Why do no Gundam pilots suffer cranial or spinal trauma when

Probably some advanced inertial dampening, the same kind which allows a bipedal form to perfectly manoeuvre in space despite the arms and legs moving around so violently which would fuck with your flight orientation every second.

They have very good airbags and probably bracing in the neck joints of their normal suits

IBO's reactors generate artificial gravity, so they function as inertia dampners.

>>15642749
Plot armor

>>15642777
That doesn't make sense.

>>15642789
It makes perfect sense. Inertia and gravity are indistinguishable from each other. If you have the technology to generate artificial gravity/antigravity, you have the technology to create an almost perfect inertial dampener.

>>15642802
Not necessarily and if they had the ability to manipulate gravity why wouldn't they just use that as a weapon?

>>15642789
Only because you dislike IBO.

>>15642802
>Inertia and gravity are indistinguishable from each other.
lol wtf?

>>15642813
IBO tech is in a regression after the great war. Lost technology

>>15642818
I think he means as pure mechanical energy, which is kind of true.

Someone didn't watch Zeta.

>>15642820
Gjallarhorn still makes them and it doesn't explain why it wasn't done before then anyways.

>>15642818
>>15642839
They are both forces that act on the volume of your body, instead of acting on the surface like the wind, a punch, or friction does.

Both of them are indistinguishable from each other to the human body. If you can generate fake gravity with the same force but in the opposite direction as the inertial force that's acting on you, they will cancel each other out.

>>15642854
Like pure mechanical energy?

>>15642749
Didn't it happened to Katz in Zeta Gundam ?

>>15642860
Like "stand in a fast-moving elevator going down and you're gonna feel like you weigh less".

>>15642889
>>15642854
holy fucking shit. go on one of those centrifuge rides on the fair and compare the inertia derived gravity there to real gravity.

The pilot suits and hyper reinforced cockpits assist in this. It's part of the reason a lot of pilots wear the suits while in gravity too.

>>15642749
They do. There are plenty of scenes where a mobile suit gets body slammed or kicked or whatever and the pilot gets hurt from it. It's one of Char's signature moves, even.

>>15642749
It happened in Gundam Thunderbolt a bunch if I remember correctly.

>>15642749
Minovsky particles. The answer is always Minovsky particles.

>>15642843

Or Victory.

>>15642854
Anon, there's no such thing as inertial force. There are only improperly applied mechanical forces. You feel inertia when you accelerate because your whole body isn't accelerated evenly. Using a gravity bubble to compensate for inertia would work by evenly distributing the forces on you. Like floating in a giant shock absorber.

>>15642843
What part Zeta are you referring to? The ending crash? Because that was magical solace bullshit that caused the coma, not the impact.

>>15642879
Didn't his tiny plane just blow up upon crashing?

>>15642774
That was one thing I really liked about Greco and Aldnoah Zero.

>>15642991
He probably meant Katz.

>>15642979
I didn't get how the reactor would manage that.

>>15642749
Spoilers for Gundam: 0083

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FWGpapiZym8

It seems like it happens to Cima here, with her being leaned forward and gasping after impact.

>>15642749
Your factually incorrect, stop talking out you're ass.

>>15642765

Gundam doesn't have inertial dampening tech, though. If they were at that tech level, 90% of all Gundam related technologies we see would be laughably obsolete.

The difference between inertial dampening and artificial gravity is a matter of application of the tech. Most gundam settings still have to spin to fake gravity, so they clearly don't have the tech base.

Likewise, with inertial influence tech you can make railgun esq weapons that are far, far stronger than any beam weapon portrayed in the show. Yes, including the Apsalus. These are likewise not present (Dainslaif is a railgun, but not strong enough to indicate inertial tech). If you can negate enough G's to matter for piloting, you can effectively APPLY those same Gs to an object as well. Thats how you get a gun that shoots a projectile that shoots faster than even a Newtype can react.

>>15642789

Sure it does. Macross does the same thing. You just use artificial gravity to create a counterforce, negating forces that the pilot is experiencing.

>>15642820
I wonder if the writers knew that was this THIRD time that plot point was used in Gundam.

>>15644249
If there is a point when they can create make remote gravitational fields the rest of the weaponry in IBO is useless.

Not sure how its supposed to be done in Macross, but Macross has a lot of crazier tech.

>>15644245
>Thats how you get a gun that shoots a projectile that shoots faster than even a Newtype can react
Couldn't you just do it with a railgun? Gundam shows typically slow down projectiles.

