Jump to content

[1.1.2] Real Solar System Expanded (0.14.0)


ImkSushi

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Einkleinermensch said:

But how strong it affects real-life things like, umm, dV maps? Does your approximation allow mission planning using real data?

The orbits are all the same as in real life, so dV requirement will differ. HOWEVER, using real life trajectories for rockets may or may not work, most of my figures are for the J2000 Ecliptic. You are best off planning your own missions by using transfer window stuff like Kerbal Alarm Clock, and launching to get slingshots for when the transfer windows line up more or less correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, have you changed Moon's orbit? But 5 degrees is an inclination relative to ecliptics, not to Earth' equator. Relative to equator it's around 26 degrees, which makes missions from Cape Canaveral easy to get there.

Edited by Einkleinermensch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Einkleinermensch said:

Oh, have you changed Moon's orbit? But 5 degrees is an inclination relative to ecliptics, not to Earth' equator. Relative to equator it around 26 degrees, which makes missions from Cape Canaveral easy to get there.

I'll see what I can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NathanKell said:

All epehemera should be via JPL HORIZONS using Earth-equatorial coordinates. Anything else will be rather messed up.

Ah. I was wondering what was being used.

Also, do you know how the ring radii work, i.e. 2500=80000km? or something like that?

Edited by ImkSushi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Phineas Freak said:

IIRC the inner and outer radius values are added to the planet radius value (e.g. Planet_Radius + Inner_Ring_Radius).

Nope, the rings are higher than 1.25-2.5km above Saturn, nearer 80000km.

Edited by ImkSushi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/17/2016 at 3:40 PM, ImkSushi said:

No, I removed that 'axial tilt', because of this logic:

With that extra inclination, ALL bodies were extra inclined, and so all but one was rather wrong;
Without that extra inclination, NO bodies were extra inclined, and so all but one was almost right;

If you think about it, it is logical.

I'm confused by your response to Einkleinermensch. So is it intended that Enceladus is changed from inclination 0.009 to 29.239?

Edited by curiousepic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Einkleinermensch said:

So, what are you going to do in a next update? Would you handle inclinations of planets relative to Sun's equator or like @NathanKell said relative to Earth using JPL data?

I would think that it would be better for @ImkSushi to stick with the Earth as a reference point since this is an expansion aimed for RSS.

Edited by Phineas Freak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breaking news!

Rumour has it that by 22:00 BST today, update 0.14.1 will be released. It is unknown how reliable this is, but the maintainer of the mod says:

Quote

It may or may not happen by then, but in order to meet my deadline, I might have to leave out coding in the new Saturn Rings due to unforseen flickery bugs it causes, but it may or may not be left in the textures file.

I guess we'll all have to wait and see. The question is, will rings come in 0.15.0 or 0.14.2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The orbital inclinations are definitely incorrect- while they are correct relative to the ecliptic, standard RSS is designed to have them all highly inclined in order to simulate Earth's axial tilt. Installing this mod over stock RSS overwrites even the regular RSS inclinations and acts as if Earth has no axial tilt at all, like Kerbin.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Howdy! I must say, you've put a lot of work into this mod, and I salute you for it.

However, there are a couple subtle problems. Problems that would easily creep past. Problems arising from the KSP engine.

For whatever reason, I decided to start putting together a database of all celestial bodies' various stats. As I was doing so, I started to notice a couple of odd things.

The first thing I noticed is that, for some bodies, particularly the super-small ones, you've defined their boundary between "low space" and "high space" for science purposes too high, and are thus outside their sphere of influence. This could be by design, considering the size of some of these rocks, but then came the bigger problem...

You have some bodies that have a radius larger than their sphere of influence. This means that they are, quite literally, impossible to orbit or land on. (Hyperedit can't even do it.) This is a pretty big problem. I don't want to have these completely useless rocks lying around, especially when they consume load time and RAM space.

The way I see it, there are three possible solutions to this problem, listed below in order of what I deem most to least reasonable.

1. Crank up their mass. This'll increase their gravity, and in turn, their SoI. This may go against the whole "realism" thing, but it gives them a reason to be loaded. Besides, even if you have to increase gravity tenfold, ten times almost nothing is still almost nothing. Take Pan for example; the difference between 0.00017g and 0.0017g is basically unnoticeable to humans.

2. Remove them entirely. If you can't land on Pan in real life without Saturn screwing everything up, why should we be able to land on it in KSP? And, as stated before, if I can't land on or orbit it, then why am I loading it?

3. Decrease their radius. I list this only because it would fix the problem, not because it's a good solution. These bodies are already small enough as-is, making them any smaller is likely to just make the game engine go nuts.

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...