Drake Corsair

[Devil Khan]

It is a stupid thing to have on the ship (cutlass aswell) it manuf are suppose to make the botton dollar ships. Why wasting extras when you could easily put a frigging ladder. They should only make cheap ships, not ones that can easily break down. They should be only have fixed cockpits. If a good designer should seen this then we would be happy. Sadly we don't, it's 3D artist that would never had designed space sim before.

[VoA]

5 hours ago, Booster Terrik said:

I don't have a degree in Aeronautics but like Reavern I don't see any use for those silly split wings. I don't see how they would have any functional use 😕 

"Those wings are as useless as tits on a boar hog" 😜

I happen to be both an aerospace engineer and architect and in Our last Blood Moon Unit meeting we explored the potential value of the tri wing which would be to feel the edges of the Wormhole of the jump point and we speculated also that all the antenna were similar to The Feelers also you see on the Carrack which perform the same function for a mapping ship this however is just speculation.

[Reavern]

2 hours ago, VoA said:

I happen to be both an aerospace engineer and architect and in Our last Blood Moon Unit meeting we explored the potential value of the tri wing which would be to feel the edges of the Wormhole of the jump point and we speculated also that all the antenna were similar to The Feelers also you see on the Carrack which perform the same function for a mapping ship this however is just speculation.

I suppose that's possible, but wouldn't CIG have advertised that feature? There's no mention of the Corsair's ability to navigate and chart jump points, so presumably, it's not more capable of that role than any other ship.

CIG's explanation for the tri-wings is that they supposedly help with improved agility and stability in abnormal atmospheric environments -- which is ambiguous at best. I mean, how does having two diagonal winds help and in what specific atmospheric conditions?

To the best of my knowledge, any aircraft that relies on wings for lift has horizontal wings, without exception. There are no diagonal winged aircraft. (There are aircraft with canted rudders/horizontal stabilizers, like the F-117, F-22 Raptor, and Predator drones, but those are control surfaces, not lifting surfaces, and the reason they're diagonal is to decrease their radar cross-section, not for the sake of agility or stability.)

So CIG's explanation for the Corsair's tri-wings seems like BS. It's simply to make the design asymmetrical, and it's not even done in a "cool" way. It just looks strange and unnecessary.

If I designed a Pirate Raider with an asymmetrical design, I'd call it the Hydra. I'd make it a catamaran-style ship adjoined at the rear half, sharing the same power plant, engineering section, and cargo hold. The front half of the Hydra would be split into two parallel fuselages, two noses, and two cockpits, although they wouldn't be identical -- hence the asymmetric design. The main fuselage would be larger to accommodate the crew quarters and amenities and would have manned gun turrets. The secondary fuselage would be smaller and have gimballed weapons or remote turrets.

The unique feature of this ship would be that one (or possibly both) of the fuselages could detach from the "powerdrive" section and operate as an independent craft (or lifeboat). In combat, the Raidcraft could serve as a parasite fighter, similar to a P-52 or P-72 for the Constellation. It would be considerably larger than those snubfighters and carry 4-6 passengers, because it would also function as a boarding craft or dropship.

The idea is that the Hydra could execute a fly-by on an unsuspecting cargo hauler, deploy the Raidcraft, and fly away so that it didn't appear hostile. The Raidcraft would stealthily approach the target ship and latch on to it with electromagnets and/or robotic claws. The Raidcraft would have a docking port on its ventral side so that it could either dock at a docking hatch or slice a hole into the hull (like the Cutlass was originally supposed to do! 😡) and deploy the boarding team onto the ship.

Ideally, the Hydra would be a modular and expandable design -- or possibly a series of ships of different sizes, like the MISC Hull series. The base model Hydra would have a single fuselage that could separate from the powerdrive section. The "standard" Hydra model would have two fuselages. And there'd be larger models with 3 and 4 detachable Raidcraft, possibly more. This would ensure the asymmetrical design had a logical purpose -- instead of just "the rule of cool" (arguably).

[VoA]

1 hour ago, Reavern said:

I suppose that's possible, but wouldn't CIG have advertised that feature? There's no mention of the Corsair's ability to navigate and chart jump points, so presumably, it's not more capable of that role than any other ship.