>>15644284
Fourth. You are probably forgetting that was a thing with AGE too.

>>15644245
Anon, inertial dampening isn't a technology, it's an application of technologies. We already have inertial dampening in the real world, we just don't do it with artificial gravity and sci-fi hax shit. There's nothing stopping mobile suit pilots from having this technology, and in fact, later mobile suits have pilot seats mounted on an arm specifically for this reason.

>>15644302

You are being pedantic. Beam weapons aren't a technologies either, they are an application of a technology, etc.

The difference is that real world techs like guns can be boiled down to and discussed in the terms of the technologies that make them function (gunpowder, metallurgy) but fictional technologies like artificial gravity CANT be discussed except in the application, because the underlying tech that makes them work is entirely fictional and largely ignored by the narrative.

You know exactly what he means, so stop being a dongus about it.

>>15644245
>If you can negate enough G's to matter for piloting, you can effectively APPLY those same Gs to an object as well.
I don't know where you get this idea that inertial dampening negates acceleration forces by creating a counter acceleration. It doesn't, it just spreads out the acceleration forces. The problem of acceleration is that the body isn't accelerated evenly, if every particle in your body was subject to the same force with the same vector you wouldn't feel a thing. Real inertial dampening technologies don't push the pilot in the opposite direction from the thrusters, they just keep the forces from mangling the pilot. I see no reason why anyone would design hypertech inertial dampeners to work otherwise. They'd just couple the pilot to the machine through a magnetic or gravitational field that applies to every particle in their body, instead of point restraints that apply localized forces.

>>15644249
Macross doesn't do that, it uses "Inertia Store Converters" that bleed acceleration forces away into an alternate dimension somehow. That's even crazier tech than the stuff we're talking about.

>>15644298

Indeed. Gundam is one of those settings where they came up with the idea first, and the rest of the setting is required to bend over backwards to make that idea function.

There are more than a dozen technologies or even entire fields of science that if they were allowed to progress forward by even a hair's breath mobilesuits would immediately become unfeasible. Better targeting computers, scanning methods that can see through minovsky, optical lasers, etc.

So all of the weapons, all of the defenses, and all of the tactics have to exist in a very narrow range where everything is sufficiently advanced enough that mobilesuits can be manufactured, but everyone is too stupid to come up with a counter to space fighters that devote half their mass to dead weight that serves no purpose for them.

>>15644334
I agree, but to an extent IBO was kind of lazy and says it was all the magic reactor doing everything.

>>15644347
As expected of IBO tbqh

>>15644347

What upsets me is they never even bother to explain WHY the Ahab reactor does... fucking anything, really.

Like, why does your fusion reactor distort spacetime? And run for infinite time without fuel? Are you sure that's a FUSION reactor? Because that sounds less and less like a fusion reactor the more you talk about it.

Also, it upsets me that Ahab reactors are described as being indestructable. Because if the powerplant for your ship is indestructable, why isn't your WHOLE SHIP indestructable?

Yeah sure its probably expensive, but if the tech exists even a single ship with that kind of durability would be worth its weight in gold.

>>15644505
The official description kind of contradicts itself, in the first sentence it says that the Ahab Reactors are highly advanced Fusion Reactors. While further down the page it says that they generate energy via Phase transition inside a vacuum device. Which implies the power source is some kind of vacuum energy.

>>15644505
And why don't they just make the entire airplane a black box

>>15644317
>You are being pedantic.
No, but you are being an idiot. I almost don't want to bother explaining it to you because my post was clearly lost on you, but that dipshit claimed that Gundam doesn't have inertial dampening tech specifically because they don't have artificial gravity technology. He has some ridiculous definition of inertial dampening trapped in his head, which is why both I and another poster felt the need to correct that nonsense.

That's not pedantry. You clearly don't understand what pedantry is. Or, more likely, you just completely lack the ability to read and comprehend basic English, since you evidently focused on a single snippet of the post I wrote and ignored everything else. Apologize to all the /m/en out there whose brains you temporarily disturbed with your shitposting.

>>15644539
That might be the actual method of getting electricity out of it. Our advanced fission reactors generate energy via steam turbines, for instance.

>>15647649
Its easy enough to get confused since so much of the related discussion was about gravity.

However no it would make more sense if it was either something in use or an application of a new idea, but not over the top like projecting fields of gravity or leaking it into another dimension.