Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'moon'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • Welcome Aboard
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
    • KSP 2 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • KSP 2 Dev Diaries
    • Show and Tell
  • Kerbal Space Program
    • The Daily Kerbal
    • KSP Discussion
    • KSP Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Community
    • Player Spotlight
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (Console)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



About me



  1. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2182158-moons-can-have-moons-and-they-are-called-moonmoons/ We all know about moonmoons. I think the article puts it best: "moons can have moons, and they're called moonmoons." This challenge is simple. Capture an asteroid, and give a moon a moon. It doesn't matter which moon in KSP is moon'd. Entrants will be sorted by mass of the completed moon. You're welcome to stitch asteroids together, too. Bonus points for far away moons. Winners get the badge below! If you want to make a better one, please do; I'm not very good at GIMP. ENTRANTS: KingDominoIII - 884 tonnes Sky Vagrant - 415 tonnes Johnster_Space_Program - 143 tonnes SecondChance - 114 tonnes
  2. Moho Moons Mod (1.7.3) Hello all, tired of spending all that fuel just to get to Moho with only a Mohole to explore? Well, do I have something for you. Introducing the Moho Moons mod! What Does this Mod Add? The Moho Moons Mod adds four moons and a submoon to the game's brown furnace. Moho: Same as usual, but with a larger SOI to accommodate the far out moons. Rotisserie: This moon is decently sized relative to Moho and grey in appearance, but boasts several impressive red craters. Honeybaked: This moon is a nice yellowish color and is a great contrast to the scorched brown of Moho. (Get them screenshots!) Doroho: This moon is puzzling, and purple. It is thought to be a captured asteroid made from the same material as Eve. Antiopho: Nicknamed 'Sauna' this moon boasts giant lava oceans and an atmosphere 6% that of Kerbins. Despite the low pressure, flight can still be obtained there by ion gliders. Sohota: Antiopho's moon, Moho's submoon. This world is similar in shape to Doroho, only it is yellow like Honeybaked and has striped red like the moon it orbits. Landing will be easy, but finding a flat place won't. To-Do List New biome maps New color maps CTTP surface textures Science definitions Surface scatter Pictures Rotisserie: Honeybaked: Doroho: Antiopho: Sohota: Download Dependencies: Kopernicus https://spacedock.info/mod/2079/Moho Moons All Rights Reserved
  3. I use Ksp 1.4.5 RSS and some other mods. Whenever I Enter the influence zone of the Moon my game freezes about 5 minutes and then it crashes. It doesn't matter either I enter the orbit legit or via cheats. https://www.dropbox.com/s/hmh7jx4meppsapi/Crash_2019-01-12_102800.rar?dl=0
  4. I'm having issues setting up a Moon's ScaledVersion in Kopernicus, no matter what I do, I can't get the ScaledVersion to accurately portray the Heightmap of the moon. A gif of what I'm talking about is linked here. Help would be appreciated! Also, here's the Moon's Config: https://pastebin.com/kJNizR7k
  5. Hi all. Hopefully this doesn't count as self-promotion but I recently had the opportunity to do a lunar parallax experiment with fellow KSPF member @cubinator. We measured the Mun's Moon's parallactic displacement against the star Theta Lyrae. After some spreadsheet wrangling and triple checking my math, I finally feel confident enough to share our results; Between my location in New Mexico and Cubinator's location in Minnesota, we measured a lunar parallax of ~283.6 arcseconds. This gave us a topocentric lunar distance of 390,775.4 km from cubinator's location and a topocentric lunar distance of 389,366.3 km from my location. Checking against the actual values given by the astronomy program Stellarium shows we have a percent error of only 0.42%! I've written up an article on Medium detailing the full methodology and the math that went into this here: https://medium.com/@DeeAlexandria/how-to-measure-the-distance-to-the-moon-a1e502440918 Please feel free to give it a read and some feedback! Cheers.
