Alright, it's been a week, so the correct answer is: Hull A.
View attachment 24460
I'd forgive you for being sceptical. I was too. It's a freighter, sure, but still, a small ship like Hull A has the absolute worst maneuvering acceleration?
Well, here's Erkul:
View attachment 24461
0.12*8 + 0.03*4 = 1.08G or about 1.1G.
Alternatively 0.15*8 + 0.03*4 = 1.32 MN.
F = ma so a = F/m = 1.32 MN / 122650 kg = 10.76 m/s^2
Expressed as multiples of G, this is 10.76/9.81 = 1.097 G ~= 1.1G.
Yes, the maneuvering thrusters on Hull A just are that bad. I even tested this out in game, and dear Montoya almighty, if your Hull A happens to have a slight amount of lateral speed (I had 150 m/s), those thrusters will take forever to kill it.
This is a bit ridiculous. Like sure, Hull A isn't meant to zig zag and dodge incoming shots, but... it's still just a small size 2 ship! I mean, a Caterpillar, despite being way larger and around 3x wider, might actually be better at evading shots with it's 6.5G maneuvering acceleration. Well, it'd be highly impractical to try to evade shots with a caterpillar, so it's a bit moot point but theoretically anyhow.
Besides being very bad at evading shots, Hull A is extremely slow to lineup for landing. And this is supposed to be the fastest and most agile of the 5 hulls! If this is anything to go by, a Hull E might just get outmaneuvered by a space station.