Why do these starfighters ignore physics?

[@archmageofmetal8883]

This whole video was just an excuse to play with a lego tie fighter. And I'm all for it.

[@KevinTheID]

My grandfather worked on the SR-71 program up at Edwards Air Force Base and there are so many things about it he still can't talk about. Loved the callout of the platform you made here!

[@jotheunissen9274]

"The SR71 Blackbeard with a velocity of mach 5 and a maximum altitude of over 80000 feet" "You sure seem to know a lot about it" "DO YOU EVEN READ MY CHRISTMAS LIST?"

[@murphsmodels8853]

My dad was an astral navigation technician on SR-71's during the Vietnam war. Since he programmed the SR-71's navigation system, he new it's maximum speed. He never told us, but whenever a TV show would mention "Mach 3.2", he'd just laugh and wink.

[@KevinTheID]

@@murphsmodels8853 My grandfather said similar things anytime the topic came up about the SR-71's capabilities lol. It could probably push 3.6 or so in reality but you'd start hitting heat and airframe issues at that point.

[@Wookieman808]

@@jotheunissen9274bwuahahahahaha!!! Every single time I see anything about the SR71 this quote from TFS Alucard lives rent free in my head 😂😂😂

[@michaelanuradha-khufu74]

​@@KevinTheID Ramjet/Jet hybrid engine could prob hit Mach 4 with a 90,000 foot ceiling

[@jamesanderson6769]

I explain it in my roleplay games that the engines are programmed to simulate atmospheric flight because most pilots know how their ships handle there and probably learned to fly in an atmosphere. So them flying the same way in space helps with the learning curve. You could also say that the repolsar lifts cause a certain amount of drag on the ship and is limited to how fast it can accelerate them.

[@0rdmantell]

In Legends novels, authors like Timothy Zahn referred to a system called the “etheric rudder” that allowed starfighters to fly as if they were in atmosphere while in space. Like you said, the technology used by ships in Star Wars is beyond our understanding, but technically, since it’s really fantasy and not science fiction, it doesn’t need to make sense. People also misunderstand escape velocity all the time. You don’t have to be going any particular speed to escape a gravity well as long as your engines are more powerful than the force of gravity. If you accelerated to 2 miles per hour, balanced the thrust of your engines to counteract the force of gravity, and had unlimited fuel to keep your engines running, you would escape the gravity well. In Star Wars, they don’t seem to cut their engines to conserve fuel like we have to with real world rockets. Presumably, their engines are far more efficient than ours.

[@jhostintola3092]

Does q ballon gain speed? ​@@TPWR1337

[@murphsmodels8853]

I always figured the atmospheric maneuvers in space were a conservation of energy and fuel thing. Which is more fuel efficient. 1: use thrusters to flip the ship 180 degrees, then fire the main engines to bring the ship to a rapid stop, then back up to speed in the new direction, with your inertial compensator having to counteract all of that inertia, using energy. Or 2. Use thrusters to gently nudge the ship around in an 180 arc at 3 to 6 Gs, or whatever inertia is measured in.

[@0rdmantell]

@ It is how physics works. If there is no net force on your spacecraft because your engines are producing an opposite force to that of gravity, then you just continue at whatever speed you have.

[@1mindreeling]

I can hear Yoda telling padawans... Stop you must, mmmm... Or force blind, you shall be. I rarely comment on anything but that line about turning the dark side & the force stranger was hilarious.

[@Boppinabe]

As a starfighter pilot, I know that the reason I bank in space during combat is tactically irrelevant. The reason we do it is because it just looks so damn cool!

[@murphsmodels8853]

I get motion sick easily, so I bank into turns so that the forces push me down instead of side to side.

[@DavidGarcia-kw4sf]

The Starfuries from Babylon 5 were designed with realism in mind. In the show they move the way you would expect them to in zero-G and no atmosphere.

[@Minty1337]

im pretty sure the downside is that you're effectively knocked out by the g-forces of most maneuvers, so they really shouldn't need a pilot, if anything they're just dead weight. if anything i feel like starwars droid fighters/vulture droids are the most accurate space fighter in popular fiction because it has no crew, getting rid of any g-force limits (besides the strength of the hull itself).

