Comic for June 11th, 2015
June 11th, 2015

Works for shooting toward the back too.

Discussion (11)¬

  1. BrickVoid says:

    Was the phrase “bass ackwards” ever a thing in this webcomic? if it was, it would be most fitting, otherwise this is so up Johnny’s posterior! 😉

  2. Colin says:

    I hesitate to think what that does to the thing’s center of mass in flight. Probably a bit of a piloting feat to avoid a tumble when deploying it to the front or repositioning it to fire aft. Maybe the RCS automatically adjusts for the change. In manual flight, it would be like two completely different craft, though.

    • Alex Smith says:

      Colin – remember they’re in space! On a practical level, mass distributions are completely irrelevant.
      (And being more of a Space Opera than a super hard Sci-Fi, they probably have access to something akin to gravity manipulation / negation for atmospheric “flight”).

      • Hamof says:

        The location of the center of mass relative to the center of thrust is extremely important, if the center of thrust is offset then it will make you spacecraft spin, as anyone who’s ever played KSP (Or watched someone else play it.) will be able to tell you.

        • Stephen mohos says:

          In space without friction or gravity in play you would not need heavy machinery to move the gun and since the gun would be a main target for enemy ships only a fool would have anything in the part that aims the gun besides the machinery required to move it. As such, the gun and the parts that aim it may have only a fraction of the mass of the rest of the ship. For all we know the “tail” which houses the gun can be entirely controlled by elastic materials (elastic as in they return to their original shape after being stretched) and servos which would pull against the elastic materials when activated, those would take less material than something like a larger motor.

          Since there are likely calculations and automatic pilots used for warp speed in order to avoid hitting anything along the way there would likely be a decent routine in the ship’s computer for correcting for the redistribution of any mass in moving the gun. As such, as long as the computer is functional the difference perceived by the pilot can be rendered null and void through compensation.

          If that is not enough, keep in mind that larger ships use localized artificial gravity, as such artificial gravity may be used to partially compensate for mass redistribution.

    • rmsgrey says:

      And let’s not forget the off-axis recoil from firing – yes, beam weapons are low-momentum compared to particle weapons, but the difference between “low” and “no” is significant when you’re wielding vast energies…

      • Oldfan says:

        I guess Johnny’s not such bad a pilot after all, then. It’s easy to forget that he has top skills in this area, as his “skills” in other areas are sadly lacking…

    • Spiffybumble says:

      Hahaha! You guys are NERRRDSS!!!

      I feel like I’m in good company! 😀

  3. Hamof says:

    Am I the only one who thinks whoever that is in the first picture must be really uncomfortable flying like that? Assuming that forward is the direction one would assume relative to the cockpit.

    • Doc says:

      It’s a bit luge-like. I’d guess that as long as the head and back are properly supported there wouldn’t be a problem.

      • Oldfan says:

        Modern-day fighters like the F-16 recline the pilots way back, like 45 degrees from vertical. This helps with the g-forces involved in combat (the blood doesn’t all pool in the legs during maneuvers). Seeing the space fighters with a similar arrangement is not surprising at all, especially with the advances HUD electronics available as well.