  6. (Apologies in advance for opening a topic again on something that's been discussed a lot but don't want to reopen old discussions either...) Apologies also if someone has already pointed out what follows... S = 1/2 a.t^2 The concensus in the forum seems to be that the best way (no atmosphere) to take off and the most efficient way to land is expend the greatest percentage of work on the horizontal velocity component to either establish or eliminate orbital speed. This is in line with Newton's idea that if he could climb a high enough mountain and shoot a baseball toward the horizon at a high enough (instantaneous) speed, it would come back to hit him in the head 90 minutes later. The problems with screaming in low and fast for a landing are terrain clearance; pilot reaction time (as this will effectively be a suicide burn which is what makes it efficient); and therefore inaccuracy. I just tried this at my mining camp on Moho and touched down softly 24m from the target. (For those who religiously don't use MechJeb, leave the autopilots alone but MechJeb provides essential displays; in this case: Orbit Info; Surface Info; Vessel Info and Rendezvous Info.) I suggest the procedure is as follows: perform any desired inclination change 270 degrees before the target; lower the periapsis to a few km above the target, 180 degrees before the target; on the first attempt, use the altitude of the highest mountain as your target periapsis to avoid premature contact; watch true altitude for a minimum which will tell you how much you can lower the target periapsis on future landings; your speed will increase as you get lower which means that your orbital speed will serve only as an initial (low) approximation; Vessel Info displays your max deceleration rate. Reducing speed from 828 m/sec with a deceleration of 16.18 m/sec/sec will take 51.2 secs; S = 1/2 a.t^2 suggests that in that 51.2 secs you will travel 21.2 kilometers; when the Rendezvous Info display says you are 21.2 km from the target (or a little before if you are nervous), fire Full Astern; Using a periapsis of 6km above the target, I arrived 2km over the target and a little after the target (because I got distracted and fired late). And vertical and horizontal speed zeroed out approximately together, which is what you'd expect from retrograde. (The MSA for this approach is actually around 5.1km, so I possibly can tune this down near 1.1 km above target.) You exit suicide burn at this time or a little earlier, when your confidence is ready. Then fly the navball in what is pretty close to a short vertical descent. The reputation is that this low, screaming approach is inaccurate, but if you are avoiding terrain anyway, it adds up to "landing" (arrival) a kilometer above the target and then a short walk in the park to get down and dusted off. The hard part is knowing when to fire and this is where the equation above is your friend. A quick manipulation of that equation gives you the following: S = 1/2 v^2/a S = 1/2 828*828/16.18 = 21.186 km (If there's enough interest, I'll make a video.)
  7. I am working in a mod that adds huge parts for youtube videos. I am talking about facades that you cheat somewhere and make a video on that. First plate texture( very high, 4060x4060p, it can take some time to load on the post, if you have a slow internet connection)
  8. A few months ago I was browsing through Atomic Rockets when I stumbled upon a passage from a blog discussing the idea of developing a base on the moon with the help of an international authority-type organization to lead it all. The blog itself is based on a report titled "Economic Assessment and Systems Analysis of an Evolvable Lunar Architecture that Leverages Commercial Space Capabilities and Public-Private-Partnerships"—or just Evolvable Lunar Architecture. Recently I took a thorough read through the second part of the report for a big project I was working on, the part discussing the idea of an authority to help develop the Moon (the first discusses the more technical aspects of a moon base). With their approach, they believe it is possible to put people back on the moon in 5-7 years for $10 billion, and build a moon base a decade after that for $40 billion, considerably cheaper than any other approach. The authority seems to solve the issue of unsustainable long-term planning in government and the high risk factor for private enterprises. I can't say I find any major issues with the idea apart from the few outlined in the report, but I can't say I have a thorough understanding of business either. I'm curious as to what everyone else thinks of the idea. Personally, it seems like implementing the ideas from the report would make space travel in general a lot cheaper, and with it a lot more development in space with propellant depots and larger, more permanent space stations. The system could probably be applied to other projects as well. Edit: If you don't what to read the report, this podcast has the PI of the report discuss the key points of it. Here are two links to articles on the report as well.
  9. After getting the space 1999 eagle mod I found one called Eagle One and it came with a landing pad like on the show. My question is how to get that sucker up on the mun? It's way too heavy for any boosters or combo of boosters I have and it's all one peace. So far it's stuck on the ground. For that matter once we get to the mun, how are we going to land it?
  10. This is an effective repost of my question If the Soviet manned lunar program succeeded, how would the missions be designated? on Quora. The only answer suggested I ask Roscosmos people. Unfortunately, there seems to be literally no Soviet space program/Roscosmos employees, present or former, on Quora. Hence, I re-ask this question here to show it to a wider audience, including people who may be super duper knowledgeable about the Russian Space Program. Comment in question source:
  11. I heard that orbit around the Moor are very unstable with exception of some orbital inclinations. I wonder why is this?
  12. Hi everybody. So, one of my hobbies in addition to KSP is the creation of a fantasy world, and I was recently inspired to make my world a moon of a gas giant instead of its own planet. However, after reading this thread I realized that I might have daily 50 foot tidal waves if I do that. So my question is, can I position my moon in such a way that it avoids this? I had planned to have five other large moons in the sky, with this world being the fourth of the six, but I'm open to changing that. Would placing it farther out lessen the tidal effects of the other moons? Would placing it closer to the gas giant's gravity well have the same effect? I am planning to have this world tidally locked, by the way, so I believe that should eliminate tidal waves caused by the planet itself, even if it makes for some weird oceans. Any help on this would be appreciated, so thank you in advance!