Sometimes ideas from Marketing / CR / the Directors / ship designers........ often don't mesh...... and sometimes..... it can be something that the conceptual artist comes up with then the Devs attach a new function to it even though it wasn't in the design brief.    You don't need to be an aerospace engineer to know that a tri-wing (other than just feelers like on the Carrack) is the most efficient linear protrusion to "feel" the edges of a cylindrical tube that you maybe traveling through.   Also note the amount of "antennae" that are on the Corsair.

When the Hornet Tracker came out........ no one mentioned the "use" of its "antennae" on its wings........ the design only called for the "dish" to be its sensors........ but then Ben L. later mentioned on a RTV that the Antennae are an integral part of extending its tracking range (in other words....... just adding a tracking dish to a regular hornet doesn't match the range of the hornet tracker itself with its Antennae )

 

[Booster Terrik]

3 hours ago, VoA said:

You don't need to be an aerospace engineer to know that a tri-wing (other than just feelers like on the Carrack) is the most efficient linear protrusion to "feel" the edges of a cylindrical tube that you maybe traveling through. 

 

In it‘s current form I don‘t really see this, if the 3 wings were equidistant from the center, then maybe I would buy your argument 😜 The main wing however is way too long for making this an ideal shape to travel a cylindrical tube. A shape like the Viper from battlestar Galactica would make more sense then: normal tail fin and downward angled wings. Even if they had made it an X-Wing design would have made more sense. Typical CIG: Make it look cool and never mind the functionality. I bet they have some architects designing ships at CIG 😜 Maybe they should hire someone that cares more about functionality and doesn‘t care how it looks from the outside (cause hey ..... how often are you or anyone gonna see the outside of your ship when you are in space 😎

[Metternich70]

On 3/29/2019 at 2:34 PM, VoA said:

I happen to be both an aerospace engineer and architect and in Our last Blood Moon Unit meeting we explored the potential value of the tri wing which would be to feel the edges of the Wormhole of the jump point and we speculated also that all the antenna were similar to The Feelers also you see on the Carrack which perform the same function for a mapping ship this however is just speculation.

Well I'm just a lawyer and a wonderful chef, but I'd say that wings are just a particular (and, for me, nice) esthetic feature to give an iconic image to a new ship

[VoA]

20 hours ago, Booster Terrik said:

In it‘s current form I don‘t really see this, if the 3 wings were equidistant from the center, then maybe I would buy your argument 😜 The main wing however is way too long for making this an ideal shape to travel a cylindrical tube. A shape like the Viper from battlestar Galactica would make more sense then: normal tail fin and downward angled wings. Even if they had made it an X-Wing design would have made more sense. Typical CIG: Make it look cool and never mind the functionality. I bet they have some architects designing ships at CIG 😜 Maybe they should hire someone that cares more about functionality and doesn‘t care how it looks from the outside (cause hey ..... how often are you or anyone gonna see the outside of your ship when you are in space 😎

I agree the wings not being equal-distant from the center of mass (or vector in the forward flight momentum) - Like  a BSG Viper...... would work better....... but that doesn't mean - due to the wings (and maybe different sensor antennae off of each - thus different lengths of wings) - wouldn't be a better "mapping" of JP ship than a Connie.

5 hours ago, Metternich70 said:

Well I'm just a lawyer and a wonderful chef, but I'd say that wings are just a particular (and, for me, nice) esthetic feature to give an iconic image to a new ship

I agree the wings at the time of design..... had no purpose other than to look cool (and to fulfill CR's desire for "Solar Sails".... for a "Corsair")........... however.......... that's not the point.....

You might have saw my previous post about the Hornet Tracker (a relevant analogy).......... the antennae that are on that ship originally didn't really have a purpose........ but CIG then adapted them to actually server a purpose and extend the Trackers range over just using its Radar dish......... so I am saying we'll likely see the same thing "after the fact" with the Corsair.   My preference is still for the Aquila over the Corsair ....... but do think they should give something to the Corsair that the Aquila doesn't do quite as good - and I think Mapping a JP with these wings / antennae..... are a good solution to that - that'll we'll likely see come to fruition (based on precedent with the Hornet Tracker)

[VoA]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/17030-Q-A-Drake-Corsair

Q&A: Drake Corsair

 

Following the launch of the Corsair from Drake Interplanetary, we took your community-voted questions to our designers to give you more information on the recently unveiled exploration vessel.