[@DoremiFasolatido1979]

But at that point, you may as well have ALL combat ships of any size be either fully automated, or remote-controlled drones. The only reason for humans to be in space is either habitation, or transport. Also...something like the Star Fury is basically worthless as a space combat option. No matter the bullshit quasimagical tech, there's just no way it could have enough thrust AND carry enough propellant to be useful at the kinds of ranges real space combat would take place at. Two opposing fleets won't even be orbiting the same body, and if they are, it'll be at vastly different distances from the body, and at wildly different inclinations. Otherwise, any given battle could only last a couple of minutes, before the two fleets diverge and can't shoot each other anymore. And trying to rendezvous for combat is just stupid. On top of that, fighters/drones would be trivially easy to shoot down in space at those ranges. Something like the Gunstar from The Last Starfighter, is probably the absolute minimum any space combat craft could get down to. And there'll never be missiles as space weapons. Same problem as fighters with thrust and propellant, and they're just as easy to shoot down. The closest to fighters there'll ever really be, will probably be corvettes built to carry a single full-sized anti-capital ship weapon in a spinal mount, and then enough power and/or cargo space to make it worthwhile. Then a big-ass engine and propellant, and thrusters for high agility. It'd basically be a high-performance mobile manned space turret. But that's about as small as anything practical could ever get.

[@Minty1337]

@@DoremiFasolatido1979 i think smaller fighters have a place, but more so as swarms of drones than dedicated ships, which is why i consider the vulture droids to make sense to at least some extent. but yea, based on stuff like children of a dead earth and other more realistic interpretations of space combat, bigger is almost always better, most mass, more armor, bigger weapons, smaller is rarely better due to how inherently vulnerable and limited it makes the ship. the only exception is drones and missiles, in which case just sheer numbers make up for the lack of individual firepower and the quantity gives it redundancy.

[@busydadscooking001]

yeah, very evocative starfury movements in that show. "that's how it probably should look!" they also launch by flinging off a rotating space station segment .. and dock down the center line where there is zero G.

[@DoremiFasolatido1979]

@Minty1337 Actually, never mind. That response tells me everything I need to know about how this will turn out.

[@Voltage_711]

I would love to see a deep dive into the jamming technology in Star Wars, as we are rarely given any details. Depending on how it works, It could very well give an explanation as to why guided munitions such as missiles are severely lacking in combat

[@acecalldale234]

it could also provide an explanation for why most ships in star wars is designed with their control bridges in a tower, rather than inside the ship itself. the expectation is that you can secure the bridge, but keep tabs on the battlefield through cameras or other devices. But if Jamming Technology is advanced enough, it could potentially be used to knock out any such method. Keeping in mind that when the Trade Federation invaded Naboo during Phantom menace, it also knocked out all communications on the planet. Theoretically, the Star wars Galaxy may have Jamming Technology that does the same to cameras/other devices, which would explain why most ships place their command deck on some sort of tower. A ship that relies on cameras, would be blinded, possibly for several minutes, and scrambling for information, possibly even ramming into another ship or station because they couldn't respond in time.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

Raspberry!

[@DoremiFasolatido1979]

They shouldn't exist at all. 1) No matter the quasimagical bullshit tech, they'll NEVER have the speed or range necessary for space combat. 2) They're stupidly easy to shoot down in space. But the real reason is...pew-pew guns are "cooler." And it hurts my fucking soul (if I had one) that that's true. Humans deserve to go extinct.

[@orokusaki1243]

@@MonkeyJedi99 There's only one man who would dare give me the raspberry....LONESTAR!!

[@Drawerofstuff00]

My headcanon is that Sudden Movements could damage the pilot thanks to bloodflow being disrupted. This is why they should fly like they're in gravity.

[@eds1942]

Yeah, star fighter pilots might not have real gravity to work with, but they still have to worry about G-forces from acceleration and deceleration. So they can only endure turns and speed ups or slowdowns that we could endure under Earth’s influence anyway. And dogfights and ship engagements only make sense when everyone was at about same relative speed anyway.

[@icetang97]

inertial compensators are specifically designed to protect pilots from deadly g forces. However, it could be said they have a limit, so instant stops from top speeds followed by immediate full thrust to the left or right could still scramble a pilot’s insides.

[@Atalas5]

@@icetang97 they are also adjustable. Some pilots like having them set at a certain way, other pilots prefer a different setting. In one of the X-wing books (I THINK it was Wrath Squadron, but it might have been Rogue Squadron), Wedge notes that Jek Porkins, one of the pilots who died in the Death Star run, wasn't able to realize his X-wing wasn't acting like he thought it was because of his setting.

[@orokusaki1243]

@@icetang97 I recall, at least in legends now, that an A-wing could do 5,300 g acceleration. The pilot would be goo and the ship would hit infinite mass at the speed of light in less than 5 minutes. Rocket launches here on earth are about 5 to 7 g. My headcanon is a top-off at about 250g for inertial compensators before they're unable to do their job, it fits reasonable acceleration and spaceflight velocities for a SW setting.

[@stephenklettke370]

The force stranger 😂 damn near spit my drink out at that one 😂

[@tedrex8959]

People who watch The Expanse know all about inertial dampners after the infamous "Belter Soup" incident. But I am guessing even Kongo, (Hi Kongo, when are we getting you onscreen again?) couldn't get that clip past youtubes guidlines!

