Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'moon'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
  • 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
  • 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





Found 58 results

  1. This article suggests you will be able to see the full disk Earthrise from the lunar surface: Earth Rising Earth as seen from the Moon is always in the same place – true or false? It depends. By Paul D. Spudis MAY 15, 2014 While most locations on the Moon's surface would only be able to see partial disk Earthrises, at the lunar terminator (separator between far side and near side of Moon) and at the lunar poles, you'll be able to see the full disk Earthrise. Anyone want to do a try in Kerbal Realism mode to show what this would look like? Intriguing question: will we see a "huge Earth illusion" like we see a "huge Moon illusion" when looking at the full disk? MOON ILLUSION IS ALL IN YOUR HEAD BY: BOB KING NOVEMBER 24, 2015 Bob Clark
  2. Remember how creating fake mods was a thing back then? Now it's time to make even more fake KSP stuff! This time, it's fake celestial bodies, rocket/spaceplane parts, and manufacturers. Btw, you can do either or both, it's up to you. My examples: Fake Celestial Body - Gerris: A planet slightly larger than Kerbin but smaller than Eve, it has green oceans, a green atmosphere, and yellowish brown land. It has aliens living on its surface. Orbits between Kerbin and Duna. Fake Part - The AEM-293 Solid Rocket Booster: A SRB that was created because we always need more boosters. Manufactured by Boosterz Co. Fake Manufacturer - Boosterz Co: A solid rocket booster manufacturer. Nuff said. Have fun making whatever your heart desires!
  3. I wrote a tutorial for running an Earth-Moon Shamrock Cycler using Kerbal Space. I used the RealSolarSystem package so this really is Earth-Moon, not Kerbin-Mun. Here are links to the Wiki page and video tutorial. I wrote this because when I become a space tourist I want to visit the Moon in the comfort of a big cycler cruise ship. Yes, I'm willing to wait a few years. Tutorial: Earth-Moon Aldrin Cycler - Kerbal Space Program Wiki youtube KSP Earth-Moon Aldrin Cycler tutorial The tutorials are based on the Shamrock cycler from Aldrin's recent paper:
  4. I've often wondered what a lunar habitat might be like if it started growing itself with in situ harvested resources. Lunar soil and rock appears to consist mostly of metal oxides and silicates. So, probably one of the very first things a colony with aspirations of becoming self supporting can do, is start excavating additional habitable volume for itself, and constructing bricks and furniture items out of carved stone. In 16% gravity, they would not be particularly bothersome to handle. In terms of processed/man made materials, smelting the regolith to separate the metals from oxygen (which is also useful..) is centuries old tech. However, the moon appears to have very little in the way of lighter elements such as carbon, hydrogen or nitrogen, these only being found in ice deposits in permanently shaded craters. On such a base then, everything possible would be constructed of stone, metal , glass or porcelain, these being relatively cheap due to the materials being locally available. On the other hand, plastics, wood, and textiles, the cheapest available materials on Earth, would be luxury items on the moon, having to be imported at great expense. So your bed frame would be stone or metal. The mattress would be sprung, and the pillows stuffed with wire wool rather than foam or feathers. Only the outermost cover would be textile. Perhaps only wealthy colonists would use sheets or duvets. Your living room might be quite spacious, carved into a cliff face, with quite generous glass windows looking out over the moonscape. Again, if you're wealthy, you'll have an armchair with a textile outer cover.. otherwise make do with stone or metal. A kiln probably isn't difficult, so expect to have plenty of porcelain dining ware. The real big ticket luxury item is however your entertainment system. A PC can do the job of games console, tv, radio, and workstation, and the bulkiest , heaviest components like the case and heatsinks, cooling fans, could be made locally. PCBs are medium tech and can be refurbished on site with surprisingly modest equipment in case of most failures, but actual manufacture of the PCBs is harder, and the integrated circuits they contain would have to come from earth. Fortunately they are tiny and light. It is still likely that new motherboards/graphics cards would ship from Earth. PCs have an advantage in being modular, but perhaps small form factor (Mini ITX ?) would save shipping cost. All of this pales by comparison with whatever you've got to use for the display however. There seems no way around this - large LCD panels are hard to manufacture yet are also heavy, fragile and bulky. Your monitor or TV is probably worth more than the rest of your apartment put together !
  5. This is spectacular. The visuals are amazing. Finally some producers understand what space is. Dark sky without stars in daylight, no ambient sound in vacuum, ballistic dust (no convection), and there is even electrostatic lunar dust, it's amazing. I'm just curious how is normal walking in the base explained, because that's not realistic.
  6. Knossos - A moon completely covered in a maze Knossos is a mod that I created while experimenting with various maze generation algorithms. I ended up successfully mapping a maze to a sphere, and imported the thing into KSP. And now, due to popular request, I'm releasing it for everyone to enjoy. Download available on GitHub: This mod requires Kopernicus to also be installed. You can download Kopernicus here: Description This mod adds a new moon into orbit around Kerbin, which is completely covered in a huge maze. The walls of said maze are high and steep enough to prevent most rovers and Kerbals from walking over them. So you'll just have to cheat with rockets instead solve it properly. There is a solution to the maze, as it stops around the poles, which could be considered the "end" of the maze. The moon itself is half the size of The Mun, but its orbit around Kerbin is behind Minmus', and is also highly inclined and eccentric, making it difficult to get to in the first place. More screenshots License This mod and its source code is distributed under the MIT License.
