I have always tried to imagine what the controls on a typical Traveller starship were like. I am referring to the standard controls for the pilot, I have thought of them being like a helicopter's with the addition of the left hand control also controlling propulsion in some manner. For example the foot pedels rotate the ship one way or the other. The right hand control acts more like the control of a airplane, while the left hand control handles throttle and altitude. Then the control panel with your instrumentation shows all the info that the pilot of course would need to pilot. I for one never cared for the controls as shown on like Star Trek and other's. I myself feel this works oout good as I figure that the controls on an airraft would be very close to this as well. What do you think the controls would be like? What would you add for direct ship controlling? I also wonder what would the requirement be for a starship to be cybercontrolled or is that already in the base cost of the ship?
Starship Flight Controls?
- Thread starter Jacqual
- Start date
dreamingbadger
Mongoose
I had always thought there would be two different kinds of controls, one for "full hands on manual control"and another for the automated support get from A to B mode.
The "Star Trek"type keyboard controls work better for the automated support, and some sort of HOTAS system for the hands on.
The "Star Trek"type keyboard controls work better for the automated support, and some sort of HOTAS system for the hands on.
Depends on TL. Higher TLs have funky "holographic dynamic" controls (think Minority Report - 3D configurable control panels).
TBH I can't really imagine that most Traveller ships would have pedals or sticks at all - that's way too low tech. I think it'd mostly be console based (certainly on the larger ships. Scouts may be like the shuttle perhaps, but a dreadnought ain't exactly going to be flying around with throttles and sticks and pedals!).
TBH I can't really imagine that most Traveller ships would have pedals or sticks at all - that's way too low tech. I think it'd mostly be console based (certainly on the larger ships. Scouts may be like the shuttle perhaps, but a dreadnought ain't exactly going to be flying around with throttles and sticks and pedals!).
Pondering it...
In a realistic flight system (by that I mean Newtonian, no X-wing style flying) you need rotation and translation controls in all three axis (roll, pitch and yaw) as well as incremental controls for evey set of drives.
With Traveller antigravity which I always had the impression gave you the ablity to direct the maneuver drives push in any direction, probably a three axis control for that too as well as a throttle equivilant.
Personally I tend to agree that we probably can't imagine a tl14 control system but how I play it is....
normal control is by a nav program...you tell it where you want to go or what you want to do and it controls ships attitude and thrust direction, doing it all but providing ever sophisticated levels of feedback and options to the pilot as TL goes up.
In those moments when manual control is a must, I usually have a button on the panel that pops up a three axis joystick (similar to modern gamesticks) with two buttons, one moves its mode between translation and rotation and the other one fires the attidude control in corse or fine mode (fine modes about 10% of corse) - Oh, no pedals, that function gets replaced by stick twist. For a little variety, some ships use a horizontal joystick with a knob on the end (a steal from the apollo system)
For smaller ships I tell the players that the M-drive in manual mode only works in fowradr and up directions and give them a pair of throttle levers. Big ships get another joystick to control the M-Drive direction and a thumbwheel for thrust level.
Up at the top end of Tech I tend to go very funky with holographic spheres you stick your hand in and hand gestures give manual commands, holographic nav systems where you use your finger to draw what you want the ship to do or just load up on expert systems and let the pilot talk to the ship.
I am fond of big MFD's for below TL12 with screen in screen and voice command displays (like I said..I get funky with the tech sometimes)
anyway..just my ideas, hope you enjoy them
In a realistic flight system (by that I mean Newtonian, no X-wing style flying) you need rotation and translation controls in all three axis (roll, pitch and yaw) as well as incremental controls for evey set of drives.
With Traveller antigravity which I always had the impression gave you the ablity to direct the maneuver drives push in any direction, probably a three axis control for that too as well as a throttle equivilant.
Personally I tend to agree that we probably can't imagine a tl14 control system but how I play it is....
normal control is by a nav program...you tell it where you want to go or what you want to do and it controls ships attitude and thrust direction, doing it all but providing ever sophisticated levels of feedback and options to the pilot as TL goes up.
