Of course, since the relative motion is the same. Also, this.

Because their arms are tied to the respective person's frame of reference. In EVE, guns are not.

Neither the maths nor the geography is ******** GÇö they just don't use the frames of reference you're expecting. As a result, the relative motion between the two points is the same.

You want to know the angular speed because it's what matters to your guns.
You want to know the transversal since, as Mara Rinn pointed out, it tells you how well you can match their manoeuvres.

At the very instant you cross the target's line of travel, the target's speed doesn't matter, but as soon as you are even a fraction off that line, it will start to add or subtract from your relative motion.

We're using the same physics and maths as always GÇö it's just that we're looking at point objects without any kind of frame of reference of their own. There is nothing GÇ£unrealGÇ¥ about it.

GǪthen you're no longer talking about anything that is relevant to my example or to how turrets work.

Even so, you still have to rotate the camera at the desired angular velocity in order to keep the subject in frame.

No. Just that they have to adjust for the angular difference between where they were previously pointing and where the target is now. If they returned to some kind of rest position, turrets would require a tracking speed of roughly 2-Ç/instant to ever have a chance of lining up with a targetGǪ

GǪwhich, incidentally, would mean that they'd never have any tracking issues at all.

Yes he did. You did not.

The larger point is that, from the EVE ship perspective, if you're going to move your turret around anyway, why create a lock-down mechanism that the tracking then has to fight when you could just decouple the tracking from the ship movement entirely and let it do its own thing. There's no reason to enforce a gimbal lock other than to stow the guns for travel. End result: turrets that sit within their own reference frame and have to track the target from that point of view rather than the PoV of the ship.

I know that is how turrets work in eve. But seeing as the suggestion was that turrets would not work like this in real life, I was simply stating we don't actually know how turrets would work in real life, and they could in fact work both ways.

It would if it was mounted in such a way that it wasn't affected by the rotation of the ship. Such mounts exist.

There is no need to particularly imagine anything since these devices have been around for two millennia.

Maybe, but that's an engineering preference. It doesn't mean that the maths and physics are GÇ£unrealGÇ¥ or GÇ£incorrectGÇ¥ as claimed.

GǪexcept that they exist and work exactly like that. So what's incorrect and unreal about them?

Because the hull turning is too imprecise and/or too violent and it's better and easier to just let the turret handle it all on its own.

GǪexcept when you're turning in the wrong direction, at which point tracking speed - hull turning < just tracking speed. At any point when you turn into the target's line of travel, you have reduced your tracking ability (but not his). This makes it far more preferable to always turn away from their line of travel, which makes you predictable, which makes you easy to hit. With a freely rotating turret, there's no telling where you're going nextGǪ