Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'impact'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website
  • KSP Pre-release
    • 1.3.1 Pre-release Branch
    • 1.3.1 Pre-release Modding Discussions

Categories

  • Developer Articles

Found 5 results

  1. Fastest Lithobrake

    Ever wanted to make crashing useful? This challenge tries to do just that. Just remember that your pod/drone core has to survive the impact(s), which Jeb may find problematic. Rules: 1. You may use Hyperedit/debug menu to place your craft in orbit around one of the following bodies: Minmus, Dres, the Mun, Vall, Moho, or Tylo. 2. The "No Crash Damage" cheat is not allowed for obvious reasons.. 3. Engines are allowed, but remember, the lower your impact speed, the lower your score. 4. Your craft does NOT have to be crewed, but your pod/probe core must remain intact. 5. Craft must be under 150 tons and have less than 300 parts. 6. No Autostrut or Unbreakable Joints cheat. 7. Must be stock parts only. Scoring: Velocity of initial impact (m/s) + velocity of subsequent impacts (as many as are needed to stop) times the surface gravity of body in m/s2 (Minmus: 0.5, Mun: 1.63, Tylo: 7.9, etc.) Example: Suppose I try this challenge on the Mun, and my initial impact speed is 300 m/s, and I then have 4 subsequent "bounces" with speeds of 180,100,70,and 30 m/s. 300+180+100+70+30 = 680 Multiply by gravity in m/s2. 680•1.63=1,108.4 points. Bonus points if you still have a working lander with a sufficient TWR to get off the ground, 100 again multiplied by surface gravity in m/s2. Happy crashings!
  2. So I poked around in the Tracking Station, and saw not one but TWO Kerbin-intercepting asteroids. I was thinking of watching them come down, but since Kerbin was rotating I had no idea where it would come down. Anyway, I overdid the time warp and they both impacted and disappeared off the radar, without me seeing where they landed. All I know is that it's somewhere around 50 degrees north. Is there any way I can locate them? Would my orbiting survey scanner be of any use? Would I see a dot of ore concentration? It has a short band, surface scanner, everything.
  3. Asteroids personally should have a real impact on the planet its hitting (Kerbin) You know how 1.2 (or sooner, idk) introduced procedurally generated craters on the Mun? Why not make it to where when an asteroid hits Kerbin. It adds a procedurally generated crater! Aswell as particle effects to the asteroid entering the atmosphere and on impact, add a texture of the impact like this. And after a minute or so it looks like this So it looks like it cooled down. The real reason i'm asking for this is because I think this would give a better point to redirect asteroids. I will not expect this feature to be added anytime soon. But i'm just asking for asteroid realism. Simply because right now there really isn't any point in redirecting asteroids. This would give a real point to redirect asteroids. So us, the KSP community, can have some fun redirecting asteroids. - Sincerely, KerbalMan32
  4. Hello! I have come to talk to you about god. I mean that burckle crater. I wonder how much kinetic energy would be required to create a 28-30 mile impact about 3800 metres below sea level. If anyone has a clue about impacts, what tools/math would I need. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2009/pdf/2243.pdf (stuff about the burckle crater itself) http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/users/menke/slides/madagascar06/report.pdf&gws_rd=cr&ei=z-ETV_iyFIShsAHy5JmwAg (stuff about the chevrons in question where apparently the "public scientific opinion" is that chevrons of this size can not under any circumstance be formed by mega tsunamis and have under all circumstances to be created by wind) A pity I'm currently not finding some work about fossil marine life from the indian ocean being found in very remote places of the world (like siberia) http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20061114/news_1n14meteors.html this is about such fossils but not the work I'm looking for tl;dr If the age of the crater and it's origin are true it would coincide with several great flood myths including the yellow and the biblical one. I wonder what the chances are for such impacts happening at the age of our solar system, supposedly relatively low but we still had the Tunguska event (didn't even leave an impact crater due to supposedly in air explosion, but what else could have had such devastating effects 1908?) as well as that impact in remote Brazil (Curuca) The Curuca event left a crater of a kilometre.
  5. In KSP when I crash a ship, I'll often just reload or revert. But first I check the after-action report to see if it contains any useful info, such as which part failed first etc. In real life they investigate what went wrong, and learn from it - gaining ScienceTM. Real space programs are littered with accidents and disasters that led to improvements later on. So why not gain some science to balance the loss of rep, funds - and sadly - brave, experienced Kerbals. It would give a bit more motivation to allow the failure to happen (rather than reverting) and would also make impactors a valid probe type. Perhaps it could go so far as gaining science by recovering parts from the ocean floor. Possibly a bit morbid for stock?