  13. 16th July 1969 was the launch of the first crewed lunar LANDING mission. Exactly this day, 48 years ago. Due to the anniversary I decided to recreate Apollo 11 lunar landing mission in STOCK KSP (KER was used to help with orbital data). NOTE: This is not 1:1 accurate, I was limited by the stock ksp parts and physics. Thanks
  14. The T-65 Crow was designed by Incom Corporation. I clocked the top speed at just over 1400 m/s in the atmosphere, and it can sustain these high speeds without overheating or exploding thanks to the Heat Resistant Parts mod which also gives the aircraft it's black coloring.. It's maneuverable, sturdy, and boasts 4 AE-6 B.R.O.A.D.S.W.O.R.D. engines from the Mark IV SpacePlane System mod. Hope you all like it! View Published Craft (Mods used, part count, images, and craft download are all found here) T-65 Crow Craft Page Direct Download download T-65 Crow Craft Thumbnails Please reply if you have any comments or suggestions for me! -Moon
  15. I recently saw this picture And this lead me to the realization that Kerbol is an Ultra-cool Red dwarf star smaller than Trappist-1 (which means that its a Class-T Star.) and can you even see kerbin and the mun?
  16. I've decided to discontinue this mod. While I am perfectly capable of developing it, my PC specifically dislikes planet mods which of course means I am not able to test any new additions. If anybody would like to revive this mod then feel free to contact me. This is my second mod for KSP so again, do bear with me as I am still learning. A redo of this mod: The Original Kerbol Mysteries Presenting the re-imagined Kerbol Mysteries mod, the point of this mod is to add some interesting new stars, planets and moons. Let's dive in shall we? STARS PLANETS MOONS TO BE DONE Add a white dwarf star (i'm hosting a competition for the name!) Give Aquatica a Moon (i'll also host a competition for it's name, Aquatica-B is a placeholder!) DOWNLOAD Spacedock LICENSE: MIT REQUIREMENTS Kopernicus INSTALLATION Move "KerbolMysteries" folder from the .zip file to the GameData folder. KNOWN ISSUES Moving the camera underwater on Aquatica during the daytime seemingly puts you in a dark void with light only coming from Lobrek (is only a graphical glitch, don't worry) Re-entry also does not align with the atmosphere's height. In map view, double clicking on Lobrek from Kerbin (and potentially any body in the Kerbol system including Kerbol itself) may cause crashes. (This is so far an issue only I've experienced, tell me if you manage to reproduce the error). Lobrek's orbit line freaks out, this is only a graphical issue within Kopernicus so I cannot fix this. Lobrek's "aura" is too big, will be fixed by next update. Any advice, tips and people willing to help with the project are greatly appreciated.
  17. The challenge is simple. launch a rocket, land it on the VAB without exploding it, then land on the moon and get back. Land as close to the Launchpad as possible and upload a pic with the distance. (you can use launch clamps to know your distance). if you do it with mods I will put you on a different leaderboard. Good luck and have fun. upload the screenshots of the landing on VAB, the moon the final landing, and your distance from the launch pad. I will update the leaderboard from time to time. Have fun! Leaderboard 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Modded leaderboard 1.cairio jack with 2 days 6 hours. Mods used: Kerbal Engineer redux 2.EkoHallen with 3 days. Mods: KER, kspi extended 3. 4. 5.
  18. 1.) On Kerbalism, is there a way to widen the GUI? 2.) I have been looking at planet mods and I cant seem to find one. All of them revamp the current system into the real one. Im looking for planet mods that adds new planets and moons that doesn't change the existing ones. Is there a mod like that? Thanks.
  19. The challenge is simple. launch a rocket, land it on the VAB without exploding it, then land on the moon and get back. Land within 5 KM of the Launchpad (you can use launch clamps to know your distance). Do it without mods, no exceptions. That includes trajectory mods. Good luck and have fun. upload the screenshots of the landing on VAB, the moon the final landing, and your distance from the launch pad. I will update the leaderboard from time to time. Have fun!
