. Current thrusters easily allow for unrealistic maneuvers which likely would instantly kill the entire crew otherwise.

 

I'm more looking for Donnager/Unknown-type combat, with variable range profiles, properly balanced railguns and boarding.

 

Yes I could get some maneuverability, via wraping my whole ship with RCS thrusters.

I don't see how to achieve 1g side or up/down acceleration without spamming unrealistic amount of thrusters atm.

And we don't even have a display for RCS acceleration in building UI yet.

[DivineEvil]

Yes I could get some maneuverability, via wraping my whole ship with RCS thrusters.

I don't see how to achieve 1g side or up/down acceleration without spamming unrealistic amount of thrusters atm.

And we don't even have a display for RCS acceleration in building UI yet.

If there's no display for RCS acceleration in UI, then how did you conclude when you're capable of 1G strafing? Take a note - in the combat sequence you've linked, there's almost no strafing present. All maneuvers shown are mostly forward thrust+turning, except for Roci's getting behind the station after taking a railgun shot, which is a reverse thrust. Also you're probably highly overestimate the size of ships in Expanse relative to the scaling in Avorion.

[AstroOwl]

Yes I could get some maneuverability, via wraping my whole ship with RCS thrusters.

I don't see how to achieve 1g side or up/down acceleration without spamming unrealistic amount of thrusters atm.

And we don't even have a display for RCS acceleration in building UI yet.

 

In Avorion, 1 block unit is 10 meters. If in Avorion you build a ship of the size as in this video from Expanse, achieving maneuverability is very easy. You don't need to "wrap" your ship in them, since they work while covered. In fact, ships of huge sizes (say ~1km long) can made very maneuverable in Avorion, while usually in sci-fi such a ship won't be very nimble. Perhaps dev shold add "length of the ship" indicator so that people would finally understand what sizes are depicted in game.

 

And yes, 1g acceleration is just 9.81 m/s^2. Try making a ship with forward acceleration of 9.81 and check if you can achieve strafing acceleration to be higher than forward acceleration (spoiler: that can be done easily. Ships in Avorion can easily be made to accelerate at > 10g).

[Amazigh]

One thing that really irks me about that scene: Where's the spalling?

Because unless the entire ship is made from some super space material that doesn't spall at all, then those rounds that just punched neat holes in the ship should have also caused a spray of fragments to scatter across the crew compartment, which would at least wound anyone even remotely near the impact point.

 

Not to mention the ridiculously close range that the combat is taking place at. For a show that's trying to be realistic, having ships literally fly past each other is completely insane. Gun range is more like 8KM in a proper realistic setting. (making a guess on the size of the stealth ship, effecive range is based on target size and all)

 

In Avorion, 1 block unit is 10 meters. If in Avorion you build a ship of the size as in this video from Expanse, achieving maneuverability is very easy.

The ship in the expanse is 48m long, so that'd be a 4.8 block unit length ship, manoeuvrability is for sure, the least of your worries at that scale.

[LordMaddog]

The ship in the expanse is 48m long, so that'd be a 4.8 block unit length ship, manoeuvrability is for sure, the least of your worries at that scale.

 

LOL WOW the ships in this game start out way! to big. I think my starter ship was like 8 blocks about 1k iron and I I always up it to about 5k-10k iron in 10 to fifteenth minutes. Most noob ships are likely the size of  that space station they are fighting around lol.

[Sable Phoenix]

Spalling is not a huge concern any more with modern armors.  Read up on what little information is out there about Chobham armor (most is still classified), which is specifically designed to not only eliminate spalling but to stop HEAT rounds, which basically ignore the existence of almost all other armor types due to the way their shaped-charge is designed and delivered.

 

Also, rather counterintuitively, spalling is more of a problem when the rounds impacting the target are traveling slowly.  If the force of impact is distributed over a wide area of the target surface, spalling is much more likely than if the force is concentrated at the point of impact, either due to the round's design or its speed.  It's consistently demonstrated that a high-speed round of small size or sufficient hardness can easily pass completely through a soft target and inflict only local damage from its penetration effects, whether it's small-arms fire or naval cannon rounds.