In those moments when manual control is a must, I usually have a button on the panel that pops up a three axis joystick (similar to modern gamesticks) with two buttons, one moves its mode between translation and rotation and the other one fires the attidude control in corse or fine mode (fine modes about 10% of corse) - Oh, no pedals, that function gets replaced by stick twist. For a little variety, some ships use a horizontal joystick with a knob on the end (a steal from the apollo system)
For smaller ships I tell the players that the M-drive in manual mode only works in fowradr and up directions and give them a pair of throttle levers. Big ships get another joystick to control the M-Drive direction and a thumbwheel for thrust level.
Up at the top end of Tech I tend to go very funky with holographic spheres you stick your hand in and hand gestures give manual commands, holographic nav systems where you use your finger to draw what you want the ship to do or just load up on expert systems and let the pilot talk to the ship.
I am fond of big MFD's for below TL12 with screen in screen and voice command displays (like I said..I get funky with the tech sometimes)
anyway..just my ideas, hope you enjoy them
If I recall correctly, the Starship Operator's Manual has some information on the bridge and flight controls, and also includes a picture or two.
I'll double check when I get home, and if it's there I'll post a bit on what it says.
For the record, SOM is a fantastic book to pick up if you can.
I'll double check when I get home, and if it's there I'll post a bit on what it says.
For the record, SOM is a fantastic book to pick up if you can.
MrUkpyr said:
If you say so, it was always one of those books that left me vastly underwhelmed. There are lots of howlers in it. But being it is from the same crowd that developed MT that is to be expected.
But for the record I am a Heritic.
IMTU, Controls are a combination of "direct" controls and computerized touch screens. A direct stick and throttle are not necessary for much more than fine manual maneuvering.
It seems a given that Ships and Boats have different but related control systems, since you can use Piloting skill for both, but have to choose a specialization.
My guess?
Automatic controls would be similar to what we get in Star Trek - buttons to align the ship's hull to certain reference headings (orbit prograde, retrograde, etc., and target-relative modes like 'facing target', 'docking orientation', 'facing away from target' and 'computed interception' and 'manual override'. The pilot would select an orientation mode and maybe run various course management commands (intercept, dock, orbit shaping, etc.), as well as having manual controls to input exact headings and trigger thruster firing.
Where the Piloting skill comes in is selecting the right programs, running them at the right time, and inputting parameters into the system so that it makes the right choices. Pilot-0, and you know which programs are available and when to run them so that you can get the ship to and from port without breaking anything. Pilot-1, and you have enough experience to know which settings works best and can handle unusual situations. Pilot-2+ and you probably have a set of custom presets and know enough about how the programs work to make the system dance for you with some additional manual control when needed.
Manual controls in human ships would likely be a 3-axis joystick for controlling orientation (yaw/pitch with right/left, and roll by twisting the stick), a throttle for the main propulsion system, and a 3-axis joystick for fine control, like docking. Taking a cue from the "orbiter" sim program, they might have an equivalent to the helo's collective which would activate the antigrav lifting system for use in a gravity well, but IMHO unless it was a specifically streamlined craft, it would probably just get by with X,Y,Z thrust controls.
All spacecraft would be fitted with inertial guidance and gyroscopic orientation instruments (or their higher-tech equivalents - antigravity would monkey with IG systems like steel hulls did with compasses back in the 19th Century) as well as some simple docking and rendezvous sensors of some kind.
Boats, lacking powerful computers, generally use their manual controls, though must surely have automation assistance for orbit shaping and rendezvous.
Ship pilots would also be trained to use the manual systems too (and would need to use them for landing on worlds without automatic landing systems), but would also be more familiar with the usage of the automated flight programs, given that most ships are large and sluggish and generally follow predictable flight paths.
Frankly, with even the most anemic spacecraft able to generate 1G of thrust for long periods of time, the more sophisticated orbital calculations aren't necessary. Who needs a minimum-energy transfer orbit under those circumstances? That being said, certain rules of orbital mechanics would still be important for craft that spent a lot of time in orbit. However, I imagine that's "Navigation" not "Piloting".
