Eve Manual Piloting
Emerenciana Mcgreal
Manual piloting is the act of manoeuvring a ship without using commands relative to another object, like orbit, keep at range, approach, etc. It is achieved by double left clicking on empty space. Your ship will then orient itself and move in that direction. Your perspective, and thus where you're clicking is affected by the position of your camera, so if you require precision, zoom out as far as you can. A simple example of manual piloting is when your ship is stuck on a collidable structures. If you can't align to warp because you're too close to the structure, you have to double click away from it to increase distance. Manual piloting includes using keyboard arrow keys to change direction or changing your ships speed by clicking on the speedometer at the bottom of the ship control panel.
It should be noted that during step 4 you can either escape from the villain's point range, OR try and burn straight at him once he has reached the zenith of his orbit, and then attempt to land tackle.
Move camera so target is in center in front of you (12 o'clock). Double-click halfway between center and edge of screen. Continue to double-click as you get closer. Note: the further away from the center you double-click, the more transversal you'll have; however, it will take longer to reach the target.
Counter: one way to counter a spiral is move to where the spiraler is going. If the spiraler is headed x/y (where y is towards you and x is perpendicular), then also move x to cancel transversal. ie. it's easier to shoot a moving car if you're going beside it at the same speed instead of turning your gun to follow it
Counter:One way to counter kiting is to further increase distance. If you're chasing, turn around and have the target chase you (the target would like to keep within optimum range). When this happens turn back towards the target at full speed (an ab/mwd would help here). The target still needs time to turn around and accelerate. Hopefully, you can get within your range while this happens.
Unlike stations, stargates or celestials, you can't align to an acceleration gate's destination. Zoom out and line up the camera so the acceleration gate is straight on your sights (the large end of the acceleration gate should be directly behind the small end). Double-click along this direction (you can't double-click the gate itself) so your ship is pointing to where you'd accelerate to.
Approach target. Activate afterburner/microwarp drive. Bump. Note: microwarp drive bumps more than afterburner. Ideally, you want to have enough range to reach maximum speed and not run out of cap for your ab/mwd
Support News Classic F.A.Q. Discord Discussions Wiki Roadmap Cosmoteer Official Forum Loading... This site is best viewed in a modern browser with JavaScript enabled. Something went wrong while trying to load the full version of this site. Try hard-refreshing this page to fix the error. Manual piloting mode CrazyMan Right now ship movement is similar to an MMO game, a series of furious speed clicks to get it to go where you want, turn, or shoot at the damn target. What i propose is a WASD control option to fly your ships how you would fly them. Also the mouse could have a dumbfire weapons mode where when you aim and click that's where the cannons fire. The ability to toggle auto pilot and auto aim would give the player a greater sense of piloting ability and give the option of being the overseer of a fight or being in one.
I get this request pretty frequently. I'm not planning to add it to the core game, BUT, once modding is officially supported, I plan for this to be a mod that ships with the game that can be turned on.
But at the end of the day, the stats reflect a perfect order being issued to the machine, I can only speculate that manual piloting would reduce/increase (which ever is the bad one) these stats due to human reactions.
Better agility allows you to accelerate faster and do tighter turns. So definitely beneficial if you want to do manual piloting, and it is the reason why nanos are often picked over overdrives since the extra agility is worth more than the small amount of extra speed.
Selecting maneuver is functionally mostly confined to these options:
Fly straight line in space
Sit still
Orbit a jettison can
Orbit target at selected range
Keep target at selected range
Approach target.
Next, they swung Starliner around and pointed the nose away from Earth to look at the stars. This was to show they can manually use the star trackers in the VESTA system to establish their attitude in space in case all three flight computers were to ever go out or be turned off at the same time.
Then, they manually sped Starliner up and then slowed it down, which slightly raised and then lowered their orbit. This was to show that the crew could manually break away from the space station orbit during rendezvous, if necessary.
All current rockets pull massive G forces in the early stages of ascent. It is essential to get up to orbital velocity as quick as possible, because at low speeds you waste propellant fighting gravity. High G forces would make the rocket difficult to control.