 

It's perfectly realistic to expect AP rounds fired in space with no windage or friction to punch right through their target, especially since even combat spacecraft would be minimally armored; moving mass through space is extremely expensive, and considering the typical speeds object can be expected to reach in a vacuum, almost no type or amount of armor is going to be doing you any noticeable good anyway.  Whipple shields would be one possible exception to that, but only against extremely high-speed objects with low mass -- the Tachi/Rocinante does indeed have a double-hulled design specifically to serve as a sort of Whipple shield, and we see it in action when it suffers the railgun strike.  The superheated fragments left hanging in the vacuum of the cabin as the PDC rounds punch through are also an indication that the Whipple shield is having an effect, although ironically, as fast as they are, the bullets are still traveling too slowly for the Whipple shield to completely negate them.

 

The incredibly close ranges aside, this scene (and even moreso, the Donager battle from the Season 1 episode "CQB") is actually one of the most realistic portrayals of what we could expect the effects of a space battle to be like that has ever been put to film.  We don't know, of course, because nobody has ever yet done it, but based on the physics involved, nothing in it seems out of the realm of possibility or egregiously handwaving the laws of physics.  Check out the Atomic Rockets website and the Rocketpunk Manifesto blog for all the information you could ever want about the real physics behind space travel and potential combat.

 

In fact, the worst violation committed by The Expanse in that scene (outside of the ships not having radiators glowing white hot from all that heat they must be producing) is that there's a "stealth" ship at all.  As Atomic Rockets demonstrates conclusively, "there ain't no stealth in space."  The Expanse is hard science fiction, but not diamond hard; it explains away the delta-v problem with the fictional Epstein drive, and completely ignores heat radiation problems and the ubiquity of detection for the sake of drama.

[DivineEvil]

In fact, the worst violation committed by The Expanse in that scene (outside of the ships not having radiators glowing white hot from all that heat they must be producing) is that there's a "stealth" ship at all.  As Atomic Rockets demonstrates conclusively, "there ain't no stealth in space."  The Expanse is hard science fiction, but not diamond hard; it explains away the delta-v problem with the fictional Epstein drive, and completely ignores heat radiation problems and the ubiquity of detection for the sake of drama.

Not really. Arguments brought on Atomic Rockets site do not apply to Expanse universe in majority of cases, as they're not conclusive, but reductive. Whereas stealth is mostly impractical for more advanced technology era (beside the fact, that more advanced tech might work on principles completely alien to current scientific theories), Expanse makes place only two hundred years from the current time scale. Stealth technology is based on use of particular composites, that seem to prevent detection by IR (low thermal emission), LADAR and optical sensors (Super Black coating and erratic asymmetrical geometry mimicking the rocks). It is recent, uncommon, expensive and shunned technology with no countermeasure tech known. Most of the action happens around the Asteroid Belt, where high-technology is scarce. Stealth frigates in question are only hidden while completely immobile, etc.

 

Long story short, pretty much any argument on Atomic Rockets can be refuted in relation to Expanse series. Avorion is a whole another case of course.

[starikki]

Yes I could get some maneuverability, via wraping my whole ship with RCS thrusters.

I don't see how to achieve 1g side or up/down acceleration without spamming unrealistic amount of thrusters atm.

And we don't even have a display for RCS acceleration in building UI yet.

If there's no display for RCS acceleration in UI, then how did you conclude when you're capable of 1G strafing? Take a note - in the combat sequence you've linked, there's almost no strafing present. All maneuvers shown are mostly forward thrust+turning, except for Roci's getting behind the station after taking a railgun shot, which is a reverse thrust. Also you're probably highly overestimate the size of ships in Expanse relative to the scaling in Avorion.

 

You can estimate acceleration by monitoring speed change vs time, which is easy in the game.

 

Small radius orbiting motion, especially the start and stop of it, would require heavy RCS input, unless you can afford pointing your nose to maneuver critical points rather than tactical critical angles in CQC.

[starikki]

Yes I could get some maneuverability, via wraping my whole ship with RCS thrusters.

I don't see how to achieve 1g side or up/down acceleration without spamming unrealistic amount of thrusters atm.

And we don't even have a display for RCS acceleration in building UI yet.

 

In Avorion, 1 block unit is 10 meters. If in Avorion you build a ship of the size as in this video from Expanse, achieving maneuverability is very easy. You don't need to "wrap" your ship in them, since they work while covered. In fact, ships of huge sizes (say ~1km long) can made very maneuverable in Avorion, while usually in sci-fi such a ship won't be very nimble. Perhaps dev shold add "length of the ship" indicator so that people would finally understand what sizes are depicted in game.

