Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'moon'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


About me


Location


Interests

  1. Hi I've played the game for quite a while now, i've buld stations and have been to Jool to. Now i'm fokussing on Asteroids. And i have 3 Questions, some of you can maybe answer me 1. I mostly only find Class C and D Asteroids. Class E ones are quit rare are they? 2. I want to catch myself an Class D or E Asteroid and bring it to low Orbit to build sort of a Base or Station on it. Do any of you have experience with that or have inspiring Asteroid Bases build? (Because i'm kinda always thinking about star wars like asteroid bases here ) 3. So I've already caught myself a Class D one and got it in a almost circular Orbit (as close as my skill level allows it haha). And i talked to a friend about it, if thats now a moon (natural satelitte) or a "unnatural" satelitte (since it was not captured by natural forces). I would say it counts as a Moon, and my Kerbin now has 3 Moons What do you think about that? o.O Thanks for the answers in Advance Sorry for the Bad spelling
  2. Here's some information and video of the Au x Hakuto Moon rover for their attempt to win the Google X-Prize. Link to article & video It's amazing to think that private enterprise is aiming for the Moon.
  3. 【1.0.5】中国嫦娥三号MOD 发布帖 登陆器及月球车 拖到现在,先放个测试版吧。 内容稍后编辑 另编辑好 后,求英语好的 同学给翻译,,,愿意帮忙的,可以再次回帖报名,或者贴吧回帖报名。。。 这个是非英语板块,,所以发汉语应该没关系。 另外,因一些原因,贴吧我已删帖,具体更新还是这里发布。 部件: 1.玉兔车身(控制) 2.玉兔电池板 3.玉兔轮胎 4.嫦娥降落舱 5.嫦娥电池板 6.嫦娥rcs 7.嫦娥发动机 一些问题: 首先,玉兔着陆器设计问题。 因为开始做的准备工作不够,凭着印象里的看过的一个动画模拟做的。所以呢,最后登陆器制作的是有些问题的。 1.登陆器的高度和形状。虽然我做的也是八边形,但是其中四个斜面明显小了。另外,登陆器实际是做的高了些。所以看起来和原版有些差别。 2.玉兔的安放。 受曾经看过那个模拟动画影响,我把玉兔安排在了登陆器肚子里。转移时,玉兔是从内部升起。。而实际,玉兔是架在登录器上方其中一边。当然因为掏空了登陆器,电池板只能做了重新设计安排,也就是现在的样子。 3.转移机构 , 目前的转移设置,和原版还是有很大区别的。当然这个开始设计的时候是一样的,实际效果也完全达到了。但是其中出现了一个鬼畜的bug(看过我贴吧帖子的应该知道),无奈,只好换了现在的转移方式。 4.轮子的一些问题。。最大的遗憾是没有悬架功能。实际设计之初,尝试着努力实现这个悬架。可是技术有限,无法做出这个效果哦。随后,只能无奈的放弃。当然,还有一些其他问题。比如,轮子偶尔会鬼畜的乱跳。这个问题,应该是减震的问题。可实际修改减震数据,还是没什么用。最后迫于无奈,删除了破坏效果,鬼畜bug稍微好了些。(初始版本是有破坏的。) 一些其他小问题和没有发现的问题。 更新日志: ----------------------------------------------------- V.0.1.2: Beta release,Transfer mechanism re-edit V.0.1.2: 测试版发布,重新制作了转移装置 ----------------------------------------------------- V.0.1.1: Fix some bug,But there is one bug for Transfer mechanism No repair。So,No release V.0.1.1: 修复了一些bug,但是转移装置bug无法解决,未发布。 ---------------------------------------------------- V.0.1.0: First edition MOD Production (There are some bug,No release) V.0.1.0: 第一版本mod制做完成,(但是存在一些bug,所以未发布。) 下载地址: (点击下方显示红色的文字) kerbalstuff 版本 0.1.2 curseforge 版本 0.1.2 如需模拟现实发射,请配合使用 长征3B MOD :中国包 我的其它MOD 天宫  点击进入
  4. I am currently developing a new planet and moon pack. I am very new to creating planets, and things are not going quite as planned, but, once I start to get things under control, I will put a link up for download. Here's what I have so far: Sedra Sedra is planned to be a moon orbiting Dres. It is currently the first and only celestial body added, and it is having some rather significant issues with its appearance at the moment. The map appearance is fine (other than the lighting angle being different than it should be), but once you're up close it's a mess. Not sure what to do about this yet, but I shall continue to work on this. Feedback and ideas are appreciated.