My guess?
Automatic controls would be similar to what we get in Star Trek - buttons to align the ship's hull to certain reference headings (orbit prograde, retrograde, etc., and target-relative modes like 'facing target', 'docking orientation', 'facing away from target' and 'computed interception' and 'manual override'. The pilot would select an orientation mode and maybe run various course management commands (intercept, dock, orbit shaping, etc.), as well as having manual controls to input exact headings and trigger thruster firing.
Where the Piloting skill comes in is selecting the right programs, running them at the right time, and inputting parameters into the system so that it makes the right choices. Pilot-0, and you know which programs are available and when to run them so that you can get the ship to and from port without breaking anything. Pilot-1, and you have enough experience to know which settings works best and can handle unusual situations. Pilot-2+ and you probably have a set of custom presets and know enough about how the programs work to make the system dance for you with some additional manual control when needed.
Manual controls in human ships would likely be a 3-axis joystick for controlling orientation (yaw/pitch with right/left, and roll by twisting the stick), a throttle for the main propulsion system, and a 3-axis joystick for fine control, like docking. Taking a cue from the "orbiter" sim program, they might have an equivalent to the helo's collective which would activate the antigrav lifting system for use in a gravity well, but IMHO unless it was a specifically streamlined craft, it would probably just get by with X,Y,Z thrust controls.
All spacecraft would be fitted with inertial guidance and gyroscopic orientation instruments (or their higher-tech equivalents - antigravity would monkey with IG systems like steel hulls did with compasses back in the 19th Century) as well as some simple docking and rendezvous sensors of some kind.
Boats, lacking powerful computers, generally use their manual controls, though must surely have automation assistance for orbit shaping and rendezvous.
Ship pilots would also be trained to use the manual systems too (and would need to use them for landing on worlds without automatic landing systems), but would also be more familiar with the usage of the automated flight programs, given that most ships are large and sluggish and generally follow predictable flight paths.
Frankly, with even the most anemic spacecraft able to generate 1G of thrust for long periods of time, the more sophisticated orbital calculations aren't necessary. Who needs a minimum-energy transfer orbit under those circumstances? That being said, certain rules of orbital mechanics would still be important for craft that spent a lot of time in orbit. However, I imagine that's "Navigation" not "Piloting".
Infojunky said:
Right. Playing the "orbiter" spaceflight sim for a while really opened my eyes to what space navigation and spacecraft piloting entail. You can do quite a lot without using the manual direction controls at all, assuming you have a half-competent orientation and inertial guidance system.
Even the old TL-6 Gemini capsule had (barely) enough of a guidance system to keep the nose pointed prograde or retrograde, track the horizon, and hold a fixed orientation relative to a given target without manual control, though you needed to use the sticks to actually perform a final approach to another ship.
Apparently, this topic has sparked my imagination some.
Another option for a flight control is the "space ball", a 6 degrees of freedom control that consisted of a ball hooked to a base. You could push/pull the ball in the 3 cardinal direction, and twist the ball in the 3 rotational directions. The ball didn't move itself, but registered the pressure being applied.
Imagine that a ship has one of these on the control panel for inputting 3d information.
At higher tech levels you could merely move your hands over the surface of the panel, probably with holographic visual cues.
Another option for a flight control is the "space ball", a 6 degrees of freedom control that consisted of a ball hooked to a base. You could push/pull the ball in the 3 cardinal direction, and twist the ball in the 3 rotational directions. The ball didn't move itself, but registered the pressure being applied.
Imagine that a ship has one of these on the control panel for inputting 3d information.
At higher tech levels you could merely move your hands over the surface of the panel, probably with holographic visual cues.
GamerDude
Cosmic Mongoose
Some pretty cool thinking there hdan.
I've been thinking about the entire holographic interface. I don't know if anyone remembers "Earth: Final Conflict" but the alien's (sorry The Companion's) ships had a holographic interface installed in them, one that was designed by the character Capt. Lilly Marquet {sp?}, who was a Marine Corps pilot and not a scientist.
