Piloting high-performance models harder than entirely new machines?

The future is now. This is the place for mecha and science.
Post Reply
False Prophet
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 7:40 am

Piloting high-performance models harder than entirely new machines?

Post by False Prophet » Sat Nov 28, 2020 12:10 pm

Just wondering, the Zaku High Mobility Types have always been said to be hard to master, right? But how hard is it compared to the Gelgoog? Which do you think create this difference? Hardware to software. And I would extend that questions to the GINN High Mobility Type and the GuAIZ.

User avatar
Seto Kaiba
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Piloting high-performance models harder than entirely new machines?

Post by Seto Kaiba » Sat Nov 28, 2020 3:33 pm

False Prophet wrote:
Sat Nov 28, 2020 12:10 pm
Just wondering, the Zaku High Mobility Types have always been said to be hard to master, right? But how hard is it compared to the Gelgoog? Which do you think create this difference? Hardware to software. And I would extend that questions to the GINN High Mobility Type and the GuAIZ.
This is one of those cases of "reality ensues"... if you increase the performance of a vehicle, you will almost always sacrifice handling stability to do it. Some modifications may stress the frame in ways that were not anticipated by the designers, like increased rocket thrust potentially exceeding the mobile suit's ability to hold posture or having additional power to the field motors may cause pilots to accidentally overestimate the power needed for a motion.

Part of it may also be training. Most pilots would be trained on the stock model, and switching to one that handles differently as a result of modifications to increase its performance is going to throw off the intuition that the pilot developed about their machine during training.
The Macross Mecha Manual
Yes, we're working on updates...

User avatar
MythSearcher
Posts: 1222
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:36 pm

Re: Piloting high-performance models harder than entirely new machines?

Post by MythSearcher » Sun Nov 29, 2020 10:08 pm

Seto Kaiba wrote:
Sat Nov 28, 2020 3:33 pm
This is one of those cases of "reality ensues"... if you increase the performance of a vehicle, you will almost always sacrifice handling stability to do it. Some modifications may stress the frame in ways that were not anticipated by the designers, like increased rocket thrust potentially exceeding the mobile suit's ability to hold posture or having additional power to the field motors may cause pilots to accidentally overestimate the power needed for a motion.

Part of it may also be training. Most pilots would be trained on the stock model, and switching to one that handles differently as a result of modifications to increase its performance is going to throw off the intuition that the pilot developed about their machine during training.
That is why I always hated how AOZ just keep adding stuff to a frame without thinking of such.
The TR-4 is still just a MS sitting on a big frame, I can still kinda accept that idea(though it would likely be very inefficient)
Then they have the Fiver, which, the shoulder parts don't look anything like they would be within the design capabilities.(Or the original design is just so inefficiently strong and heavy)
They started to integrate everything back onto the TR-1, which is supposed to run on an RGM-79Q frame? Yes, I known the original TR-1 Hazel is supposedly newly built unit only based on the 79Q, but the Hazel Custom and Hazel II are just onverted 79Q, how on Earth can it support such addons?
And then there's the TR-6. *Facepalm*
Yes, I'd admit some of those looked cool, but none of them required that small MS unit in the middle.

I highly doubt the pilots being able to adapt to any of them at all, even if they are test pilots, it is very likely they just keep throwing them into battle situations without and care about they are essentially piloting an entirely new machine every time they strap a bunch of new stuff on it.

Also, other than piloting new machines, it seems like they aren't really doing much of the actual testing and evaluating of them, and the higher ups in Gundam just love to throw them in real battles instead of asking them to evaluate whether the machines match what they claim to be or compared to older models/models in competition against.

User avatar
Seto Kaiba
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Piloting high-performance models harder than entirely new machines?

Post by Seto Kaiba » Sun Nov 29, 2020 11:24 pm

MythSearcher wrote:
Sun Nov 29, 2020 10:08 pm
I highly doubt the pilots being able to adapt to any of them at all, even if they are test pilots, it is very likely they just keep throwing them into battle situations without and care about they are essentially piloting an entirely new machine every time they strap a bunch of new stuff on it.
The most realistic reaction to that nonsense was Oliver May's... confused screaming and mild panic.
The Macross Mecha Manual
Yes, we're working on updates...

User avatar
MythSearcher
Posts: 1222
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:36 pm

Re: Piloting high-performance models harder than entirely new machines?

Post by MythSearcher » Mon Nov 30, 2020 12:57 am

Seto Kaiba wrote:
Sun Nov 29, 2020 11:24 pm
The most realistic reaction to that nonsense was Oliver May's... confused screaming and mild panic.
Even without the politics, I don't pity the Titans losing the war, I mean, they are complete idiots in terms of logistics, integration of new weapons, PR and every other administration item you can imagine.
I guess it is really because they didn't have to do all that before the war, they are just a branch of EF set up for anti-terrorist and they just relied on EF to provide all of the above, and all they cared and applied for are fleets to be commanded on the battlefield and not the administrative branches that actually keep the fight to go on.

Post Reply