  5. I have an interest in the "what-ifs" of the Japanese space program, which were only denied because of problems with the country's economy : ( . In the mid-2000s, JAXA announced that they would be sending astronauts to the Moon in 2020. In 2008, this was the plan according to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries: 6 launches of a next-generation rocket known as "H-X" (the preliminary version of what is now known as the H3 rocket) would launch a lunar lander, a manned cislunar transfer vehicle, and several Earth Departure Stages (found via a NASAspaceflight forum thread). I also found another paper done by JAXA. The launch vehicle shown here uses a custom version of the LE-7 engine from Forgotten Real Engines, with the thrust and Isp of the future LE-9 engine. This will be a recreation of the mission profile using Real Solar System and Realism Overhaul. EDIT: I re-did the mission because of a few things: I needed a slightly bigger rocket for the Earth Departure Stages, I wanted to launch to the lunar orbital plane during the daytime so I waited about 200 days, and I changed my mind regarding the use of RTGs over solar panels. The original version of this post can be found here. Just remember to get an ambient light mod like this or this if you're taking screenshots at night. The first launch from Tanegashima Space Center would put the lunar lander module in a low Earth parking orbit. Liquid rocket booster separation (and fairing jettison) Second stage ignition (and orbital circularization) Payload jettison The lander, waiting in low Earth orbit.
  6. easy: land on the mun, then minmus, in one ship medium: land on the mun, then minmus, then back to kerbin in one ship hard: land on the mun, then minmus, then back to the mun, then back to kerbin, in one ship Super: (**probly not possible**) land on the mun, then minmus, then back to the mun, then back to kerbin, in a SSTO SUPER-SUPER: land on the mun, then minmus, then back to the mun, then back to kerbin, in a SSTO, with no mining or refueling rules: mining is allowed only on super mode, and only on minmus no alt+f12 menu stock parts only no refueling
  7. I have been using real solar system with realism over haul and I am having severe problems making a moon Lander. I have all most 6k delta v set aside for landing and taking off from the moon and still can't do it. I want to know what is the most efficient way to land on the moon. Right now I am just lowering my orbit till it hits the ground and slowing down till I am over my target then burning off all speed. I know I must be doing something wrong and I don't know what for the life of me.
  8. I know that the Kerbol system isn't the most realistic (1 gas giant, 2 moons for Kerbin) system in the world, but having only 3 main moons seems a bit off for a towering cloud that Jool is. I just want to make the game feel more interesting. There's a wide open space between Tylo and Bop that constantly makes me irritated. I always feel that the potential for a moon to be there is just too high for there not to be one. It doesn't have to be either flat or lumpy like the other moons; real life Callisto is cratered and rigid and interesting! It would be so fun to see the protector of the inner moons watching silently over the Joolian system! That's all that I have to say!
  9. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36786915 There you have it 2021, a Russian firecracker with a Euro drill on it.
  10. Before you read, please don't bash my points, I found them in my research, I am just curious and need someone's non rude opinion and discussion about it. Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is at present an open question and a topic of scientific assessment and research. Titan is far colder than Earth, and its surface lacks stable liquid water; factors whichhave led some scientists to consider life there unlikely. It has a methane cycle analouge to earths water cycle and there are many other factors and analogyies which argue it may host complex probiotic life. Some reasons I found in my research (source - wiki, I know it is not the most reliable source, but I just found it and need someone smart enough here to discuss this) 1) The Miller–Urey experiment and several following experiments have shown that with an atmosphere similar to that of Titan and the addition of UV radiation, complex molecules and polymer substances like tholins can be generated. The reaction starts withdissociation of nitrogen and methane, forming hydrogen cyanide and acetylene. Further reactions have been studied extensively. 2) In October 2010, Sarah Horst of the University of Arizona reported finding the five nucleotide bases—building blocks of DNA and RNA—among the many compounds produced when energy was applied to a combination of gases like those in Titan's atmosphere. Horst also found amino acids, the building blocks ofprotein. She said it was the first time nucleotide bases and amino acids had been found in such an experiment without liquid water being present. 3) On April 3, 2013, NASA reported that complexorganic chemicals could arise on Titan based on studies simulating the atmosphere of Titan. 4) Laboratory simulations have led to the suggestion that enough organic material exists on Titan to start a chemical evolution analogous to what is thought to have started life on Earth. Although the analogy assumes the presence of liquid water for longer periods than is currently observable, several theories suggest that liquid water from an impact could be preserved under a frozen isolation layer. it has also been theorized that liquid-ammonia oceans could exist deep below the surface. Another model suggests an ammonia–water solution as much as 200 kilometres (120 mi) deep beneath a water-ice crust with conditions that, although extreme by terrestrial standards, are such that life could indeed survive. Heat transfer between the interior and upper layers would be critical in sustaining any subsurface oceanic life. Detection of microbial life on Titan would depend on its biogenic effects. That the atmospheric methane and nitrogen might be of biological origin has been examined, for example. 