  20. https://archive.org/download/gov.archives.arc.1257628/gov.archives.arc.1257628_512kb.mp4 About it : https://archive.org/details/gov.archives.arc.1257628
  21. cratercracker


    The Moon The Moon is the most explored body for me in game. But sometimes even a professional player can get serious problems while exploring it…. So here is a collection of all mission reports form 35 kerbals that been to moon and a base that I have at the east crater Moon is place where everything can go wrong in a second. But if you know what are you doing ,you can deal with them. Moon is full of craters and interesting landscapes like canyons valleys but the only flatland you can find is bottom of the biggest craters on Moon. So it is best to build your bases there. Due to lack of atmosphere no aerobraking can be done but the Moon still has a very powerful gravity and you must not disrespect it. But flying an SSTO is still possible but now you need gimballed engine or RCS to maneuver. But pilots of SSTO must think differently than they think in atmospheric worlds they need to remember that they can’t glide or turn with no using engines,SAS or RCS. When you send a rover to the moon you need to check if your SAS is ok for driving in low gravity. Too much SAS power will make your rover spin at one point. But if you don’t use any SAS you may end up flipped upside down . You can still drive at good speed like 40 m/s but be careful and be aware that you may find yourself flying at suborbital speeds right into crater bottom You may lose your connection when you are at the bright side so choose landing spots carefully and think about connection. Setting relay is easy but keep in mind that you will need a relay probe orbiting far from kerbin. Moon have contrast spots that have lots of ore and dead zones that have no ore at all. Try not to aim by luck and use scanning satellites to get ore and convert it. Try to bring as much drills as you can or drilling process can take months and years. I hope you got at least a tiny bit of information that can help you with exploring Moon. P.S it is not HOW TO GET TO MOON it is about how to avoid failures while operating on the Moon
  22. Pretty interesting site: http://lunarexploration.esa.int/#/intro
  23. Dave Jones receives Karsten Becker as a guest, lead engineer of the Audi Quattro Lunar lander and rover. They discuss many different aspects of designing a spacecraft, such as thermal requirements, radiation hazards, space rated components and more, and prove that some of the things that are mundane on Earth can pose interesting challenges. We get an insight into the curious mix of off-the-shelf technology, combined and custom proprietary designs and why each was chosen in which places for this specific mission.
  24. The X-Prize foundation just announced that five teams are cleared to proceed into the final phase of the competition. They earned that right by having a verified launch contract in place by December 31st, 2016. Originally, 29 teams participated. 13 either dropped out or merged with other temas over the course of the competition. Another 11 have now been disqualified for not submitting a launch contract in time for the deadline, which had already been extended several times. However, at least three of the teams not among the final five have announced plans to launch anyway, on their own time - even though they will not be eligible for any part of the $30 million prize pool. The remaining five teams and their launch service providers are, in no particular order: - Moon Express (USA), launching on Electron (Rocket Lab) - SpaceIL (Israel), launching on a rideshare mission brokered by Spaceflight Industries, using a Falcon 9 (SpaceX) - Synergy Moon (International), launching on Neptune 8 (Interorbital Systems) - Team Indus (India), launching on PSLV-XL (Antrix Corp/ISRO) - Team Hakuto (Japan), hitching a ride on the Team Indus spacecraft Interesting to see the wide variety of nationalities and launch vehicles present. Especially interesting are those two launch vehicles (Electron and Neptune 8) that have not even flown yet as of the writing of this post. Will they be operational in time? And will SpaceX's immensely backlogged manifest allow SpaceIL to fly in time? In order to be eligible for any part of the prize pool, a team's spacecraft must lift off no later than December 31st, 2017. Aside from that absolute deadline, the winner is decided by who is first to land and perform the minimum required tasks: soft-land to a complete stop, then travel 500 meters across the surface by any means, then transmit HD video back to Earth. The first team to do this will be awarded $20 million, the second team will get $5 million. The remaining $5 million is split up among various secondary objectives, such as surviving a lunar night, traveling 5 kilometers, or taking pictures/video of manmade objects on the surface (themselves or other competitors excluded).
  25. Hi all, I'm attempting my first ever Jool mission. Not one for half measures, it's going to be a Jool 5. I've got a very large spaceplane with about 1100dV remaining as it plunges to its doom in the Jool system, and .38 TWR. It has IRSU and if we can get into Laythe's atmosphere in one piece, i am very confident of being able to land the thing (even dead stick) , get mining, and complete the mission. The problem is that whilst i think i've got a fair understanding of stock aerodynamics and can fly decently, I'm terrible at orbital mechanics. Was very pleased with myself using only 2200 or so to get an encounter with Jool from LKO, normally i use 2 or 3 times the estimates. Now the capture burn would be another 2k dV if doing it propulsively, and you're looking at the same again or even more to get into Laythe. Now I hear that all the smart kids actually do it by using gravity assists. This is where i'm struggling - On the Kerbin-Jool transfer burn we hit an AP of 77 billion then arced back down to this encounter with Jool. We swung around the back of Jool itself, and as luck would have it, can pass just in front of Tylo to get a massive gravity braking assist. Do i need to tune this to be a bit less aggressive? As you can see, it's going to have us plunge to our doom on Jool. Miraculously (some would think it intentional) we get another encounter with Laythe, on our way down to oblivion. But we're going 5300m/s plus at this point, and Laythe's atmosphere goes from thick enough for jet flight at 40km to zero at 50, so setting PE high enough to not blow up the ship means you're only in the atmosphere for a second or two. No appreciable braking possible. As for the gravity assist, it can substantially affect our trajectory, but only after we've smashed to bits on jool.
  • Create New...