[@gabrielho1874]

"Belter soup"? You mean that guy who got instantly stopped at a stargate trying to do a high speed stunt?

[@Christmas_Joe]

The most aerodynamic ship in the franchise, the N-1 Starfighter, has the same aerodynamics as a car. And let's not talk about the TIE fighter.

[@franciszurielburgos3798]

lol

[@mbphilipblack8993]

The Twin Ion Engine more than makes up for it's wacky design lol

[@Atalas5]

the TIE Fighter has the aerodynamics of a bumblebee

[@thepsychicspoon5984]

​@mbphilipblack8993 It's still the worst sci-fi fighter ever created. Cant even give it a 1 on the cool factor.

[@richardanderson9092]

Having little enough traffic to go 70mph on the FDR drive feels like a miracle, because it is.

[@garion742]

I once saw a show (can't recall where) where someone being interviewed theorized that space fighters would be cubes with thrusters in each direction. The craft would pretty much always just make 90 degree cuts, not turns. Purely for human comfort and ability to spatially track what they need I don't think it'll be that drastic, but it won't be dogfighting like in WW2 though.

[@cerboris521]

Timothy Zahn in his Heir to the Empire series described repulsorlifts as effectively flipping the gravity that exists. That is why vehicles like speeders float a set distance above the ground. Gravity down is balanced by the flipped gravity. To ascend you add energy to the flipped gravity (repulsorlift). This means that no matter the gravity you can at least stay floating. Of course this collapses at extreme gravities like black holes.

[@taitano12]

In my head canon, the Star Wars galaxy is saturated with gasses. Not only are planetary atmospheres a LOT deeper, but there's likely pockets of gasses that coalesce at random, likely dissipating in just a few decades before they have a chance to start forming a gas giant. I have to go, so I'll have to edit this later, but I have some theories on the subject I'd like to elaborate on.

[@sumukhvmrsat6347]

Like if their galaxy is still a bit younger than our galaxy

[@taitano12]

@sumukhvmrsat6347 Well it was a long time ago... And far, far away. 🤷😁

[@deinonychus6860]

There is support for this idea. In legends, Star Wars ships had an etheric rudder, which acts on luminous space to turn like in atmosphere. Ekhart made a great video about this, too.

[@erictolle6847]

That actually matches the events of Empire Strikes back.

[@spark300c]

"In my world, there's air in outer space," "When I want it." George Lucas

[@jacob4920]

Thank you for this video Alan! I feel like this is something that EVERY critic of Star Wars needs to be educated on! I shall fervently pass on the wisdom you have bestowed upon us this day!

[@Hezy]

12:16 wait hold on… WHAT?!

[@SpeedLagging]

Also how do they make sounds in space

[@isaackim7675]

Also clapping underwater in the Mon Cala arc

[@TheMandaloreFett]

I'm pretty sure that just for the audience

[@ecyor0]

Simulated positional audio in the cockpits to help with spatial awareness.

[@jhon6378]

The Dark Side of the Force is a Pathway to many abilities that are scientifically impossible (I don't know)

[@Blathskite]

Pew pew pew

[@VERYEXCITED]

Please do a video on The Force Stranger and other secret Jedi hobbies.

[@CHMichael]

We could argue that the deathstar has its own gravity. .... for good space battle... watch "the expanse"

[@Atalas5]

it does have it's own artificial gravity generator's, and is potentially large enough to produce at least a weak gravitational field from it's mass alone.

[@raininglogic]

6:18 I half expected him to say you’d dislocate your arm but if you didn’t you’d swing around.

[@dolandarkxgrandayy6953]

They should try spinning. That's a good trick

[@JustinPivinski-cm2rh]

Let's be real, if it was realistic most people wouldn't want to watch it.

[@sumukhvmrsat6347]

Expanse : Excuse me , should I be insulted or humoured ?

[@spark300c]

well it would very different kind of battle. So do not really know. but if not line of sight fighting then its boring.

[@hadeshades2365]

I m a hobby author and my current project is a sci-fi story. Orbital mechanics take part in this endeavour. The vessels in my story don’t follow orbital mechanics while in combat to preserve reactor life spend. When in combat, they just brute force it with insane amounts of thrust (if they have the technology of cause).

[@shintaro797]

Writer here too. My book is set in and around space as well and I’m still debating whether to give the navies in my setting fighters or not😂 Thing is most wars in my world are fought in space between ships, most worlds have marine corps for boarding actions but the ships do follow orbital mechanics to a degree.