5) It has been suggested that life could exist in the lakes of liquid methane on Titan, just as organisms on Earth live in water. Such organisms would inhale H2 in place of O2, metabolize it with acetylene instead ofglucose, and exhale methane instead of carbon dioxide. 6) Although all living things on Earth (including methanogens) use liquid water as a solvent, it is speculated that life on Titan might instead use a liquid hydrocarbon, such as methane or ethane. Water is a stronger solvent than methane. However, water is also more chemically reactive, and can break down large organic molecules throughhydrolysis. A life-form whose solvent was a hydrocarbon would not face the risk of its biomolecules being destroyed in this way. 7) In 2005, astrobiologist Chris McKay argued that if methanogenic life did exist on the surface of Titan, it would likely have a measurable effect on the mixing ratio in the Titan troposphere: levels of hydrogen and acetylene would be measurably lower than otherwise expected. 8) In 2010, Darrell Strobel, from Johns Hopkins University, identified a greater abundance of molecular hydrogen in the upper atmospheric layers of Titan compared to the lower layers, arguing for a downward flow at a rate of roughly 1025 molecules per second and disappearance of hydrogen near Titan's surface; as Strobel noted, his findings were in line with the effects McKay had predicted ifmethanogenic life-forms were present. Same year, another study showed low levels of acetylene on Titan's surface, which were interpreted by McKay as consistent with the hypothesis of organisms consuming hydrocarbons. Although restating the biological hypothesis, he cautioned that other explanations for the hydrogen and acetylene findings are more likely: the possibilities of yet unidentified physical or chemical processes (e.g. a surface catalyst accepting hydrocarbons or hydrogen), or flaws in the current models of material flow. Composition data and transport models need to be substantiated, etc. Even so, despite saying that a non-biological catalytic explanation would be less startling than a biological one, McKay noted that the discovery of a catalyst effective at 95 K (−180 °C) would still be significant. 9) As NASA notes in its news article on the June 2010 findings: "To date, methane-based life forms are only hypothetical. Scientists have not yet detected this form of life anywhere. As the NASA statement also says: "some scientists believe these chemical signatures bolster the argument for a primitive, exotic form of life or precursor to life on Titan's surface." 10) In February 2015, a hypothetical cell membrane capable of functioning in liquidmethane in Titan conditions was modeled. Composed of small molecules containing carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen, it would have the same stability and flexibility as cell membranes on Earth, which are composed ofphospholipids, compounds of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and phosphorus. This hypothetical cell membrane was termed an "azotosome", a combination of "azote", French for nitrogen, and "liposome". 11) Despite these biological possibilities, there are formidable obstacles to life on Titan, and any analogy to Earth is inexact. At a vast distance from the Sun, Titan is frigid, and its atmosphere lacks CO2. At Titan's surface, water exists only in solid form. Because of these difficulties, scientists such as Jonathan Lunine have viewed Titan less as a likely habitat for life, than as an experiment for examining theories on the conditions that prevailed prior to the appearance of life on Earth. Although life itself may not exist, the prebiotic conditions on Titan and the associated organic chemistry remain of great interest in understanding the early history of the terrestrial biosphere. As a prebiotic experiment involves not only observation through spacecraft, but laboratory experiments, and chemical and photochemical modeling on Earth. TL'DR So, what do you think?
  11. Hello everyone. I'm starting this thread to discuss how combat on the lunar surface would take place. Specifically; -How to armor soldiers? What would a military spacesuit look like and function? -How to solve the logistical issues efficiently? (Earth/Moon transport, the delay between arrival and departure, getting around the moon itself, etc.) -Stealth and detection? (How to hide something on the moon, and find something that's hiding on the moon? And how would forces change on the lunar surface? How would: -snipers -artillery -assault forces -aircraft -spacecraft differ from those on Earth?
  12. The event will occur on 2016/04/06, at around 08:30 UTC. Exact time depends on your location on Earth - after all, the object that occults is much closer to us than to the target of occultation. Expect several minutes of difference. Venus will slide behind the Moon in less than 30 seconds, then stay behind it for more than an hour, and then slide out. The event will be visible some 17° away from the solar disk, so be careful. Stay in a shade behind a building or something to remove the glare. The event can be seen with a naked eye because Venus is always visible like that, but it would be much easier if you used a telescope or at least binoculars. Check it in Stellarium or any similar software for exact local time of the event.