Most rockets go into a low Earth parking orbit initially, and this barely skims the Earth's atmosphere. Without significant guidance, a pilot would not have the precision to enter such an orbit, so would need to overshoot, putting the spacecraft into a higher (or more likely, elliptical) orbit as this would be a safer option than undershooting and ending up entering the atmosphere and crashing in an undetermined part of the world. Such an orbit would be a waste of propellant. If you are going to provide a guidance system, you may as well link it directly to the engine rather than having an unnecessary step of using the pilot.
Manual orbital rendezvous has been tried, and the first attempt failed due too poor understanding of orbital mechanics. More information about that can be found in this Wikipedia article about space rendezvous.
More spectacular manual piloting occurred during the Apollo 13 lunar mission, including changing the orbit. When the service module failed, the astronauts were forced to abandon their descent to the Moon's surface and instead use the lunar module as a lifeboat. They executed several burns of the lunar module's engine in order to return to Earth, according to instructions from mission control and using the Earth and celestial bodies out of the window for reference. This NASA's source gives a good overview of what was required. Things to note are:
This gives an example of what is involved in navigating a spacecraft. Note that they had several very small correction burns to carry out and given that they had several hours between the burns they had (some) time. I do not believe it would be a good idea to carry out such manoeuvres manually in close proximity to the Earth, as an incident would be disastrous.
The Vostok was controlled completely automatic or from ground, since it was feared that Gagarin might pass out or would be otherwise unable to control the spacecraft correctly. The controls were even locked but Gagarin had a code he could have used to unlock them.
Mercury-Redstone 3 had an automatic ascend but Shepard took manual control during the flight to do some experiments. NASA scientists/engineers didn't even want to include manual controls for Mercury but the pilots insisted they be added (and a window) so they can do something if the automation fails (which turned out to be a good idea).
Depending on your definition of orbit, the X-15 Aircraft was flown above the Krmn line to 108km in flight 91. At its Apogee, it had no aerodynamic control and was in a rather elliptical orbit. If you insist on once-around, the other answers are most likely the authoritative ones.
There is both an automatic and manual flight control for the X-15. I didn't find an absolute reference as to whether flight 91 was piloted in manual mode or not. However, some non-atmospheric X-15 flights clearly were in manual mode.
After increasing evidence of a decline in manual handling skills in airline pilots, the US FAA has now recommended that airlines should allow pilots to hand-fly during normal operations whenever possible. Captains JOHN LEAHY FRAeS and ALEX FISHER provide the background to this ground-breaking shift.
It may not come too soon. Coincidentally, as this piece was being put together, there have been at least two reported (and yet to be fully investigated) major near-misses recorded in commercial aviation in the space of the past few weeks.
In two alleged separate incidents in December and January large widebody aircraft from United Airlines and Qatar Airlines are reported to have come within 800ft of crashing into the water following take-off. Each had the potential for the loss of hundreds of lives.
The FAA recently published Aviation Circular [AC 120/123] Flight Path Management, in which it has clearly stated the importance of pilots having the skills to fly the plane when the automation fails. To paraphrase the document it concludes that manual flying skills are paramount for flight safety, that automation requires more training, not less, and that it is not a binary choice between manual and automated flight. Both are essential components with different but complementary skill sets needed.
The rationale was that too many recent accidents, fatal hull losses and Loss of Control (LOC-I) events had a lack of Instrument Flying (IF) ability as a factor. We were also concerned that numerous official final accident reports often failed to allocate cause to what were human failings. They often cite such effects as startle, surprise and illusions as the causes of the event. These effects do exist, but well-trained instrument-rated IFR pilots are trained to overcome them, recover their ability to think and recover the aircraft.
Another trend identified in the reports was the employment by some carriers of pilots with a history of poor flying ability. Many seem to habitually fail and need to repeat annual checks or underperform in other ways, yet remain employed up to the time of the final fatal crash.
c80f0f1006