Special thanks to John Crewe for answering these questions.

Can you please clarify your stance on Drake ship durability? We want tough and versatile no-frills ships, not paper ships that will fall apart when you look at them as some devs have stated. Which is it?

 

When we say “paper ships”, we say it with regards to our entire line-up, where Aegis and Anvil typically have more armor and can be regarded as very tough. In comparison, Drake ships are relatively under-armored, which we exaggerate as “paper thin”. While they may be less durable, their defense is more than enough for the intended role they’re pitched at and they’re often up-gunned to offset any deficit.

With Drake’s stance on barebones necessities, how will the living quarters actually be in comparison with other ships?

 

While not as luxurious as other companies’ living quarters, Drake still provides all the necessities such as a bed, kitchen, washroom, and storage for every crewperson’s weapons and clothing. Other ships may give each crewmember their own facilities, but Drake feels this is a waste of space and resources that could be better used elsewhere.

Can the pilot get out of their seat while the co-pilot is in the downward position (this was a problem in the original cutlass that was resolved by the rework)?

 

Yes. Unlike the original Cutlass, there’s plenty of room for the pilot to exit their seat and walk around where the co-pilot’s seat was. When the co-pilot seat is deployed to the lower level, a hatch covers the hole to provide a flat traversal surface.

Does the pilot control the 4 x S5 (S4 gimballed) front AND 2 x S4 (S3 gimballed) right wing guns?

 

The pilot controls these weapons by default, although in the future (like other ships), their control will be able to be delegated to another station.

 

With this special pilot/co-pilot seating arrangement, will both seats provide the option to fly the ship?

 

 

Both seats have full control inputs available, so this will be possible.

From what we saw in the whitebox-clip, there’s plenty of open hangar space left after the Rover is parked within the Corsair. Can’t there be a few SCUs left over although the rover is on board?

 

We want this ship to have similar trade-offs as the Constellation in terms of ‘cargo space versus vehicle storage’, so currently there are no plans to allow this. However, there will always be space to put cargo items outside of the grids on all ships providing you can get them in, though they won’t be securely locked down.

I own several other exploration ships, what makes the Corsair stand out? In other words, is its only trick the big guns?

 

The Corsair offers the same functionality as a variety of other exploration ships but is catered towards a more offensive style of gameplay. It also has a different set of roles for a crew of four compared to, say, the Constellation.

 

Due to the fact that it’s an exploration ship, the Corsair has a fuel intake system. Does it also have a refinery?

 

 

The Corsair does not come with a refinery, nor is it capable of equipping one.

What are the component classes available to this ship? Civilian and Industrial?

 

Correct and these two categories suit the role of the ship perfectly.

With the wings folded upwards in landing mode, will the Corsair fit in front-entry hangar doors, like those at the Rest Stops?

 

Yes. When designing a ship, these metrics are considered and the Corsair will fit in medium/size four hangars (the same as the Retaliator and Constellation).

What types of weapon and armor storage are on the ship? How many weapons per player and what level of armor (light, medium or heavy)?

 

Each crew member can store one set of armor (excluding what they’re wearing), two primary weapons, and one sidearm.

 

Are there any crew stations beyond the turrets and co-pilot, for example, an engineering computer or scanning station?

There is an engineering station towards the rear of the ship.

How many people can use the forward lift at a time?

 

The front lift can take the entire crew, so four at a time.

Does this ship have landing lights so you can see what’s underneath you when you land on the dark side of a moon? It’s an exploration ship, so there’s not always a landing pad available.

 

The ship will have a variety of lighting when it’s released. This is a popular request players have asked for on existing ships and something we plan to roll out over time.

[MurderForHire]

On 3/22/2019 at 3:22 AM, T-rex said:

Anyone know the crew count for it?

4 crew min, max 6 I think.. is the mirror of the Aquila it seems Drake style, guns guns guns.

[MurderForHire]

On 3/22/2019 at 8:24 AM, Danakar Endeel said:

Maybe, not sure if those are actually S4 guns or not on the Corsair but I'm suspecting they are.

The last we know about the Carrack was that it was supposed to have 4 turrets with 2xS4 guns each but that was from the ship stats years ago so no clue if that changed or not. CIG might have upgraded some turrets to 2xS5 (the top turret would be the most likely candidate for that) but we'll have to wait and see.