[@Zartren]

Absolutely nerdy discussions on sci-fi: perfect. :D A few notes, though. First, being in orbit simply means that we are moving sideways fast enough compared to the surface that, while we are falling and being dragged towards the object we're orbiting, we are simply missing the surface. For the most part, the reduction in the pull of gravity with distance doesn't make that much of a difference. It comes into play only when another heavy object's gravity overwhelms whatever gravity you are experiencing from the object you were orbiting. For example, you can orbit a planet that does not have an atmosphere from very close to its surface, as long as you clear the terrain and any obstacle. With that out of the way, the repulsor lifts don't necessarily play such a big a role in keeping fights slow and close. They explain why you can hover a spacecraft over a landmark, even at hundreds of kilometers in altitude out in space. You could have relatively slow fights around objects in orbit around a planet if all of the ships involved in the fight essentially share the same orbit. We do achieve to dock two objects out in orbit, after all. In time, objects at different speeds/altitudes would see their orbits diverge, and probably converge again later. But the thrust of Star Wars spacecraft are probably enough to make turning fights possible in orbit. Instead, two things that make Star Wars fights seem unrealistic are: the distances, considering the vastness of space, and planetary blockades, possible thanks to hyperspace lanes exiting right over the same spot of a planet, despite planets spinning on their axis and orbiting their star. Explanations for the second one usually touch on the fact that lanes are generally constantly kept up to date, for both safety and convenience reasons. That said, a determined attacker should be able to calculate a different hyperspace exit location near a planet, allowing them to make landfall while completely bypassing any blockade in space. Now, disregarding the above point, the real reason why Star Wars battles kinda work is thanks to faster than light travel. Without FTL, you cannot get close to your target without being spotted from very far away, at least much further away than what we see on screen in Star Wars. The other way to make it work without FTL, like in the Expanse, is to have enough stealthy ships on the offensive that the target of an attack does not have enough time to destroy all of the attacking vessels before some of them get close. Couldn't have been done to a nicer vessel, poor Donnager. But with FTL? You can jump in right by your enemy, unleashing shots that are nearly impossible to dodge at such a close range. And under such conditions, fighters and large brawling battleships do make a lot more sense. This FTL reasoning also applies to other settings, like Star Trek, Starfield, Homeworld...

[@azrealarkanius4955]

My favorite argument against “that’s not realistic” in science fiction is “how do we know?” You think people in 1900 knew what war or the tech level in general would like in 2000 or even 1950? How would we know what things would like in settings set hundreds or thousands of years in the future or in different galaxies? Yeah you don’t want to pull everything out of your behind and need things to make at least some form of sense, but we need to remember this is also fiction, not everything is going to make sense by today’s standards.

[@12oshinko]

Because George isn't a scientist or engineer. He's an entertainer.

[@k_dawg7475]

Correct. i recall he himself stated, that Star Wars is "Science Fantasy" instead of being "Science Fiction"👍🏼

[@spark300c]

petty much and he uses fantasy logic to make the Star Wars universe work.

[@Drigoon12]

Yeah but it's fun to add lore bs to things lol. It's how star wars got so expansive in the place. It's events entertainment 😊

[@Gfish17]

Even if he were an engineer he could still have come up with repulser lifts. The technology of the Star wars lore is supposed to be far more developed than our current space faring vehicles.

[@argotheslicer1654]

No

[@iNeo1]

Most scenes in space around a planet in Star Wars are not actually in orbit. They are just hovering above the planet by using antigravity. It's also much easier to bomb a target on the surface if you are stationary above it instead of zooming past it at 17,000 mph. So there is really no such thing as 'orbital bombardment', just 'high altitude bombardment'.

[@mississaugaicedogs]

Geosynchronous orbit, a fixed point in orbit above the planet's surface where the object manages to stay in sync with the planet's rotation. So thereby having orbital bombardment actually being real

[@MonkeyJedi99]

Orbiting is falling down, but missing.

[@iNeo1]

@@mississaugaicedogs Yeah but then the ship has to be much further away from the planet, like 22,000 miles away if it was Earth (ISS is only 254 miles up). The ship also has to be above the equator. Maybe if it was a very small planet which spins much faster than Earth, it'd be more viable than on an Earthlike planet.

[@cnoyes72]

Because it looks cool on screen.

[@KamikazeNinja75]

Update: "Space Stranger" almost made me crash my car when you said it. My ribs🤣🤣🤣

[@sumukhvmrsat6347]

What if Starfighters having less storage and fuel use lower speeds for more fuel lifetime ? They can jump to longer and far longer distances too , and tactical short jumps too , so to save space and consume less fuel they use less powerful engines

[@KaizerKlash111]

OR (if they are deployed mid battle like TIEs) they can go full speed, even if they only get 2 hours of flight time, but since they will be more effective going at 100% instead of 70% speed they will shoot down more X wings. Yes they need to return to base to refuel but in the meantime they shot down 0.3 more X wings

[@imperfectionist2575]

​@@KaizerKlash111 Plus no repair costs! Either you survive and need fuel/recharge/BASIC maintenance, or you're blown to smithereens!