Now that would be a really cool pilot interface.
I've been thinking about the entire holographic interface. I don't know if anyone remembers "Earth: Final Conflict" but the alien's (sorry The Companion's) ships had a holographic interface installed in them, one that was designed by the character Capt. Lilly Marquet {sp?}, who was a Marine Corps pilot and not a scientist.
Now that would be a really cool pilot interface.
hdan said:
Galactic Patrol (E E Smith 1930-something) had the ships attitude (or course)controlled by a big ball and all the drives and attitude jets controlled by a keyboard that described as like a pipe organ (double banked piano keyboard). Always amazes me how some of his ideas worked out.
Doc Smith was a true Renaissance man; see Robert Heinlein's tribute to the man, and bear in mind that the Admiral was a tough fellow to fool on most topics. It's hardly surprising, given his background and the shaping influence he had on the culture of science and science fiction, that he would anticipate many of the details decades down the road. The man was a Master Machinist, for goodness' sake! That's the knowledge base that the entire science of ergonomics derives from - the control systems under discussion here were anticipated - and solved, in theory if not in practice - more than half a century ago. It's only now, though, that application is beginning to catch up with theory.
6 degrees of freedom tracking is already possible with a TrackIR unit on your PC (I've had every version up to 4 of this device).
http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wXx3vMy_AQ
Thus, piece of cake to make a sensitive, fail-safe unit that tracks your favourite appendage.
http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wXx3vMy_AQ
Thus, piece of cake to make a sensitive, fail-safe unit that tracks your favourite appendage.
yeah,
Another point to consider is how manual is manual control
Even these comparitively low tech days....
Most Fighters and a few modern airliners are Fly by Wire/Fly by Fibre where the pilot gives an input and the plane then figures out how to do what he wants
Airbus has said that as a policy its planes will never allow a pilot to control them out of safety limits
Boeing has comitted to a policy that in no situation will pilots of it's planes loose control authority
I do lean toward a manual input and the computer then doing the thinking rather than lots of controls. Maybe a 30 inch multi MFD with touch and voice access for normal operations and a joystick/trakball for manual flight inputs relying on the ship to figure out what you want at TL 9+ and semi holographic point and shoot stuff for even higher levels.
Theres so many potential technologies even now that could blossom out into control systems...sensors that detect where your looking and can measue your blink as a "click", voice activation, screen in screen functions and interace systems...the list goes on and on and on.
For example, think of a smartphone from 1995, then think of an iPhone and how different their functionality is.
Another point to consider is how manual is manual control
Even these comparitively low tech days....
Most Fighters and a few modern airliners are Fly by Wire/Fly by Fibre where the pilot gives an input and the plane then figures out how to do what he wants
Airbus has said that as a policy its planes will never allow a pilot to control them out of safety limits
Boeing has comitted to a policy that in no situation will pilots of it's planes loose control authority
I do lean toward a manual input and the computer then doing the thinking rather than lots of controls. Maybe a 30 inch multi MFD with touch and voice access for normal operations and a joystick/trakball for manual flight inputs relying on the ship to figure out what you want at TL 9+ and semi holographic point and shoot stuff for even higher levels.
Theres so many potential technologies even now that could blossom out into control systems...sensors that detect where your looking and can measue your blink as a "click", voice activation, screen in screen functions and interace systems...the list goes on and on and on.
For example, think of a smartphone from 1995, then think of an iPhone and how different their functionality is.
CosmicGamer
Mongoose
A lot of what people are describing sounds, to me, more like interface devices. Especially with holographic and voice interfaces, the computer is probably still what is controlling the ship based on pilot input.
When I think of manual controls, I think of something that will work even if the computer is down. Possibly even allowing control surfaces to be adjusted without the computer or power with hydrolics or mechanical linkage or some such.
When I think of manual controls, I think of something that will work even if the computer is down. Possibly even allowing control surfaces to be adjusted without the computer or power with hydrolics or mechanical linkage or some such.
lastbesthope
Mongoose
The Chef said:
It might!
:lol:
LBH