  7. One thing that has always bugged me in discussions about colonizing the moon or Mars is the casual way everyone overlooks the growing of food. I have a fairly well rounded background in agriculture, and I have spent a lot of time learning about the complex symbioses that a lot of plants depend on to survive. I know that NASA has been growing salad greens and some types of wheat in a very small experimental area on the ISS, but I don't think it's enough to get a good picture of what agriculture will look like on space colonies. First of all, any system that has colonists reliant on it for sustenance must be 99% sustainable at a minimum. NASA's experiments have been very closely monitored with sensors giving real-time data on all sorts of parameters to a team back on Earth, and the most they've gotten out of it is a few salads. For a serious system, it has to be somewhat robust, and able to handle some shocks and variation to conditions. It also needs to be able to reprocess all the wastewater produced by the colonists in a safe and efficient manner. These things are very possible to achieve, but they do present some challenges. Growing food is maybe one of the easier ones to handle. The most logical solution, in my mind, is aquaponics. Aquaponics is like hydroponics, but with fish. Turns out that fish poop has pretty much everything plants need to grow, and the plants are great at filtering the water for the fish. This means you only have to figure out how to feed the fish. Initially, formulating food for the fish might require some supplemental nutrients, but over time, it should be possible to stabilize the intake/output of the various micro-nutrients in the system. Probably the best species of fish to use is Blue Nile Tilapia, a fast growing breed used around the world in commercial fish farms. The other challenge to the system is processing the human poop. If composted properly, human waste makes a fantastic fertilizer for plants, but it is illegal to use human waste for growing food crops in the US. This is due to the possibility of spreading disease via unwashed vegetables. This can be avoided in our application, since we aren't growing our plants in soil. We can, however, reduce the possibility of spreading disease by using human waste to grow things like cereal grains and even fruit trees. The cereal grains can be used to formulate food for the fish, as well as for things like bread or beer. Obviously, setting up a self-sufficient system like this will require a large enough population to support it, but the advantages are many. Fore one, you won't have to have carbon scrubbers, since the plants will easily take care of that. Another aspect is the psychological benefits of having green things growing about the base. One of the largest challenges, however, will be maintaining healthy populations of bacteria in the system. Here on Earth, bacteria do a lot of the work in the treatment of wastewater, and in converting waste from both fish and humans into nutrients plants can use. These bacteria are everywhere on Earth, and can be relied on to just show up and start growing where conditions are favorable, but on an off world base, we'll have to bring our own. This could be extremely challenging, due to the high radiation environment in space, and any system on a moon or Mars base will have to be buried deep underground to protect it from radiation. There is also the potential issue of symbiotic organisms that are present here on Earth, that could affect how various plants in the system grow, or don't grow. It is also likely that we will have to introduce some species of insects into the ecosystem to pollinate plants for us. We might also bring earthworms and other species that help decomposition, so we can compost things like food scraps, plant fibers, and solids that settle out of the various wastewater systems. Worms would make great food for the fish, and they are excellent at breaking down fibrous materials. As you can see, the biodiversity of a sustainable life support system is immense and complex, and certainly not possible in a sterile space station. Sure, you could grow only certain plants and feed them with chemical fertilizer, but this would be very difficult to make self-sufficient. Anywho, I'd love to hear other folk's thoughts on the topic, this is just what's been rattling around in my head for a few years now. I'm currently thinking about going to school for engineering and soil science, either as a double major, or minoring in soil science with an engineering major. I've seen little to no discussion of the actual mechanics of "just growing food in greenhouses" and I'm hoping I can kick off a bit of discussion on the topic. I suspect that a lot of the folks into rockets and space travel aren't really into the sustainable farming movement, and vice versa, which might be why the topic is so often dismissed as a triviality or just glossed over by enthusiastic future Martians.
  8. ISRO launched Chandrayaan 2 (chandra=moon, yaan=vehicle) aboard a GSLV- mkIII on 22nd July. Youtube link here. Unmanned Orbiter-Lander-Rover mission to Moon/Mun's South Pole. All upper stage modules should be be solar powered, Orbiter must be in a low, circular and polar orbit. Lander (Vikram) carrying the rover must land in a crater near the south pole. Rover (Pragyan) should be housed inside the lander and must have a drill and seismograph.(EDIT: surface exploration & science parts) For those wanting a challenge: As it is an ISRO mission, budget should be as low as possible! Chandrayan-2 will utilize the Oberth Effect for raising its apogee through multiple burns, to conserve fuel and thereby launch costs. Concept : Animation Video by ISRO Chandrayaan 2 Official webpage Realism mods such as RO, other aesthetic mods, mechjeb, kOS, KER, etc are allowed. Stock entries are also welcome. Take it as a challenge and try to replicate it OR simply just have some fun doing it, totally up to you guys! Feel free to post your screenshots, crafts, ideas, suggestions and comments. Enjoy!
  9. I know the Soviets designed a spacecraft to do this, but it wasn't built do to funds. But is it actually possible to afford a direct accent mission to the moon, and if it is, do you think someone will actually use this method to get to th moon and back? Personally, I don't think they will, but I wanna see what you guys have to say about it.
  10. 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
  11. 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 Moons All Rights Reserved
  12. 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.
  13. 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:
  14. 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: Please feel free to give it a read and some feedback! Cheers.
  15. (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.)
  16. 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)
  17. Hi guys!! Here's some work i'v beem on this weekends! It's some "compact" version of a moon base fully functional, with few parts and functional as hell!! Only have 3 models until now, an Science Lab, a Mining Facility and GreenHouse (because its pretty, that's all... ). This is the ESA concept for a moon base that i really enjoy and like how it looks! Modules: "Interactive Interiors": Science Lab: GreenHouse: Mining Facility: Ground Solar Panels: Altair Lander - "Big Boy"! (Up to 8 Kerbals) Almost there... solving the last bug (that I found...)
  18. 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.
  19. 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?
  20. 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:
  21. I heard that orbit around the Moor are very unstable with exception of some orbital inclinations. I wonder why is this?
  22. 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!
  23. 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
  24. 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
  25. 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?