[@jozefkozon4520]

As an aside, inertia compensator and inertia damper technology affects not only the pilot, but the machine as well, with an effect similar to drag. Fighters in SW perfectly illustrate this with this assumption. In turn, any context that does not illustrate this effect as SW does is peculiar.

[@kdusel1991]

Alan doing peak content again!!

[@heavymetal3060]

Antigravity is easy. You just attach a slice of buttered toast, which always lands butter side down, to the back of a cat, which always lands feet first. Ethics aside, it's the perfect perpetual motion engine.

[@jimmyx18f]

I gave this video a like specifically due to the “force stranger”. Dave would be proud… although he’s not dead, so maybe he is proud?

[@Ciro1500]

Small correction on one of the things you talked about. Orbit itself is what keeps the ISS afloat not the lack of gravity, gravity at that altitude is pretty close to surface gravity. The effect of weightlessness is because the ISS is moving so fast it is falling over the horizon, so it acts as if it is perpetual freefall. Not that it really changes much of your further points, but I think the distinction helps to reinforce it.

[@isaackim7675]

I’d actually feel bad for the TIE pilot when his fighter gets shot down while flying on the surface of the battlefield

[@luisemoralesfalcon4716]

Tell that to Tie Striker pilots.

[@eduardostapenko6808]

SR-71 does not really flies on turbojets. it only gains altitude and speed till it can start the ramjets.

[@mikithekynd]

In my head canon ships in SW have a limitation in their inertial dampeners technology that requires them to be pointed as close to their vector of velocity as possible in order to keep dampening the craft's inertia and not turn passengers into goo. I came to this conclusion after trying to recreate a starfighter flight characteristics in Kerbal Space Program (nice mention btw!). If you tell your craft's SAS to keep pointing Prograde, and you use RCS translation controls (IKJL and HN) without turning with WASD, your craft will start flying and turning like a starfighter, with its nose pointed in the direction of travel! So in the movies, when characters do crazy maneuvers, it can be explained as them intentionally turning off inertial dampeners and enduring extremely high Gees for just a few moments before turning dampeners back on.

[@jackleith3502]

“If you dig deep enough into the lore you can find explanations for almost anything.” Me: Furiously searching the lore books for why my parents doesn’t love me.

[@thalmoragent9344]

It's interesting, cause Vader is seemingly the only pilot who understands how space works, like shutting off his engines and just drifting to get the ideal positioning and shots in.

[@darwinskeeper421]

I've also heard that the "space" in Star Wars contains something called the ether which kind of acts like air in that it lets the ship's control system and allows the ship to maneuver like a WWII fighter.

[@blackc1479]

That earth waterball is pretty badass btw.

[@nathanieljackson5554]

I always chalked it up to some type of tech. That it was some combination of repulsor tech or a side effect of the inertial compensator that caused spacecraft to operate as if in atmosphere. And it's also a space opera, so everything is designed to be dramatic.

[@bsmnt23]

About the maneuvering of starships in SW I'm pretty sure it has a lot to do with their known technologies of hyperspace manipulation, gravity generation, inertia and mass manipulation and enormous energy production. Regardless of the mentioned technologies they still use basic rockets and turbines to propel ships through space, but those rockets are ridiculously small to move these ships to any kind of real speed. Therefore, I believe they use a technology to transfer a large portion of their mass into hyperspace, which is then subject to much different natural rules. Much like a sailing ship uses the wind to propel itself over the ocean, the more a ship can transfer its mass into a higher dimension, the greater its ability to effect maneuvers in realspace. Then, to stop along its own vector, all they have to do is reduce the amount of mass they're projecting into hyperspace until their own natural inertia slows them down naturally. There are similar technologies in SciFi properties used for inspiration of SW, like the Lensmen series, so it's not actually too far-fetched.

[@reokobalta8839]

Please watch The Expanse

[@Hezy]

Gravity still exists in orbit, and you’re constantly falling towards the earth. However, you’re falling so fast that you’ll keep falling into orbit.

[@lampy5490]

As a further point: Technically, low earth orbit is freefall. You are constantly being pulled towards the centre of Earth's mass but the velocity imparted by launch x your mass keeps you falling forward around the Earth.