The latest Carrack images do make it appear that the Carrack has much better overall coverage from all angles though while the Corsair has a lot of forward firepower at its disposal but the rest of the ship appears to have issues with proper coverage and lacks firepower (guns on those side turrets and the rear appear to be S2 or S3).

So... 

• Carrack with 8xS4 on turrets with good coverage
• versus
• Corsair with 4xS4 forward facing guns, some missiles (8xS2?), and an assortment of S2-S3 guns in locations that offer only limited coverage

Personally I'd rather have a ship that can bring 2 S4 guns to bear on any location compared to a ship that is only protected by 2xS2 or 2xS3 on the flanks and rear. I'm also suspecting that the Carrack will have larger shield generators and thicker armor as the Corsair will likely have only medium sized shield generators and cardboard for armor. 

Carrack needs some S5 turret and even 1x S6 (yeah i went there), and a missile launcher. For it's size 125m and being ex/current military (exploration/support) it seems woefully armed. sure it might put a fight up against a couple fighters but that's about it. You wouldn't dream of tangling with anything much bigger with its current load out. Sure you might win if your aggressive enough but at what cost. Must have bigger guns to handle mid sized ships at least defensively while retreating. These additions would not be unbalanced. A Corsair with 4x size 5 guns + 2x size 4 guns (all the forward facing) or a connie with it's missiles compliment will destroy a Carrack atm in less time than it takes to say "shields up" and that shouldn't be the case.

[Danakar Endeel]

Someone over on the Discord Leaks apparently found these images while datamining 3.9.1

[Veanocam[Suncrusher]]

Grabbed one a few weeks ago I cant wait to be able to fly it. Hopefully it wont be toooo long before its ready. But who knows

[GRIZZ]

[Painmiester]

Well  looks  can be deceiving- it might be as good as the others -  if teamed up with a kraken holds full food and bullets 8-10 fighters and a starfarrer  fuel resupply. would make a compressive unit for scouting. Maybe throw in a Polaris time will tell.

🤡

[GRIZZ]

This weeks Sneak peek appears to be a Corsair, I'll delete if I'm incorrect.

 

[VoA]

Great updates on this video at 5:32m

 

[GRIZZ]

I think its looking swell, the new x-ray view gives a good feel for its finalized layout.

 

[GRIZZ]

2 shield switches

[Danakar Endeel]

On 3/19/2022 at 5:21 AM, GRIZZ said:

2 shield switches

Hmmm, makes you wonder if it's 2 S3 shields or 2 S2 shields. The Caterpillar was given an extra S3 shield for a total of 2xS3 yet the Cutlass has to make do with just 1xS2 shield. As I recall the Corsair was supposedly the counterpart of the Aquila which now has a S3 shield. Considering the amount of firepower on the Corsair CIG may have decided that the extra firepower comes at the cost of reduced shields and that this ship may only have 2 S2 shields.

During a3.14 the Constellation-series was suddenly given a S3 shield instead of the original 2xS2 (and received a massive buff to its durability) whereas the 400i that sold shortly thereafter also started out with a S3; yet the larger Mercury was left with very low durability and only 2 S2 shields for defense (that merely look like S3 because the designers didn't adhere to the proper metrics of a S2 generator and made them look almost as if they are S3's on the Mercury).

So I guess we'll have to wait and see if the Corsair will be the 'Aquila killer' with 2xS3 shields or if it will be a gunship 'explorer' (of other people's cargoholds) with heavy firepower at the cost of shield capacity. 😕

[GRIZZ]

[GRIZZ]

Chin Turret

[GRIZZ]

Holy Heck, how did I forget to add the shiptalk to the official thread.

Corsair has an elevator to the roof in a SC first (not counting the 890J top hangar)

 

[Morgen Black]

While I really appreciate the utilitarian Drake layout inside and out on their ships, the asymmetrical wing design seems a bit forced for the cool factor.  It serves no actual purpose and this ship would of been much better looking as a symmetrical design.  I know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but really this will be a CCU jump instead of a CCU completion stop for a great ship.  It really screams Star Wars shuttle in the wing design and I am not a fan.  The overall design looks like the two foldable wings on the starboard part of the ship were blown off in a confrontation and they found a large scrap wing from another ship and just welded it on to get by for the near future.  Hopefully, it will stand the test of time before this game is released in another 10 years.

MB