 

And yes, 1g acceleration is just 9.81 m/s^2. Try making a ship with forward acceleration of 9.81 and check if you can achieve strafing acceleration to be higher than forward acceleration (spoiler: that can be done easily. Ships in Avorion can easily be made to accelerate at > 10g).

 

Yes 10g maneuver can be done, via paneling every inch of your ship with RCS thrusters, how realistic and tactically advantageous too...

unless you can enlighten me an other feasible way?

 

And RCS working under cover is a totally acceptable fact too? I might as well get ride of the jet effect and call them gravity drive or something. 

 

All I want is achieving reasonable RCS TWR via reasonable wet area ratio, clearly we don't have it atm.

I'd much prefer RCS being way more effective per m^2 but cost way more energy at the same time, so they can't be spammed.

[Sable Phoenix]

In fact, the worst violation committed by The Expanse in that scene (outside of the ships not having radiators glowing white hot from all that heat they must be producing) is that there's a "stealth" ship at all.  As Atomic Rockets demonstrates conclusively, "there ain't no stealth in space."  The Expanse is hard science fiction, but not diamond hard; it explains away the delta-v problem with the fictional Epstein drive, and completely ignores heat radiation problems and the ubiquity of detection for the sake of drama.

Not really. Arguments brought on Atomic Rockets site do not apply to Expanse universe in majority of cases, as they're not conclusive, but reductive. Whereas stealth is mostly impractical for more advanced technology era (beside the fact, that more advanced tech might work on principles completely alien to current scientific theories), Expanse makes place only two hundred years from the current time scale. Stealth technology is based on use of particular composites, that seem to prevent detection by IR (low thermal emission), LADAR and optical sensors (Super Black coating and erratic asymmetrical geometry mimicking the rocks). It is recent, uncommon, expensive and shunned technology with no countermeasure tech known. Most of the action happens around the Asteroid Belt, where high-technology is scarce. Stealth frigates in question are only hidden while completely immobile, etc.

 

Long story short, pretty much any argument on Atomic Rockets can be refuted in relation to Expanse series. Avorion is a whole another case of course.

 

Which is why I say that The Expanse is not diamond hard SF.  In real life, any ship is going to be hotter than background, even when at rest.  If you're hotter than background, you're detectable, period.  If you light a drive, you can be seen from one end of the system to the other.  If you turn off the drive, even if you're somehow invisible, you're now flying by Newton and all those people looking at your drive flare before you shut it off will know your velocity vector and trajectory and can find you any time they want.  If you coat your ship in superblack something or other, not only are you absorbing heat in the form of infrared, and thus either cooking your crew and systems, or shunting that heat to be emitted somewhere else (making you detectable), but you're also occluding visible light which there's actually quite a lot of in space, so you'll be visible from long range as a spot of darkness where there shouldn't be one.  And this is all with off-the-shelf, passive sensing technology available today, to say nothing of the improvements such technology might undergo 200 years from now.

 

Stealth in space is a zero sum game.  If it's "refuted" in respect to The Expanse, it's because The Expanse is ignoring the physics of the problem.  Or in other words, if arguments about why there ain't stealth in space don't apply to The Expanse universe, it's because The Expanse universe is not behaving the way reality does.

 

That's not to say I dislike the show.  The Expanse is some of the best SF I've ever seen on television, the only hard SF I've seen on television (hard SF movies are rare but hard SF television was, as far as I can tell, nonexistent till The Expanse came out), and my favorite television show currently running.  But it handwaves certain laws of thermodynamics in order to tell a more entertaining story.

[Amazigh]

Spalling is not a huge concern any more with modern armors.  Read up on what little information is out there about Chobham armor (most is still classified), which is specifically designed to not only eliminate spalling but to stop HEAT rounds, which basically ignore the existence of almost all other armor types due to the way their shaped-charge is designed and delivered.

So you're telling me that the ENTIRE ship is made from chobham? even the screen that clearly had a round go straight through it?

 

Most of my perceptions of "realistic" space combat are based on Children of a Dead Earth just so you know.

[darkconsole]

Actually I have no idea what the problem with Avorion, that prevents you to have similar battles, except maybe for high-tech available after Iron. Current thrusters easily allow for unrealistic maneuvers which likely would instantly kill the entire crew otherwise.

 

I'm more looking for Donnager/Unknown-type combat, with variable range profiles, properly balanced railguns and boarding.

