Search the Community

It seems that the ksp atmosphere(stock) has some visual artifacts with the brightness and contrast. Which makes me curious about: How's it rendered? Is it intended to be physically accurate (in some degree), or just artificially constructed to look good? Also, I've heard that Tylo and Eeloo supposed to have very thin atmosphere, but it is discarded due to the rendering method of ksp being incapable of those rendering. Can I be given a short description of the cause of the incapability?

Revamped Kerbol System Atmospheres This is an EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements and Scatterer configuration for use with @GregroxMun's Revamped Stock Kerbol System mod. Greg asked me to help him create this for his mod, and I was happy to help. He and I discussed the changes to be made for the Revamp, and I've done my best to implement his vision for this mod. EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements 1.1-3 or later is required! Scatterer v0.0246 or later is required! To install, first download and install EVE and the standard EVE configs, and install Scatterer and any additional Scatterer sunflare as you desire. Then download and extract the RevampedKerbolAtmos.zip file. Copy the GameData folder into your KSP install, and overwrite the existing Scatterer configs. Currently it is not possible to implement Scatterer configs via a ModuleManager patch, and custom textures for Scatterer are in use with this mod. However, the MM patch in the "Cetera" folder will make the necessary changes to the BoulderCo > Atmosphere >clouds.cfg. This file must exist for module manager to update in order for this mod to work. Download License: GPLv3, primarily due to using the Scatterer config tool to create the textures and the configurations, and that is the license Scatterer is released under. Special thanks to @GregroxMun for making the Revamped Stock Kerbol System mod, @rbray89 for creating and supporting EVE all these years, and @blackrack for the Scatter mod. KSP just wouldn't look nearly as good without the efforts of those two gentleman, and you should each thank them personally. A huge thank you to @Raptor831 for coaching me through writing the ModuleManager patch, and explaining to me like I'm five how module manager works. His patience was instrumental in making this mod happen. Details: Jool has a more yellow cloud color, and a very pale green atmosphere in Scatterer. Lathe has a more blue-ish gray atmosphere, adding an additional cloud layer. Duna has very light, wispy, high-altitude clouds. The clouds are a light brownish-orange. Eve has been reworked to keep the stock EVE textures, but turn them a very nice pink, almost salmon, color. The atmosphere in Scatterer still has a purple highlight. Moho has a very thin, gray atmosphere. At higher elevations on the planet, it will not show up at all, as you are above the majority of the atmosphere. At lower elevations, it will provide a gray highlight to the horizon.

I know clouds have been brought up a lot on this forum, but I think clouds are only half the story. Weather is often a determining factor in the success or failure of space missions or aircraft flights, be it on Earth, or at the destination. 1. Wind - Wind plays a big factor when taking off or landing with aircraft. High wind speeds and storms also cause hazard for re-entering spacecraft, and for spacecraft wishing to launch. 2. Clouds - Clouds add a layer of uncertainty to approaches, as it is more difficult to judge where your spacecraft will touch down, (especially on a planet like eve where there would be very thick clouds). It'd also add nice aesthetics. 3. Rain - Again, mostly cosmetic, but adding another level of depth to the planets you are visiting. Every day is the same on the moon, but Laythe storms would add a different perspective to the mostly barren moon. 4. Storms - Storms would combine all of the above, not freak hurricanes which destroy ground bases (although poorly built ground bases or top-heavy landers might topple) but still a deterrence from landing. Weather is something which is closely tied to aeronautics and space, and I think I'd be a loss if KSP didn't implement some form of weather system. PS: No mod I've seen has successfully combined all of the above. I've seen Kerbal Wind: And I've seen EVE: But these two do not represent a fully functioning weather system.

How to get atmosphere and tempterature curve values without writing them? Or a generator maybe?

Hi there, I've accepted a contract asking me to enter the atmosphere of Jool. I decided to send a very simple probe in a deadly trip to the Green Planet. (Periapsis 4 km...) I was thinking that "Enter the atmosphere of Jool to achieve this goal" was pretty clear. But my probe exploded a few hundred meters below the surface of Jool, and the contract is still there... https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B1cJn_NG58YYSGRSdm1KQXpDSDQ&usp=sharing Do you think I need wings to achieve this contract, or is this just a bug? Thanks for reading

I have a very small pod (about 1 ton) in an elliptical orbit around Kerbin. The Pe is around 68km, the Ap around 330km. I am mostly watching the thing orbit in realtime. When I am not timewarping, both the Ap and the Pe fall. (In 1.0, it used to be true that when the Ap fell, the Pe would rise, and vise versa.) The funny thing is that it's acting like a drag that's decreasing with altitude. Like the 70km atmosphere cutoff no longer applies. Is anyone else seeing something like this?

Is there any add-on which shows the trajectory of the ship and where will it land after experiencing drag in the atmosphere? Whenever I try to land at KSC or any other piece of flat land, I find it difficult to land on the exact position I had chosen, due to decay of the orbit. So, is there any mod which shows me where I will exactly land after experiencing drag in the atmosphere? Thank you.

