RailRoadFan.com

When an aircraft wants to turn around it is dealing with both gravity and G-forces from the turn. So the pilot dips one wing to counteract gravity and turns the rudder to turn the plane. Now here is where I'm going. When I watch a space movie like Star Trek or the like, you see the same maneuvers for the star ships to turn around even though there is no gravity or air to deal with. Is this incorrectly displayed? How should they be doing a this?

Pixl wrote:When I watch a space movie like Star Trek or the like, you see the same maneuvers for the star ships to turn around even though there is no gravity or air to deal with. Is this incorrectly displayed? How should they be doing a this?

Yes it is incorrectly displayed. The Star Trek technical manuals attempt to explain that there are low level force fields through the ship that apply equal and opposite to the acceleration so the crew does not feel the acceleration force. Be it the invisible force of the low level force field or the bulkhead, something has to put the crew into motion. The laws of motion would still apply.

What system on the Enterprise never failed. Warp engines, phaser, life support they all failed. Artificial gravity never did.

In the vacuum of space, none of the control surfaces, or even the wings or tail, will even work.

Pixl wrote:When an aircraft wants to turn around it is dealing with both gravity and G-forces from the turn. So the pilot dips one wing to counteract gravity and turns the rudder to turn the plane. Now here is where I'm going. When I watch a space movie like Star Trek or the like, you see the same maneuvers for the star ships to turn around even though there is no gravity or air to deal with. Is this incorrectly displayed? How should they be doing a this?

In reality (not what you are referring to I know) the maneuvers you describe are never actually accomplished by spacecraft. It would consume much more fuel than they are capable of carrying. Rather spacecraft trajectories are carefully calculated in advance and rely on relatively small changes in velocity over a proportionally much larger period of time. That's why there are only certain launch windows available depending on the mission intended. You can't point a rocket at the moon and get there. You have to point a rocket at where the moon will be in three days. You can't achieve orbit and then point your craft to the Space Station. You have to achieve an orbit that intersects with the space stations orbit; and then time the launch of craft to the intercepting orbit so precisely that the craft is in the exact spot the intersecting orbit intersects the space stations orbit at the exact same time the space station is there. Oh and if you want to rendezvous you also need to be going the same speed as the space station at that time.

Star trek is neat; star wars is neater. Chemical rockets and our present modern fleet of space capable vehicles, pretty boring and mundane compared to them.