[@acecalldale234]

i also have a theory similar to this on why -in star wars, we can hear in space. normally, Sound travels through the vibration of atoms and molecules in a medium -like air and water, to our ears which registers it as noise. that is why you cannot normally hear in space, because it lacks such things my suspicion is that there exists a small device in all spaceships that is designed to detect the vibrations emitted by vessels and explosions in space, and translates those vibrations into noise inside the starship. This would be valuable to all pilots, who likely depend on sound when they fly. The Star wars Galaxy is supposed to be leagues and bonds ahead of earth's own technological abilities, so it wouldn't be too far fetched to envision them having created such a device

[@spark300c]

"In my world, there's air in outer space,". "When I want it."-George Lucas.

[@orokusaki1243]

sound vibrations need a medium to travel through. so your device would have to be electromagnetic detectors and an audio processor with speakers. of course, the tactical display should also be able to gather tracking and status information, and simulate appropriate sounds. we certainly have this technology.

[@ITHYANDEL]

5:34 truth is, escape velocity or orbital velocity are fast enough to allow the ship to keep missing the ground in its fall toward earth. It makes the falling trajectory at least match the diameter of earth...

[@Minty1337]

4:05 "just kidding, he just exploded and died" come on, not even gonna give him a bit of credit for trying lmao, maybe a chunk of his stupid chair made it to the upper atmosphere or something

[@orokusaki1243]

Repulsorlift - is not a propulsion system, it mitigates the effects of gravity Inertial Compensator - works to significantly dampen/nullify g-forces, else pilots would instantly become goo Thrusters/Engines - this is the propulsion system, in atmosphere the resistance is the atmosphere, out of atmosphere there is no resistance. nobody wants to go 700 MPH to reach orbit, that would take ~30 minutes, and we don't see that slow of an ascent..even on Aldahni they made it to orbit in under 10 minutes in a slow freighter while flying through a meteor shower. thus, there's more to it that may be unknown via current SW lore, so would be the least believable part of all of this. Now, here's the rest of the puzzle: Stabilizers - just like the rest of the technology, these are likely quantum units that interact with the fabric of spacetime to give some "grip and traction" and "steering", without restricting 3d movement (like a magnet under a table, moving something on top of the table). we don't see thrust-based reaction control systems on most (or any) SW space ships (and wouldn't produce the desired effects if they did exist), so it must be an internal component akin to a repulsorlift but more like a reaction wheel. u-turns, banks, and rolls would all be enabled by such a device.

[@johns8364]

Because a realistic orbital velocity would look like a blurry smudge for two frames if you're lucky. That's boring. Battlestar Galactica comes close to realistic battles by using RCS thrusters to turn sideways in space, but even those vipers are traveling way slower than they should be.

[@russellharrell2747]

The dogfight sequences in Star Wars are based on old WWII movies. So they fly like fighters from that war. It’s that simple. It makes visual sense on screen and feels right for the audience. That’s all that matters

[@ChefSpinney]

Also worth noting that humans have a specific evolved frame of reference that would make those 'tic-tac' flight patterns counter intuitive and difficult, if not impossible, to perform effectively. We can only look in one direction effectively at a time and it's reasonable to expect that space flight capable fighters would conform to these requirements. It would also be reasonable to expect that, given the nature of their repulsor lifts and the square-inverse law that describes the effects of gravity, repulsor lifts would become less effective the further from the gravity fields source, creating greater reliance on thrusters, which are all placed in the rear. Even in zero-G Newtons laws of motion still apply: something pushes you from behind, you move forwards. Thrust vectoring allows for turns and maneuvering, but that thrust still only pushes in one direction at a time. That's my take on it anyways.

[@daveonwheeler7412]

X wings

[@ralphflint4264]

Walter Jon Williams's The Praxis contains space battle that DO seem to conform to the ideas of orbital mechanics, and was a good bit of space opera to boot! 😁

[@johan23501]

Nice video! :) Also, Star Wars is never meant to be realistic. :)

[@xxvaltielxx1789]

Wait, you mean there was never a Galaxy far far away that was at constant war a long time ago?! The hell?

[@MrQuantumInc]

The repulsorlift explanation still implies that combat would be more Newtonian the farther you are from any gravity well. This would be rare since ships are typically hyperdriving straight close from one planet to close by another planet, but it would sometimes happen.

