Jump to content

[WIP] [1.0.2+] [Kopernicus] KerbalGalaxy 2 | 0.7 - New star system!


Artyomka15

Recommended Posts

Does adding this mod to an existing save mess with things already in orbit/on their way to other planets?

Are any of the planets kerbin twins where my kerbins could exist without helmets on?

You need TR to take off helmets. And Aphrodite is a Kerbin twin.

And everything in Kerbol orbit will be broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need TR to take off helmets. And Aphrodite is a Kerbin twin.

And everything in Kerbol orbit will be broken.

Are there any of these extra solar system mods that don't break saves then?

Edited by MarcAlain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, KIS/KAS one of those allows you to take off your helmet. I wasn't talking literally though, I was speaking more of as in " the atmosphere is identical to kerbin" sort of way.
Yeah, it's probably Laythe-like, but Aphrodite has life and the atmosphere is definitely breathable.

And it's KIS, KAS is a KIS addon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, a celestial body would not be able to maintain that shape. It's own gravity would collapse it into a sphere again in fairly short order. Then again, even if it managed to retain that shape, the exposed core wouldn't stay molten, as it would lack the pressure necessary to keep it so. It would expand and cool over a series of days, really. That being said, I'm kind of okay with being able to land on the core, as that makes it into a chunk of phosphorescent rock. :P

Now, with the science out of the way: "OMG! Broken moon is so cool!"

P.S. I've been following along this thread since it started, and I've really been wanting to pick up some skill with 3D modeling so I might be able to contribute. Any advice on how to start learning that? Also, what kind of computer specs would be recommended?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, a celestial body would not be able to maintain that shape. It's own gravity would collapse it into a sphere again in fairly short order. Then again, even if it managed to retain that shape, the exposed core wouldn't stay molten, as it would lack the pressure necessary to keep it so. It would expand and cool over a series of days, really. That being said, I'm kind of okay with being able to land on the core, as that makes it into a chunk of phosphorescent rock. :P

Now, with the science out of the way: "OMG! Broken moon is so cool!"

P.S. I've been following along this thread since it started, and I've really been wanting to pick up some skill with 3D modeling so I might be able to contribute. Any advice on how to start learning that? Also, what kind of computer specs would be recommended?

Actually if the planet has had time to cool and solidify first it would be solid enough to resist gravity, for example if you melted a asteroid it would mold into a sphere but since it never was molten it has a undefined shape.

Also artyomka maybe you should ask elowiny how he made my system work :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually if the planet has had time to cool and solidify first it would be solid enough to resist gravity, for example if you melted a asteroid it would mold into a sphere but since it never was molten it has a undefined shape.

Also artyomka maybe you should ask elowiny how he made my system work :)

No, asteroids generally don't collapse into spherical shapes because they don't have the requisite gravity to do so. Now, there are asteroids large enough to collapse into spheres. The best example of this would probably be Ceres.

If a planet or moon, meanwhile, had "time to cool and solidify", it would still collapse, because there is no known material capable of withstanding the stresses necessary to maintain such an irregular structure. This is the main problem facing people trying to engineer a space elevator, the lack of such a material.

You could have an elipsoid object like Haumea, stretched out due to extremely quick rotation, but that's a different can of worms altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, asteroids generally don't collapse into spherical shapes because they don't have the requisite gravity to do so. Now, there are asteroids large enough to collapse into spheres. The best example of this would probably be Ceres.

If a planet or moon, meanwhile, had "time to cool and solidify", it would still collapse, because there is no known material capable of withstanding the stresses necessary to maintain such an irregular structure. This is the main problem facing people trying to engineer a space elevator, the lack of such a material.

You could have an elipsoid object like Haumea, stretched out due to extremely quick rotation, but that's a different can of worms altogether.

it doesnt rotate that quick anymore. only in its infancy when it was molten. A planetoid that has hardened simply cant become easily spherical. i tell ya, Melt an asteroid and it will become a sphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it doesnt rotate that quick anymore. only in its infancy when it was molten. A planetoid that has hardened simply cant become easily spherical. i tell ya, Melt an asteroid and it will become a sphere.

I don't doubt that a fluid will more readily form into a sphere than a solid. My point was that when something gets large enough, like the size of a planet or moon, it doesn't matter what it's made of, solid or fluid, it will deform into the shape of a sphere fairly quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Artyomka.

Your new (scientifically very strange..) planets are very nice looking indeed.

However (sorry to push you), Edmunds planet in Interstellar doesn't orbit Gargantua, like Mann and Miller, but instead orbits a neutron star orbiting the black hole called Pantagruel. This is pretty important if you want to follow the Interstellar lore to the letter.

And one last note : A return wormhole would be much appreciated :)

Thank you !

MegaUZI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Artyomka.

Your new (scientifically very strange..) planets are very nice looking indeed.

However (sorry to push you), Edmunds planet in Interstellar doesn't orbit Gargantua, like Mann and Miller, but instead orbits a neutron star orbiting the black hole called Pantagruel. This is pretty important if you want to follow the Interstellar lore to the letter.

And one last note : A return wormhole would be much appreciated :)

Thank you !

MegaUZI

Thanks, i know it :)

I made it like this:

HZtJjGH.pngbRLhy0Z.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...