  13. I got tired of doing a complex set of calculations from scratch every time I wanted to find the dV of a given Hohmann transfer, so eventually I sat down and made an excel calculator to do it for me. Which led to this: And this: These are reference tables for periapse and apoapse velocities for Hohmann transfers between numerous orbits of interest around the earth and the moon. They should be pretty self-explanatory. These won't give you dV directly; instead, you have to subtract your current velocity from your target velocity. So if you're at a low orbit and want to go up to a higher one, subtract your circular-orbit velocity (in purple) from the periapse velocity (in pink) matching your orbital altitude to the target altitude and execute that burn. Once you reach the apoapse of the Hohmann transfer at your target altitude, subtract your new velocity (in blue, matching the new altitude to your starting altitude) from your target orbit's circular velocity (in purple) and execute that burn to circularize. To drop to a lower orbit, do the same thing in reverse. The EML-1 and EML-2 points are reference for an orbit at that distance; the perigee burn is the same, but the apogee burn needs to match the lunar-circular velocity instead. Actually that's not perfectly correct (since it matches period not speed), but I'm using patched-conic anyway so it's close enough. I've made a correction to the original so that the EML-1 and EML-2 circular velocities are the period-matching velocities rather than the reference velocities for an orbit at that distance. On the lunar side those points are stationary so you don't have to match velocity at all, In the lunar reference table, the circular velocities for EML-1 and EML-2 are for orbits with that distance but at other points; if you are actually reaching one of these points, you just kill your elliptic-orbit apolune velocity. Then I decided to go ahead and create a complete dV map for all major cislunar transfers. I can't attach it here but I posted it at the following link: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39942.0 Here's a reduced-size version of the dV map; if you want the full-size version, you'll have to go to the link above or click here.
  14. NASA scientists say we could colonise the Moon by 2022... for just $10 billion. What are we waiting for? FIONA MACDONALD 22 MAR 2016 Quote: All of the papers in the special edition of New Space are freely available online for you to peruse and use to plan your future in space. Get dreaming, because it's closer than you think. "It is time to go back to this Moon, this time to stay," concludes the journal's preface. "and funding is no longer the main hurdle." http://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-scientists-say-we-could-colonise-the-moon-by-2022-for-just-10-billion
  15. So, this is kind of just a thread about one of my missions and its motives. I have been playing a career game for a while, and suddenly I realized something: Jeb was missing! In all of my manned launches, my ship was flown by Valentina or some other random pilot. So I did some solar system digging and realized that Jeb was on the moon. In a lander. With no fuel. Guess I forgot that when I took a 3 month break from KSP. So I hastily threw together a rescue rocket. I'll post more as I go along.
  16. I ran some numbers based on data I could find online and some rough estimates. I think that an SLS could be used to send Orion and a 20 metric ton lander to the moon by using a NTR as a third stage. The block 1B SLS will be able to lift 105 metric tons to orbit. I guesstimate that the NTR stage could have a dry mass of about 10 metric tons. An Isp of 850 and the mass of the fuel at 40 tons, Orion spacecraft and a twenty ton lander could be propelled into lunar orbit entirely using this stage. Storage of cryogenic fuels over three days would give a test opportunity for NASA, who could the tech developed for this on a trip to Mars. The lander could be, at maximum, 20 tons. I think this is easily doable for the support of 4 crew during a 14 day lunar surface stay. This would allow for a deep study of the surrounding area on earlier missions, later ones being used to build and resupply a base. Also, it would allow for polar landings, since a new return window opens up every 14 days. The lander would launch from the surface, and dock with Orion in orbit. The lander would be discarded, and Orion could return to Earth under it's own power. 3 days there, a stay of 14 days, and 3 days back adds the total mission time to 20 days, within Orion's planned capabilities. Does this seem plausible for a return to the moon? I definitely had very rough estimates when I couldn't find good info on the mass of a dry NTR tank and engine.