[@followerofthemantle3489]

Isn't canon that ships in Star Wars have a type of shield that allow them to 'ignore' air resistance? Add in inertia dampers and gravity generators things together and then you're only limited by the structural strength of your craft, how fast you can react, and how 'tough' you are. Aka, without the right tech space battles would look like the Expanse, but then with those 'impossible' techs things would happen get faster, but you would still be limited by piloting, materials, how good the tech is, how much money the builders were willing to spend, and, ironically, the same physics that governs the space battles in the Expanse, which is something I've noticed a lot of people don't understand. The faster you move in one direction, the more energy you have to use to stop and go the other way, but if you were turning, then it would be far more energy efficient (and less stressful on the ship and crew) to maneuver in would end up looking like as a banking motion then try and pull of a 90 degree turn. Funny enough the math (and KSP) supports this, as you have to start moving (turning/thrusting) before you're parallel to your destination to avoid overshooting it. Add this to how the slower you are (relatively) the easier you are to hit because you can't move as quickly, of course starfighters in Star Wars would look like they fighting in WWII dogfights, aka: Go too fast and you might wreak your ship or knock yourself out (by going past what your tech can handle), maneuver too quickly however and the same might happen, but go too slow and you're an easy target for the faster fighters who have the speed and energy where they can get in and get away before you can react. Zero-gee fighting still works, but it would become situational in the world, and tech, that is Star Wars.

[@RayHardman7567]

It would seem to me like the ships act the way they do, is because you have to be up close and personal in star wars. Lasers have an effective range, the closer you are, the more powerful the blast is when it hits, doing more damage. And no amount of technology will allow you to instantly change direction.

[@ShundoZiggy]

“Force stranger” is crazy brother

[@mtzzero]

You could probably manuever a spacecraft like a fighter jet, but that’d be incredibly fuel inefficient. Also when they are close to a planet like at Scariff I think they would definitely be monitoring their velocity because if they lose to much speed while manuevering theyd get pulled into the atmosphere.

[@Troylewe]

Alan, now spacecraft get all the physics love, what do think of land vehicles? Like comparing modern tanks to A Droids tanks? Hover vs Walkers vs wheels? Just thought for a video?

[@Marisa_arts]

If you have the fuel, you can leave the Earth's gravity over a couple of hours at a low speed of 10-80 mph. A lot of things can leave the gravity well if you have the fuel, but the higher Thrust to Weight can make that time of a couple of hours end up in the range of a couple of minutes. That is why we have a higher Thrust to Weight for objects on earth with our technology. If you ask about the balloons we let go for them to go to space, here's the thing, the helium they have does end up freezing over and leaving the balloon as it gets closer to the edge of space, so it never makes it.

[@lyme1030]

Great Video once again tho "What i like to call a: Force Stranger" is WILD xD

[@GGBlaster]

I think the important thing is to be careful when applying real world logic to fictional universes. This doesn’t absolve writers the responsibility of facilitating the suspension of disbelief, but hyper-analysis can suck the fun out of entertainment.

[@johannessondrup6207]

Look up 'Luminiferous Aether' :) That's all the explanation you need for how the starships fly in Star Wars

[@orokusaki1243]

Better in SpellJammer, than Star Wars.

[@bojik2616]

Well we can create weird gravity effects and make things float with massive magnetic fields around them. Closest real-world technology to antigravity, that's not theoretical or only plausible on the micro scale, like warp drive. Warp drive is proven plausible on the micro scale, but requires absurdly massive power levels to produce on the micro scale.

[@orokusaki1243]

Moving through space does take a lot of time, effort, and energy, and has limitations. Gotta do like Cthulhu and Star Wars, and move between spaces.

[@MN2_Kevin_Hill_1970]

Great video

[@gaming_bigfoot]

Title apostrophe got a bit too much love again but I saw you fixed it last time Description apostrophe went MIA though huh Oh, hmm.... Description "Starfighers" missing a "t" there too

[@eds1942]

I never really understood how artificial gravity actually works in most scifi, whether Star Trek, Star Wars, Stargate or Farscape. I understand the practicality of it, but not how. That’s one of the things that I liked about the Expanse. They compensate for the low or no gravity with either magnetic boots on metalic plates, or centrifugal force or constant acceleration, for when gravity was lower than places like Ganymede, because the human body needs that type of resistance even for dealing with a bad injury. No gravity + internal bleed or even from a gun shot could be a death sentence because without gravity, the blood just pools up.

[@orokusaki1243]

Quantum physics is where you might find some answers. Create fluctuations, get effects.

[@eds1942]

@ Well in Star Trek, artificial gravity is created by using a hypothetical subatomic practice called the graviton, generated by a gravity generator and passed through the gravity deck plates, creating an gravity net across each deck. By hypothetical, I mean not real. The other problem being, would that not make the ceilings down too? Or does the field generates only extend so many feet above the floor? Or is there some type of graviton insulating barrier between decks?

[@johnhodgson4216]

The counter-argument, is that the 'inertial dampener' is not 100%, so your left with a residual g force and forces that act like you're on earth. in the Timony Zhan book 'luke turned down his 'inertial dampener to 95% or 90% I don't know, so that he could feel gravity simulated. The physics of Star Wars is really unknown, like the temp of the 'blue lightsaber' plasma blade is about 10,000 C to 50,000 C, very hot temps, let alone the single 'purple star' is cooler. but forcefields and magnetic fields in earth tech would be electrostatic fields and magnetic fields. it's just the tech of Star Wars is really unknown... a long time ago.