 

thrusters are pretty weak in 0.11, and i have this feeling that inertial dampeners only work when you let off ALL the keys, because it glows when its working, and it never glows while im rolling from thuster to thruster.

[Doc Savage NDMF]

It should be noted the TV version isn't as representative as the books in what the ships were actually equipped with to handle these high thrust/high G maneuvers.

 

In the show they have the little office chairs. In the books they have crash couches. They are gel filled and allow a body to sink in to help absorb some of the G forces. The occupants are also injected with a bunch of different drugs to allow the body to handle higher loads.

 

It was was one of the big things I was waiting to see how they did in the show. It was a bit of a let down they didn't really represent it well. There are a number of issues with side effects and with what they limits actually are in the books that will have to be written differently or glossed over.

 

The series is by James S A Corey (which is actually two guys) and are pretty good reads.

 

Cheers... 

[DivineEvil]

thrusters are pretty weak in 0.11, and i have this feeling that inertial dampeners only work when you let off ALL the keys, because it glows when its working, and it never glows while im rolling from thuster to thruster.

Directional thrusters are pretty solid in my experience. I actually think they're more unrealistic in Expanse in relation between size and the amount of maneuverability then provide.

 

Inertial dampeners are only active when your ship is breaking. Breaking naturally only occurs when you're not providing any manual input, otherwise it would interfere with your maneuvers.

[starikki]

It should be noted the TV version isn't as representative as the books in what the ships were actually equipped with to handle these high thrust/high G maneuvers.

 

In the show they have the little office chairs. In the books they have crash couches. They are gel filled and allow a body to sink in to help absorb some of the G forces. The occupants are also injected with a bunch of different drugs to allow the body to handle higher loads.

 

It was was one of the big things I was waiting to see how they did in the show. It was a bit of a let down they didn't really represent it well. There are a number of issues with side effects and with what they limits actually are in the books that will have to be written differently or glossed over.

 

The series is by James S A Corey (which is actually two guys) and are pretty good reads.

 

Cheers...

 

I will try not to put spoiler in ;)

Later they did show the injection when they are under high G constant acceleration.

 

And what happens if you are under constant high g without protection.

 

[starikki]

thrusters are pretty weak in 0.11, and i have this feeling that inertial dampeners only work when you let off ALL the keys, because it glows when its working, and it never glows while im rolling from thuster to thruster.

Directional thrusters are pretty solid in my experience. I actually think they're more unrealistic in Expanse in relation between size and the amount of maneuverability then provide.

 

Inertial dampeners are only active when your ship is breaking. Breaking naturally only occurs when you're not providing any manual input, otherwise it would interfere with your maneuvers.

 

Since in Avorion all engines are magical matter-less energy drive, typical problems of RCS thrusters like highly tweakable thrust, multi-ignition etc. don't exist, they do not have to use less efficient mono propellants or self-igniting mixtures.

If they are using the same propulsion principle I don't see why the TWR of thrusters should be any less than main drive.

 

Even for game balance, allowing ship to perform 1g acceleration with RCS in under 5-10% of surface area won't be a game breaker.

 

Also you can't compare Avorion war machine performance with RL civil application , at least we need to compare with RCS control of KKV.

 

[DivineEvil]

Since in Avorion all engines are magical matter-less energy drive, typical problems of RCS thrusters like highly tweakable thrust, multi-ignition etc. don't exist, they do not have to use less efficient mono propellants or self-igniting mixtures.

It's not necessarily "matter-less magic". Perhaps the fuel is collected from the space medium, or its just a conventional negligence similar to ammunition.

 

Even for game balance, allowing ship to perform 1g acceleration with RCS in under 5-10% of surface area won't be a game breaker.

Its not about surface area, but about the performance of smaller thrusters compared to a single engine taking up the entire volume of the given block. Again, 1 g acceleration is not in any way hard to obtain.

 

Also you can't compare Avorion war machine performance with RL civil application , at least we need to compare with RCS control of KKV.

You also cannot compare the very different scales of Avorion and RL. In Avorion, a ship of 20 units-length is relatively petty, but at the same time its a ship almost twice as big as a Saturn V rocket.

[starikki]

You also cannot compare the very different scales of Avorion and RL. In Avorion, a ship of 20 units-length is relatively petty, but at the same time its a ship almost twice as big as a Saturn V rocket.

 

yet you can get 10g + forward acceleration with a relatively small main engine...

 

I agree RCS should be weaker than main engine to an extent, but not this much, it is dozens of times weaker atm.