Hellooow everyone ! Today I come up with a weird question : Okay, so I wish to start exploring other planets in the game now, but I like to do things properly and well, because the most amazing part of the gameto me is when excrements works and you succeed in actually going somewhere. My first target will obviously be Duna and I have this program idea, that's kind of inspired by the Mars Semi-direct Mission, with a hab module, a Duna Ascent Vehicle and a Kerbin Return Vehicle. Now I know Duna has a different atmosphere and gravity pull than Kerbin... So how do I test properly my crafts ? How am I going to know if they'll actually work waaaay over there ? That's the kind of mission I don't want to have to restart from the beginning if something doesn't work.. I mean, I enjoy problems that are interesting and spectacular, like when everything goes south or when you forgot a step and the result is just too funny to be reverted etc... Not the annoying stuff that makes you start again 60 times and takes you 7hours to get right. So yeah, thanks in advance for all the help and have a nice Odyssey

As the title says: we have listed values for vacuum and ASL thrust, but how is the Isp/thrust interpolated from there (or extrapolated for higher atmospheric pressures)?

So, I am making a planet pack with Kopernicus for KSP. And I have a problem. I want to create a brown dwarf, using Jool as template. I want to create an atmosphere for it (so you can't land on it), but I don't understand those complicated numbers: key = 137500 100.8216733 -2.71949803636364E-03 -2.71949803636364E-03 key = 151250 68.1071 -2.13953963636364E-03 -2.13953963636364E-03 key = 165000 41.98433333 -1.65774109090909E-03 -1.65774109090909E-03 key = 178750 22.51922 -1.00126501090909E-03 -1.00126501090909E-03 key = 192500 14.44954667 -4.06759432727273E-04 -4.06759432727273E-04 key = 206250 11.33333333 -2.27824727272727E-04 -2.27824727272727E-04 key = 220000 8.184366667 -2.25669374545455E-04 -2.25669374545455E-04 key = 233750 5.127426667 -2.06283192727273E-04 -2.06283192727273E-04 key = 247500 2.51158 -1.61502101818182E-04 -1.61502101818182E-04 key = 261250 0.68612 -9.13301818181818E-05 -9.13301818181818E-05 key = 275000 0 -4.98996363636364E-05 -4.98996363636364E-05 (They're about atmosphere pressure and temperature curve) Is there a program or site to make these, or is there a simpler way?

Re-entry is tough, especially when it's at high speed with a very large craft. This is a challenge to see how large and fast of a spacecraft you can successfully navigate through the terrors of atmospheric re-entry to a successful landing! It's also a challenge designed to encourage big spectacular explosions and cool orange glows. The total kinetic energy of a moving object is proportional to m * v^2. Your score in this challenge is your peak re-entry speed in km/sec, squared, times the mass of your craft in tons (or biggest single piece of your craft) after it comes to a stop on the ground. That's it. The Fine Print: 1. Passive braking systems only. No engines after you enter the atmosphere. Heat shields, air brakes, parachutes, winged gliders, and lithobraking are all OK. Using engines (or Hyperedit, or any other technique) to accelerate your craft up to speed in space is also just fine, but everything gets switched off before hitting the atmosphere. 2. Stock parts only. We will have separate divisions for stock physics and FAR. 3. Any (stock) planetary body with atmosphere and a landable surface is fine. 4. Pics or it doesn't count. Failure pics are also encouraged if they are spectacular or entertaining. 5. KSP version 1.0.5. 6. Multi-orbit aerobraking doesn't count if it uses engines between atmospheric passes. Or put differently, your score is measured from the highest speed after you've shut down your engines for the final time. Standings: Stock: 1. Foxster: 1042.4 (50.953 tons, 4.523 km/sec) 2. 3. FAR: 1. Yakky: 223.715. (22.194 tons, 3.1749 km/sec) 2. 3. My sample entry (and the inspiration for this challenge): I landed a pretty heavy lander on Eve the other day. Peak re-entry speed was 3.1749 km/sec (might have been higher but that is what I captured in a screen grab), and mass after landing was 22.194 tons. Total score = [mass] * [speed] * [speed] = 223.715. Re-entry screenshot: After landing:

As I was performing an aerobrake, my ablator died and went completely black. Then it made me wonder: how fast can you kill an ablator? ---RULES--- No Alt F12, keep it stock, don't mess with game files, etc. Keep it pure and genuine. I want to see how fast you can kill an ablator. I'm not sure if the size matters, but I'm going to try and keep it on even ground. The size of your base, starting engines determines the size ablator you can use. For instance, a 3.5m starting engine only allows you to use no smaller than a 3.5m ablator, and a 2.5 m starting engine allows a 2.5m ablator, and so forth. However, you can stick on a larger ablator with a smaller starting engine (The Vector engine can carry a 2 or 3 m ablator). If you use a cluster of starting engines of varying sizes, you can use an ablator no smaller than the largest starting engine. You may use stages as you see fit, but you may not use an engine in any stage larger than your blator payload. I will keep ablator burn up times each respective to their sizes. You gain bonus points if your vehicle doesn't blow up after killing the ablator, and especially if you come to a complete stop. This also means you can't have any parts destroyed while attempting to fry your blator. ----- Also, I hope this is a reasonable challenge... feel free to critique my challenge, but please don't be a wiseguy. As long as you are nice about pointing out any potential loopsholes, etc. Have fun.