[@rayswiatek5948]

It's because it's a movie.

[@jbone5830]

Force stranger lol I love it! And that is a valid point you could pull one off anywhere the only give away would be your Oface and wet spots

[@andrewcombe8907]

To escape Yavin gravity at the speeds shown in ep IV, the x wings and y wings needed twice the thrust of a space shuttle then to cover the distances to the Death Star in under 5 mins would need to travel at light speed.

[@tacobowler]

Love KSP!

[@yo_boi_john4471]

Well the sr-71 needed constant thrust to keep at speed, where the ISS only needs a small puff here and there. Also KSP2 wasn't finished. KSP is over 9 years old and has been fleshed out.

[@spark300c]

if keep moving away form the earth eventually the gravity pull will get so weak that escape velocity will become a low number. it why black holes if get close enough even light can not escape. the crazy thing is that George saids in Star Wars there is air in space. "In my world, there's air in outer space,". "When I want it."-George Lucas So in star war universe space is not a vacuum. It just really thin. So yes you can space battles that look like dog fights in Star Wars universe.

[@Wanaskiwin]

I always figured it had more to do wit the fact they don't have reverse thrust.

[@nathansheldahl]

They don’t need to beat the planet’s gravity as they have achieved mastery over gravity and control where the pull of gravity (center of gravity or has the most mass) at will. Thats what turbolifts and other “antigravity” devices do. There’s no such thing as antigravity but you can achieve the same effect by controlling where the center of gravity is with the right technological knowledge.

[@planetofthepete]

Gotta geek check you on this one Allan - sorry ... The repulsor lift was a fiction created to enable atmospheric flight and 'float' near large gravitational masses. Manoeuvre was actually achieved through a device called an 'Aetheric control surface' The Aetheric control surface was a device that interacted with a fictional phenomena known as the 'Aether' or 'Ether' to create changes in momentum much like wind resistance in real life. ... Timothy Zhan used this in his books, so did Mike Stackpole in the Rogue Squadron books ... the Aetheric rudder, for example, acted like a real rudder and allowed dramatic manoeuvres that added suspense. Fun fact - the Ether was actually a pseudo scientific principle from Victorian times - Scientists actually thought that the space between planets was occupied by a mysterious substance - the nature of which we did not know ... but it was invisible and hence probably similar to a gas, vapour or ... ether.

[@tektrixter]

In Victorian times Aether theory was science, not pseudo science. It was based on the idea that waves needed a medium in which to move (eg sound in air or water). They didn't know at that time that light was an electromagnetic wave that could move in a vacuum.

[@planetofthepete]

@@tektrixter Good to know thankyou! ... A good reminder that I shouldn't apply pejorative terms to Victorian science. I always saw Aether as a placeholder theory for later experimental confirmation ... much life dark matter / dark energy ... we cant see it, but the maths suggests it might be a solution.

[@orokusaki1243]

@@planetofthepete the maths could be bandaids for their theory, and not the actual reality. possibly a step forward, but could also be a step back.

[@1canadiankid1]

“A force stranger” 😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@2fathomsdeeper]

Actually, the X-wing could maneuver in space with it's engines by thrust vectoring.

[@aaronsanborn4291]

Simple answer acceleration, deceleration, hard turns etc still produce G forces

[@BryceByerley]

Star Wars: The Phantom Stranger.

[@mikeythezero]

A force stranger lol force waking from the other side

[@Wzrd8]

Don't worry man, Kitten Space Agency soon, HarvestRs making it.

[@vic5015]

Probably a stylistuc choice by George.

[@tetrasphere8165]

If the ships were going to move around like that ufo theyd need to build them like that practice ball that shot at baby yoda. Lukes training ball.

[@desperado8605]

😂😂😂thanks for the last bit im laughing like a special seal now. I think it's just most pilots train in atmosphere so they fight how they train

[@mattsteele7681]

The one show that I know of that did it right. Was Babylon 5.

[@kirkbolas4985]

So how much gravitational force did the DS1 create that needed to be compensated for?

[@WissenBros]

3:47 same

[@wraith7989]

It’s cool. Do we really need a better explanation than that?

[@jaanikaapa6925]

My gripe with the SW dogfights is that thry don't use missiles. Just look at the X-Wing trilogy.

[@scottchadwick1247]

Tie Fighters do hover in atmosphere.

[@screamingeagles2670]

Been playing ksp just before watching this. Just captured a D class asteroid and put in low Mun orbit.

[@luisemoralesfalcon4716]

Hmmm, sometimes we, the fans, think of things the author doesn't.