  17. The Challenge: Find an asteroid that's class C-E, and redirect it into a stable orbit between Kerbin and the orbit of the Mun. Name it whatever you want. RULES -MechJeb is permitted, but only for the boring parts (e.g. catching up with the asteroid). You must launch the rocket and redirect the asteroid without MechJeb. -Asteroid size may only be class C, D, or E. Class A and B asteroids are not permitted. -No mods where that will make this really easy (I'm looking at you, Hyperedit) and no warp drives or OP engines. Also, only use F12 if ABSOLUTY NECCESSARY. MODES -Easy Any Class C-E Asteroid Launch a probe to study and redirect it. Build a colony of your choosing on it once in Kerbin's SOI. -Medium Only Class D & E Asteroids Launch probe to redirect it. Build a colony and refueling station. -Hard Class E Asteroid ONLY. Launch lightest probe possible to study, NOT redirect. Launch crewed rocket to redirect. Build a colony with housing space for 30 kerbals, and a refueling station that can hold up to five spaceplanes. REQUIREMENTS Probes must have all science experiments on them. Colony should be able to house 10 kerbals. POINTS Probe Weight 10 tons or less- 5 points 7 tons or less- 10 points 5 tons or less- 15 points 2 tons or less- 20 points 1 ton or less- 25 points Asteroid Size Class C- 2X Multiplier Class D- 5X Multiplier Class E- 10X Multiplier Kerbal Housing On Base 5+ Kerbals- 10 points 10+ Kerbals- 20 points 20+ Kerbals- 50 Points 50+ Kerbals- 100 Points 100+ Kerbals- 10X Multiplier Orbit Altitude 600,000+ Km to 500,001 Km- 20 points 500,000 Km to 400,001 Km- 40 points 400,000 Km to 300,001 Km- 60 points 300,000 Km to 200,001 Km- 80 points 200,000 Km to 100,001- 100 points 100,000 Km to 70,000 Km- 200 points 2X Multiplier if in a polar orbit Refueling Station Capacity (Counted as docking ports on your station) 1+ Ship- 10 points 3+ Ships- 50 points 5+ Ships- 100 points 10+ Ships-150 points 50+ Ships- 1,000 points 20 points for every structure 20 points for the first person to create a badge for this 1 point for every photos (5 photo limit per structure) 5 points for every video (5 video limit) Add up the points to determine your score. Your station can be a work in progress. Have Fun! LEADERBOARDS
  18. a little window or HUD (like KER) that shows the next launch window to planets or moons (a customizable list to only show Mars, Saturn, Titan...), so i don't miss my contracts deadline
  19. Using Americium RTGs for a reusable Manned Lunar Lander- could it work? On the surface, this seems very reasonable- the lifetime of a Manned Lunar Lander could easily be extended far into the Lunar Night, beyond the 14 day maximum mission length a current lander would allow for (w/o something like fuel cells or large batteries to store electrical power- though extra supplies would obviously be necessary). It would also heat up the lander, reducing electrical usage, and makes batteries unnecessary (which would reduce the mass.) The increased mission duration also means that NASA could squeeze more science out without more SLS launches (which cost at least $500 Million apiece) including during the night (maybe some sort of Lunar night-specific experiments?) Amercium RTG use could also be extended to a lunar pressurized rover, increasing distance one can cover in a single mission dramatically-now limited only by consumables and CO2 scrubbers, not power) However, RTGs would require larger radiators and radiation shielding- also, Amercium RTGs (which have a lower power density, but use much more common material than Plutonium ones) will likely take another decade to develop (which ESA is doing), meaning the first lunar landers will have to use more conventional power sources. However, since Amercium 241 has a longer half-life (432 y), it will take much longer for the heat energy to decline, so long that the RTGs will likely never have to be replaced- it would be replaced with the aging lander itself. Though more common, Amercium RTGs still have a limit to how much you can make- limited by the production of the Amercium Feedstock (a limit I have no idea is :p) Additionally, Amercium RTGs would have a much lower power density of 2W/Kg, compared to Solar at 10W/kg. On the other hand, the increased capability of the lander and not having to carry O2 and H2 (if using fuel cells) may offset it. So, is an Amercium RTG-powered Manned Lunar Lander a Good Idea? Or should it go in the dump bin next to RTG-powered Space Stations? (Yes, those things were proposed in the 60s-70s.)
  20. We've talked about putting near-term colony's on the Moon, Venus, and Mars (Especially Mars), but where is the Outer moon colony love? Personally, Titan would be by far the best outer solar system colony.
  21. Found this while surfing them internets. Enjoy. https://vimeo.com/141812811
  22. Nothing to say really, just wanted to share with you this beautiful Earthrise seen on October 12 by LRO. www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/lro-earthrise-2015
  23. This particular link looks at the various aspects of colonizing the moon, solutions and problems with each. http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20151218-how-to-survive-the-freezing-lunar-night
×
×
  • Create New...