Aerospace Fighters - side thrusters

[idea weenie]

Instead of having the entire engine pointing out the rear, some of the thrust is being channeled into side jets to improve maneuverability.

Design rules:
1) decide how many thrust points you want going to a single side
2) Double that to reflect that it will be mirrored for the opposite side
3) Add to that the number of Thrust Points you want going out the rear
4) That is the total thrust points you will need when selecting an engine

So if you have a 45-ton ASF that you want 1 point to each side and 5 pts of standard Thrust, your total Thrust will be 1 * 2 + 5 = 7, minus 2 for ASF bonus yields 5, multiplied by ASF mass of 45 tons yields the craft needing a 225-rated engine (5*45).

Game rules:
1) At any time during the movement phase you can relocate the fighter 1 hex to the forward left or forward right hex for each side thrust point available.  This is in addition to legal turn rate, and does not reset the number of hexes traveled in a straight line.
2) The Thrust spent to perform this maneuver only counts as regular Thrust, not Overthrust


Yes, that means if you have a 5/8 ASF with 1/1 side thrust, you can technically move 6 spaces ahead.  This is because first side thruster move it one hex forward and left, the second thruster moves it forward and right, net is the ASF spending 2 thrust points to move 1 hex forward .  You get a more nimble ASF, but lose out on the straight-line Thrust.

Technically existing craft could have this refit done to them, losing 2 (or 4, or 6) points of thrust, and getting half that amount as side thrust.  So an Eisensturm that is 6/9 could become 4/6 with a Thrust 1 side jet on each side.  A jet that is 7/11 could become 3/5 with 2 pts of Thrust to each side (3+2*2 = 7)


(Got the idea from reading how Harriers would use their vertical take-off ability to be more maneuverable in a dogfight.  By making the side thrusters increase the overall engine rating this is both easy to calculate and a nasty penalty.)

[AlphaMirage]

Aerospace fighters can actually use the air hammer move that jump jets use in atmospheric dogfighting. I think you can even side slip in the advanced rules already. Certainly warships have the ECHO maneuver. The real limit is the pilot's skill, honestly ASF pilots should start at 4/4 or 4/3 G/P since advanced maneuvers have some high modifiers even just landing vertically on a 1g planet is tough.

[pokefan548]

Yeah, a lot of this is already accounted for in some respect by sideslips in low-altitude atmospheric movement and your one maneuvering thrust in advanced rules space movement. Might be fun as a bit of experimental equipment to allow the latter infinite maneuvering thrusts, but eh.

[BATTLEMASTER]

I think this would be very useful if Newtonian space movement rules were being used.  Less "Asteroids" and more "X-Plane".  One wouldn't have to change facing as much to point the star drive in a way to make the craft decelerate or change direction.

[DevianID]

So in space, aerospace fighters have so much turning potential that you dont need this.  What I mean, is that just 1 thrust point in the 1 minute space turns can spin a fighter like 40+ times easy.  1 thrust point in 1 minute can spin the largest ship the Leviathian 5 hex turns, but the warship has issues with its length causing centrifugal force stresses along the spine (like how toppling buildings crack in the middle), meaning spending 1 thrust per hex turn on the largest warships is actually fine.  But fighers have no such problem with their small size, and can safely spin like a top.

Fighters in space 'SHOULD' operate like infantry on the ground, with no facing... they are so small and over thrusted PLUS with VTOL/vectored thrust abilities for free, so facing changes would be nothing for them.  The 'newtonian' physics of vector movement is all wrong, none of that math works, so its fine to toss that.

Fighters in the Air using vtol on the other hand have other issues.  Most importantly, you have to be moving slow for the VTOL to mean something... moving fast and using the vtol thrusters just lets you climb elevations more, as you are generating lift and drag when moving with speed, so the belly thrusters just push you up.  (Aerofighers have ridiculous climb rates, they can go 90 degrees vertical no problem.  Its only going down too fast that they have trouble with) If you wanted, you could use the vtol thrusters on an aerofighter to act like a WIGE or VTOL instead, by drastically reducing your speed so you dont operate like a fixed wing lifting body.  I think a 6/9 aerofighter being able to act like a 6/9 vtol or WIGE is pretty fair, and a better representation of the VTOL ability then just spending 2 MP to hover and do nothing else like how the current rules work.  Its really an issue of speed... if you go too fast, you cant help but start flying and suffering turning drag cause of those wings, so your 'vtol' speed should be pretty slow, but it WOULD let a 6/9 aerofighter turn on a dime BECAUSE it is going too slow for drag to kill its turn radius.

[idea weenie]

So in space, aerospace fighters have so much turning potential that you dont need this.  What I mean, is that just 1 thrust point in the 1 minute space turns can spin a fighter like 40+ times easy.  1 thrust point in 1 minute can spin the largest ship the Leviathian 5 hex turns, but the warship has issues with its length causing centrifugal force stresses along the spine (like how toppling buildings crack in the middle), meaning spending 1 thrust per hex turn on the largest warships is actually fine.  But fighers have no such problem with their small size, and can safely spin like a top.

Fighters in space 'SHOULD' operate like infantry on the ground, with no facing... they are so small and over thrusted PLUS with VTOL/vectored thrust abilities for free, so facing changes would be nothing for them.  The 'newtonian' physics of vector movement is all wrong, none of that math works, so its fine to toss that.

Fighters in the Air using vtol on the other hand have other issues.  Most importantly, you have to be moving slow for the VTOL to mean something... moving fast and using the vtol thrusters just lets you climb elevations more, as you are generating lift and drag when moving with speed, so the belly thrusters just push you up.  (Aerofighers have ridiculous climb rates, they can go 90 degrees vertical no problem.  Its only going down too fast that they have trouble with) If you wanted, you could use the vtol thrusters on an aerofighter to act like a WIGE or VTOL instead, by drastically reducing your speed so you dont operate like a fixed wing lifting body.  I think a 6/9 aerofighter being able to act like a 6/9 vtol or WIGE is pretty fair, and a better representation of the VTOL ability then just spending 2 MP to hover and do nothing else like how the current rules work.  Its really an issue of speed... if you go too fast, you cant help but start flying and suffering turning drag cause of those wings, so your 'vtol' speed should be pretty slow, but it WOULD let a 6/9 aerofighter turn on a dime BECAUSE it is going too slow for drag to kill its turn radius.

These side thrusters are not be a rotational change, they are actual movement.  So if you use the starboard thruster you are not turning to port, you are moving from 1 hex to another, and even adding a value of '1' to the appropriate facing on the Advanced Aerospace Movement Sheet (Strategic Ops, 4th printing, p175).

As to fighters in space being infantry, that is completely true, and I have ideas for that which belong in another thread.

This is also not a VTOL movement, that is handled by the existing engine rules.  I thought about putting extra engines for VTOL movement, but wanted to stick with side thrust first.

[DevianID]

Ah so the side thrusters would let you move like a quad, side stepping without needing a slip maneuver at the cost of the 2 bonus thrust aerofighters get.  That's cool, more low speed maneuver options versus raw sprint speed.